Actually, I hope you knew that Ford wanted his cars run on ethanol but the Rockafellers and Standard Oil made that go away. The idea of non-carbon based fuels has been around a very long time.

So you don't read my articles and insinuate that I won't bother to read yours because I won't read anything that disagrees with my predetermined ideas. Sonny...that is called projection and you have just proven your projections.
I posted this already in the EDF article. Besides, I told you once that I don't waste my time with those who present circle jerk arguments. You can't argue my original premise and have tried to divert the issue away and want to drill in to DDT in hopes of trying claim some small piece of victory and I shut you down on that front as well. In fact you have ignorantly backed in to proving my point that the same junk science that was used to ban DDT (deny it all you want) is being used to advance the AGW/CC hoax.

I suggest if want to continue this public spanking that we go over to one of the Global Warming threads and I will dispatch you like all of the rest who have tried.

__________________
"Liberals live in a house of mirrors...that is why they don't like what they see" 1WISEGUY

'My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it.'
-- Barack Obama


"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates. " Jay Leno

Yo wizeguy,

You're Whacked.

Same source info that generated multiple articles --which is the same vehicle used by AGW/CC alarmists. Hansen writes one article and others read it and write articles and papers based on what Hansen says , and of course adding their own unique piece of their evidence, and next thing you know we have a scientific consensus and peer reviewed papers--all based on one premise with other "scientists" piling on.

Now with that said, I am not criticizing the content. I think the article is good, but I am not so dumb as to confuse the fact that they are presenting observations and conclusions and are not reporting "settled" science. After all of these years the effects of DDT are not fully known and neither is AGW/CC. They are simply reporting on a hypothesis --not proven science. Proven science is the process by which a hypothesis passes the rigors of the scientific method (scrutinized) and then is elevated to a Theory and that theory is further scrutinized and is then promoted to become 100% settled science--either proven to be true or false--- their is no middle ground or democracy in science and thus there is no consensus in science.

BTW, I'm not arguing whether DDT is good or bad, I'm arguing the fact that we still don't have all the information about DDT and that is was an environmental political agenda behind the hysteria to ban it without fully understanding the implications--just like AGW/CC.

__________________
"Liberals live in a house of mirrors...that is why they don't like what they see" 1WISEGUY

'My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it.'
-- Barack Obama


"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates. " Jay Leno

Thank you!

__________________
"Liberals live in a house of mirrors...that is why they don't like what they see" 1WISEGUY

'My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it.'
-- Barack Obama


"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates. " Jay Leno

DDT is a poison.

Poisons are dangerous.

With many poisons we are just finding out the long term effects of what they do. We did not have that level of scientific survey and testing 40 years ago.

You are presenting this like DDT is as harmless as Kool-aid. If you are so confident about your argument then please spray the insdie and outside of your hosue with large quantities of DDT and the rest of us will sit back and make the scientific observations of how the poison effects a human being. We will get back to you on the results...not worry the stuff has saved countless human lives. That is all you need to know.

That should satisfy you, should it not?

No. Viking is retarded.

You two should get along fine, alot in common.

__________________

GOD BLESS AMERICA