So what you are saying is we should issue all rapists with condoms, and the problem is solved yeah ?

Rape and incest account for less than 1% of abortions. This is unfortunately used to justify lifestyle abortions.

Contraception is only effective *if* you choose to use it.

So, according to you, somebody is justified to have multiple abortions because they are too lazy to use contraception?

Yes, we really should be making sure rapists all wear condoms and then force birth control pills down their victim's throats once their done!

This is a really bad line of argumentation. Research (such as those by the Guttmacker institute) says that less than 1% of abortions is due to rape or incest and less than 4% is due to fetal malformation (these are the reasons that are usually touted).

In the case of rape the victim can use medicines that prevents egg cells from being released.

Oh, and you know that more than 40% of abortions are second time abortions? (i.e. by women who had abortions before). They just couldn't be bothered to use contraception.

And there's certainly no way contraceptive methods could ever *gasp* fail!

The abortion rate is much higher than any imaginable failure rate for contraception. The biggest reason why contraception fails is *because it is not used*. If double contraception is used, then the failure rate is extremely low.

That has got to be the stupidest argument against abortion I have heard yet.

I did not state an argument (however you like to construe it). I stated my opinion - that abortion is a vile, barbaric and unnecessary practice that has no place in a civilised society. I stated my opinion in contrast the above poster's opinion (that you do not have a problem with). To quote, he said:

As for the anti-abortion, they just *need* to be dragged screaming and kicking into the century of the fruitbat.

You'd like to think that individuals who are opposed to preventing unwanted children would be standing in line for the opportunity to adopt such children and raise them in a loving environment.

I know many people who are adopted (and who adopted children themselves). Adoption is never easy (and it is a lifelong commitment). And yeah, the only orphanage in my town is run (and funded) by one of those evil churches who are opposed to abortion.

As for the anti-abortion, they just *need* to be dragged screaming and kicking into the century of the fruitbat.

Really? Slavery, abortion and infanticide is all centuries old. Unfortunately only two of these barbaric practices were stopped. Even the rationale for abortion has become weaker (since the efficacy of contraception greatly increased).

It is the pro-abortion folks who need to be dragged into the "century of the fruitbat".

"Fuck Star of David" pic on phone

I wonder if you tried that with a Fuck and a picture of Mohammed in other middle eastern countries.

What's wrong with visiting an arab country? or do you believe in enclosing a race to their own land and prevent them from outside contact?

The reverse is actually true. Try to get a VISA from an Arab country with an Israeli stamp (you can't) - the solution is to get a clear passport. Israel will actually give out VISAs even if you have Arabian country stamps in your passport.

I as neither a Jew or a Muslim feel much safer in Israel than Arab countries (except Dubia).

Unattended luggage gets treated as possible bombs the world over (from the English Tube to airports in any country).

Of course, we lived with a couple of decades of terrorist attacks ourselves long before Terrorism was the new bogeyman.

It is ironic that the UK government dislike terrorism yet the Minister of Foreign Affairs (David Miliband) openly supports terrorism.

All countries with a developed civil infrastructure OR a stable leadership would have done some prospecting by now.

Some, but not enough. Especially in other African countries (examples such as the DRC that lacked stability) there may be many more deposits. The more mining that is performed in a country the more deposits are found.

It is the same as the copper problem. There are significant amounts of copper in the DRC and Zambia. But because of corruption and the lack of stability it is not exploited.

There is no reason not to use aluminum wire or galvanised stainless steel wire.

South Africa may have many chrome reserves but there are many countries with large reserves and there is no shortage (even when South Africa starts to implode).

One reason that South Africa have so many reserves is because of good prospecting (both for chrome and other minerals). Other countries may also have substantial reserves that we don't know about.

It would however not be sensible to use stainless steel.

Galvanised steel (steel with a very thin zinc coating) is routinely used for fencing. In my part of the world they also use it for telephone wire in rural areas (since copper gets stolen). Steel wire could replace copper in many situations.

Then use steel...

It's simple. Don't buy inkjets.

I wouldn’t go that far. You should just buy smart. Do not buy anything with Lexmark, Epson or Canon on it (especially Lexmark, they are evil). Check beforehand if the cartridges can be refilled.

I’ve bought an HP inkjet+scanner (F350 or something) 2 years back. I print a lot. The cartridge is an HP21 cartridge. The printer costed around $60 bucks with a colour and black cartridge (multiple uses). To refill a cartridge you simply pull the sticker back, stick a needle in the hole and inject ink. It is as fast as immunising a rat. For the black cartridges (I don’t use colour) I get about 30 refills before the quality declines. A refill costs about $1 and is good for about half a ream of paper.

I’ve shopped around for cartridges also. In brand name shops a cartridge will cost around $37. I found cartridges that sell for $20 though (imported from Singapore). This is original, brand new HP21 cartridges (probably gray imports). The moral of the story is to shop around.

Also, if you are refilling, check that the cartridge doesn’t run dry (this damages the printhead and reduces the quality). As soon as you are out of ink you should refill. Another thing is that if you use Vista, use the native Vista drivers. The normal drivers are irritating (telling you the cartridge is empty when you refilled it. This doesn’t prevent printing but it is irritating).

One of my family members picked up a printer printing with an HP21 cartridge for around $40 dollars. This included the cartridges. The only catch was that it came with a funny plug that had to be replaced (probably a grey import from a funny country). HP printers are also nice for printing double sided pages.

Many cheap laser printers have the same model as cheap inkjet printers (Gillette model: Give the shaver away and sell the blades). So their refills are extremely expensive.

\rant

2) As people get wealthier their access to health care, proper sanitation etc. becomes easier. This increases the survival rate of their children which reduces the number compensatory pregnancies. In other words, when a child dies a woman's friends,

You do not understand - economic development will not be a good thing. Take as an example Africa. The place is economically underdeveloped so it produces almost no Carbon Dioxide. Whether the population growth is high or not, doesn't matter - it will reach an equilibrium (carrying capacity of the land).

If Africa were to develop like China, pollution will increase (not decrease) even if birth rates were to decrease.

"Engaging with skeptics" is an approach that I find improvised and naive at best.

You know that there are a fair amount of “Skeptics” with PhD degrees? (e.g. Hans von Storch, Roger A. Pielke, etc). Skeptics in this case are scientists that dissent from the mainstream view. Gallileo was also in his time viewed as a skeptic.

You also ignore the fact that the skeptic which is the most hated (as the hate in the e-mails proclaim) discovered numerous errors. He discovered an error in the Goddard Institute of Space Science (GISS)’s temperature record for the USA which they corrected (this is a very big thing). He also discovered errors in a paper by Mann, et. al. which forced him to make a correction in Nature.
All of these actions by a “skeptic” helped push science forward.

The nature of science is supposed to be adversarial – you make a claim and others test our claim (by reproducing the results for example). That is why you “defend” your PhD (it is not filled with a room of yes-men who all agree with you). The Climate-Alarmist-Scientists seemed to dislike the adversarial method of science.

They are out to destroy the legitimacy of climate scientists in public opinion and they use all the dirty tricks in the book toward that objective.

As these emails reveal, it is the climate alarmists which used every dirty trick, including but not limited to: 1. Manipulating data. 2. Hiding data whilst breaking the law (deleting data under a Freedom of Information Act Request). 3. Deception (“Hiding” the decline) 4. Ensuring that results could not be reproduced by not giving data and obfusticating data. 5. Loading review boards. 6. “Redifining” the peer review process (as one stated). The list goes on. What happens here is a blight on the scientific method. Popper would turn around in his grave.

This affair should really be reviewed by ethics review boards of the specific universities.