Thanks for posting Joe.

Well done Sarah — good job. The look on Shatner’s face was priceless.

Palin blew it because she didn’t open the book and pretend that she was reading from the book.

She is a natural in front of thr camera. Please, please stay out of politics.

This was hilarious!! Two hot air balloons go at it toe to toe, Shatner v. Palin — non-partisan funny. They’re both gasbags — Shatner’s book is out of the ’70s environment of faux love and Carpenters and polyester and Palin fits in so well.

I LOVE SARAH!!!

Stewie the 3rd,

I thought you loved posting links nobody reads?

Oh that Sarah! Certainly something with whom to identify! Praise Jesussah – at last a “reel Murcuhn!!!”
A blue-collar dream come true. Joe six-pack, Joe-The-Plumber – rejoice, rejoice!! Hit dont git no better’n this!!! Yup. Makes mah heart pump…hiss!

At least she found someone more on her level to debate. It’s nice that she’s embracing her true talent as a celebrity. It’s clear that she could never debate Al Gore who is way out of her league. Perhaps she has a future in comedy. If her past is any indication.

roxsteady…that’s funny. you ever seen algore debate? seriously? The only debates I recall algore being involved in were the ones in which GWB mopped the floor with him.

She’s a celebrity, just like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.

She is the Paris Hilton of politics and thats fine. She’s good as long as she doesn’t get involved in anything that really matters. I think Playboy should be her next move.

timzank – If you think that sarahpalin could actually even begin to debate Al Gore, well, its nice that you have such a rich fantasy life.

She handled Greasy Joe pretty adeptly. ‘Course it was Greasy Joe though I guess. I’d pay big bucks to see her debate The Goracle, she’d eat him alive. Hell he hasn’t really answered a question since his ass-kickin in 2000. He gives a lotta speeches, but answers NO questions….Sounds like another over-rated Democrat we’re familiar with now doesn’t it?

Nearly as many people watch Palin’s RNC acceptance speech as Obama’s “historic” spectacle in Denver at the DNC.

Star power, indeed.

She should be RNC Chair instead of Steele. Do what she does best – raise money and rile up supporters. She doesn’t need to be involved in policy. Her cheerleading skills are extremely valuable.

Sarah’s got a place. Indeed, SHE, no one else’ll get to CHOOSE that place. The 21st Century’s “It Girl,” an undefinable star quality which attracts genuine human beings the way in which they bond with intimate friends. I FELT it way back when, long before McCain selected her. Indeed, I (Fingerprince) .and one other were the first to forecast her VP-ship, officially, on Predictify. Check it out.

Even far-left-leaning CNN validates Sarah’s magnetism. And, in so doing, gives this Constitutionalist confidence that, when I go to Mediaite, I’ll get what’s really comin’ down.

Thank you, Big M.

timzank – Riiiiiight. You really do have a rich fantasy life.

dmbream – From a political-strategy point of view, you’re absolutely right. If the GOP were smart, she would be the RNC Chairman b/c Steele certainly isn’t helping any.

timzank – yeah….so I take it you haven’t left your mom’s basement in….12 years?

Nachi says:
December 12, 2009 at 2:15 pm

Oh that Sarah! Certainly something with whom to identify! Praise Jesussah – at last a “reel Murcuhn!!!”

Oh, phew… I thought you had given up making new words!

roxsteady says:
December 12, 2009 at 2:19 pm

It’s clear that she could never debate Al Gore who is way out of her league.

Well, that’s true. Al doesn’t debate ANYONE… remember, he says that debate is unnecessary and shuts it down whenever he goes to speak. He must be one heck of a debater… since he never does it. He must real rested.

__________

Wow… you lefties really REALLY hate Palin, don’t you?! It’s HILLARIOUS! Even when she’s not doing anything political, you’ve got the daggers out. So much anger, for someone who isn’t really a politician anymore.

What I don’t understand, however, is why when someone criticizes Obama… you know, the President… you guys complain that there’s “too much vitriol” and anger. But the moment someone mentions Palin, you’re cool with spitting out stuff about 10x worse than any criticism of Obama. Is it that you’re okay with the hypocrisy, or you’re just too blinded by your own sense of self-righteousness to recognize it?

Al Gore… afraid to debate?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/12/11/al-gore-refuses-discuss-global-warming-john-stossel

h/t to :StewartIII @ December 12, 2009 at 1:29 am

@ImNotBlue

You mean a scientific amateur refuses to debate a scientific illiterate? I’m shocked. I’m also shocked that Stossel didn’t push the invitation to actual scientists, but instead went with the route with someone who climate scientists have criticized. But when I say shocked, I mean completely without shock.

Joy Behar will devote a months worth Palin-hatred panel discussions to this appearance. Imagine the disgust and bemusement. Perhaps Levi Johnston can be brought on again to really analyze the situation.

Snipzor says:
December 12, 2009 at 7:36 pm

This is a real problem with the left right now… they really think they’re better than everyone else. So, let me see if I understand your statement correctly. Gore didn’t want to meet with veteran journalist John Stossel… but had no problem talking to CNN’s John Roberts and Kiran Chetry, or MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell. All of those guys, they’re “scientists?” Or at least, “scientific enough” to talk with Gore.

Maybe you’re onto something. The polls show that more and more people think Gore’s warming alarmism is BS… maybe it’s because we’re not all “scientists” like you “amateur scientist” Gore. But that really goes back to the, “I’m better than you” problem I mentioned earlier. Just how many people do you think you’re better than… and why? And when should you worry that your ego is getting just a smidge out of hand? I’d start to worry if I were you… but since you already think you’re better than me, I doubt you’ll take the advice.

So because people (Note, people being people and therefore being stupid. Also noting that the polls you just quoted are made up) think it is “alarmism” (Not a real word), decades of scientific work and theory is to be thrown away? Excellent idea. Maybe modern medicine should stop being used because so many people (A stat I made up) believe holistic means are much better.

Perhaps instead of basing everything on Al Gore, a non-scientist, you should probably read the actual science behind climate change instead of coming here after whining about liberals on Free Republic. That is all I’m suggesting.

/Oh yeah, I don’t know the motivations behind Al Gore not going on an interview with John Stossel, but frankly I do not care because it is an attempt to divert the topic to something completely unrelated. Mainly because the science against climate change doesn’t actually exist and you are buying time until the next made up controversy comes around.

Snipzor says:
December 12, 2009 at 8:09 pm

So because people (Note, people being people and therefore being stupid.

Is everyone stupid? And if so, does that mean you’re stupid too?

Also noting that the polls you just quoted are made up

“The percentage of Americans who believe global warming is happening has dipped from 80 to 72 percent in the past year, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll…”

That’s a loss of 8% of the population… or as I said, “more and more people.”

think it is “alarmism” (Not a real word),

Main Entry: alarm•ism
Pronunciation: \ə-ˈlär-ˌmi-zəm\
Function: noun
Date: 1867

: the often unwarranted exciting of fears or warning of danger

— alarm•ist \-mist\ noun or adjective

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alarmism

decades of scientific work and theory is to be thrown away?

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece

Perhaps instead of basing everything on Al Gore, a non-scientist,

roxsteady says:
December 12, 2009 at 2:19 pm

At least she found someone more on her level to debate. It’s nice that she’s embracing her true talent as a celebrity. It’s clear that she could never debate Al Gore who is way out of her league.

That is all I’m suggesting.

No.

Mainly because the science against climate change doesn’t actually exist and you are buying time until the next made up controversy comes around.

http://www.global-warming-and-the-climate.com/arguments-against-global-warming.htm

And if the science was “so good,” they probably wouldn’t have had to “improve” the numbers… would they?

And somewhere, off in the distance, the Price Is Right “you’ve lost” horn plays… for you. Sorry.

Snipzor says:
December 12, 2009 at 8:09 pm

So because people (Note, people being people and therefore being stupid.

Is everyone stupid? And if so, does that mean you’re stupid too?

Also noting that the polls you just quoted are made up

“The percentage of Americans who believe global warming is happening has dipped from 80 to 72 percent in the past year, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll…”

That’s a loss of 8% of the population… or as I said, “more and more people.”

think it is “alarmism” (Not a real word),

Main Entry: alarm•ism
Pronunciation: \ə-ˈlär-ˌmi-zəm\
Function: noun
Date: 1867

: the often unwarranted exciting of fears or warning of danger

— alarm•ist \-mist\ noun or adjective

Source

decades of scientific work and theory is to be thrown away?

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

Source

Perhaps instead of basing everything on Al Gore, a non-scientist,

roxsteady says:
December 12, 2009 at 2:19 pm

At least she found someone more on her level to debate. It’s nice that she’s embracing her true talent as a celebrity. It’s clear that she could never debate Al Gore who is way out of her league.

That is all I’m suggesting.

No.

Mainly because the science against climate change doesn’t actually exist and you are buying time until the next made up controversy comes around.

Global Warming Greatest Scam In History!

By John Coleman, The Founder of The Weather Channel
It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM.

Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data back in the late 1990′s to create an allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental wacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.

Source

And if the science was “so good,” they probably wouldn’t have had to “improve” the numbers… would they?

And somewhere, off in the distance, the Price Is Right “you’ve lost” horn plays… for you. Sorry.

Why is the right so desperate to be so wrong? The fringe kooks’ of the Right wing and their policy of being contrarian have become tiresome.

“By Seth Borenstein, Raphael Satter and Malcolm Ritter

updated 12:18 p.m. ET, Sat., Dec . 12, 2009
LONDON – E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don’t support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges don’t undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

…..

By Seth Borenstein, Raphael Satter and Malcolm Ritter

updated 12:18 p.m. ET, Sat., Dec . 12, 2009
LONDON – E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don’t support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges don’t undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

By Seth Borenstein, Raphael Satter and Malcolm Ritter

updated 12:18 p.m. ET, Sat., Dec . 12, 2009
LONDON – E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don’t support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges don’t undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

Frankel saw “no evidence of falsification or fabrication of data, although concerns could be raised about some instances of very ‘generous interpretations.’”

Some e-mails expressed doubts about the quality of individual temperature records or why models and data didn’t quite match. Part of this is the normal give-and-take of research, but skeptics challenged how reliable certain data was.

The e-mails were stolen from the computer network server of the climate research unit at the University of East Anglia in southeast England, an influential source of climate science, and were posted online last month. The university shut down the server and contacted the police.

Million words reviewed
The AP studied all the e-mails for context, with five reporters reading and rereading them — about 1 million words in total.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34392959/ns/us_news-environment/

wow – that was weird. don’t know why it pasted that way.

…The spin keeps on spinning it seems.

Bill Adkins says:
December 13, 2009 at 12:22 am

Bill… did you read any part of what you copy/pasted copy/pasted copy/pasted?

Here are the important parts:

E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data…

The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change.

“…although concerns could be raised about some instances of very ‘generous interpretations.’”

Some e-mails expressed doubts about the quality of individual temperature records or why models and data didn’t quite match.

In other words… the “scientists” recognized that they weren’t painting an exact picture, when they would tell folks that GW was a “certainty” or express the severity in which it would impact. That “consensus” that everyone likes to talk about… appears to be less than true, and it’s apparent they’ve been attempting to portray the situation in a way that is less than 100% honest. And if it only took a few stolen emails… EMAILS… to find that out, what do you think would be found out from a more thorough investigation?

Lucky for those scientists… the politicians have no desire to find the “truth.” After all… alarmism makes a better campaign slogan, so who needs the truth anyway?

The funny thing about the AP assessment:

FIVE reporters examined the climategate emails.
TEN reporters fact-checked Palin’s book.

AP — always balanced!??? LOL

Blue, did you read what I posted?

“The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges don’t undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.”

TfT says:
December 13, 2009 at 11:42 am

Great point!

Bill Adkins says:
December 13, 2009 at 12:45 pm

So, while the emails show scientists “altered” data and have doubts about GW… they still insist it’s all true… everything’s fine… nothing to see here… move along now…

This kinda proves the theory that the scientists PUBLICALLY want people to believe in GW absolutism… but PRIVATLY are less convinced.

As I said… it may not be a smoking gun… but it was only a handful of emails. Imagine what a real investigation would find.