Wow. Mods on this are pretty telling. +1 Informative, +1 Interesting, -1 Overrated, -1 Troll, -1 Troll

AGW really is like a religion.

You lose a lot of credibility repeating the fraudulent "polar bears in danger from AGW" claim. It's bogus. The polar bear population is no in danger, it's increasing. As far as specifically drowning / brown bear mating, those phenomenon have not changed significantly and have nothing to do with AGW.

This shows a basic misinterpretation of the carbon cycle. CO2 does not stay around forever as CO2. Estimate range widely from somewhere around 5.4 years to 30 years or more. You can look at the NOAA's video that shows the fluctuating concentrations of CO2 and see the cycle is quite dynamic. Much of it is absorbed by the ocean and land sinks, but isotope studies point to the CO2 molecules from any point source are short-lived, and do rarely re-enter the atmosphere, if ever.

Maybe. Typically. Certainly in a closed system with no other cooling / heating effects going on. Sorry, but the science is not "settled", neither on the specific calculations on the global temperature for a given CO2 concentration, nor on the ways and amounts that human activities can impact the climate directly.

You people in Canadia are hilarious!

And the government has not told Scientologist-owned companies to supply psychiatric medication, and have not told Jehovah's Witnesses they have to buy health insurance for anyone at all. The didn't limit anything to contraceptives - in fact it was about specific types of contraceptives that the business OWNERS objected to. Far from "unconstituional" (which the court has UNANIMOUSLY told your Dear Leader his actions have been 13 times now), this decision protected the Constitutional rights of people, even if they own a corporation. Citizens United did the same thing - it would be asinine to tell someone you have to fund a multi-million dollar movie out of your pocket, because if you form a corporation to do it we can ban your movie.

False. Nobody said Hobby Lobby's employees can't go buy "morning after" pills. Only that the government can't force Hobby Lobby to pay for it.

First Amendment rights are intended for only a very small subset of the citizenry??

I think NOT. At least until Reid and the tyrants in the Senate figure out how to pass their new Amendment, and define "the press" as only people holding a federal license to speak, like they keep heading toward with crap like this.

It's a distinction without a difference. All that's established is that corporations have the same legal protections under the law as individuals. That's important in an age where every financial transaction, possession, and and property has hundreds of rules and regulations attached to it by various agencies of the Federal government. It's important for the government to include all types of organizations as subject to the same rules as individuals, too, considering all the social engineering baked into the tax code.

Did you know most celebrities are corporations? Labor unions? Non-profits and NGOs? All these organizations need to be subject to, and protected by, a common set of standards. Without that, jurisprudence would be even more chaotic than it is now.

No, it must have been a long time ago.

You'll really like Windows 8, then, because the ribbon is implemented for File Explorer and the Common Dialogs, too.

Worked beautifully, hasn't it? It's all about Facebook letting stockholders and advertisers what they are doing to improve the value of the PRODUCT (a.k.a. "users") to maximize revenue. Outrage from the product only serves to prove its effectiveness.

Well what do you think they're counting on to pay the debt WITH, anyway?

Well, you failed, because that is not the libertarian argument, it's a straw man, especially the "economic islands" part. Libertarian ideas require and encourage greater social interaction among people, not less. It also makes use of empathy for others', it doesn't ignore it, but rather values it as a better motivator than coercion (higher levels of confiscation of the fruits of labor by force).

Well your self-appointed masters are. It was, I believe, the State Department that came up with the figure of $7.2 million as the value to the US for each citizen. I can't find the reference though.

Nor do we live in a hive socialist fantasy land, where everyone happily does his duty at the direction of an all-knowing benevolent dictator.

None of these statistics take into account the rate of attempted suicides. That would certainly be a factor. Using a gun the first time you decide to try to kill yourself, you're much more likely to succeed because guns are so efficient. Taking pills or cutting yourself, or even driving your car into a tree, can land you in a hospital and the people around you realize you try to off yourself and you just might get the help you need to keep you from trying again.

"He said suicide rates tend to be higher in states with higher gun ownership — not because gun owners are more likely to suffer from depression, but because guns are faster and deadlier than other methods such as drugs, carbon monoxide or hanging. People are more likely to survive an attempted overdose or even a hanging than they are a gun-shot wound."

Also from the CDC: "There is one suicide for every 25 attempted suicides."