 |
|

|
by PepperElf Posted Thu June 18, 2009 @ 12:17 PM
|
|
|
I went downtown this morning to get a new SSN card ordered and on the way back I was hungry.
I remembered this thread and headed over to Burger King specifically.
=)
It was tasty.
Reply
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Personally, my theory is that supposedly the earth changed millions of years ago to what we have now. So, why could there not be another Ice Age or even a "Warming Age" so to speak? What decides the path our planet is on for changes? Certainly not "global warming" as the Al Gore has decided.
You can turn anything to your point of view...its not that difficult. You can tell people whatever you want and some will believe while others will not.
Its all pre-destined anyway. We are just along for the ride.
Reply
|
|

|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
by Alexandra1973 Posted Fri June 12, 2009 @ 8:28 PM
|
|
|
Global warming is baloney. CO2 is not a pollutant. Plants need it.
Furthermore, CO2 rises IN RESPONSE to any warming, it doesn't cause it!
Reply
|
|

|
Right on
by littleriver Tue June 16, 2009 @ 11:24 PM
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|

|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
by jeishere Posted Mon June 8, 2009 @ 5:31 PM
|
|
|
I don't understand your logic. Burger King needs to stay out of the debate but MIC should not because you agree with them? Why shouldn't both Burger King and MIC stay out of the debate? Why shouldn't MIC just stick to making whoppers too?
I surely hope there is something in the franchisees agreement about what can be posted on franchise property since it will carry the Burger King name will ultimately represent the corporation.
Reply
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
by Ben G. Posted Mon June 8, 2009 @ 5:26 PM
|
|
|
I agree with the OP. They need to not polarize themselves.
My thoughts? How can we be absolutely sure global warming is true or false when we have only been recording weather patterns for how long now? 150, 200 years? How are we absolutely sure this is a man-made issue?
How do we know this isn't just a cycle?
Reply
|
|

|

|
Re:
by Kemp Mon June 8, 2009 @ 8:11 PM
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
how when it's alleged that the, um, noxious gasses from cows and other large animals supposedly erodes the ozone, why it's only become an issue now?
Have cows not been farting since the dawn of time? Can't we give them all some Gas-X?
Reply
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
by hussyinterrupted Posted Mon June 8, 2009 @ 12:57 PM
|
|
|
What I find amusing about this debate is the rate at which people become so infuriated about it. I admit, I am a skeptic on climate change. I do beleive it's happening, and I do believe that man most probably has something to do with it. But I don't believe that it's really worth getting up in arms about.
The science of climate change is a relatively new science. It's only been around for, what, 50 years-ish? No way is any one going to convince me that scientists have this thing nailed. The earth has been going through warming and cooling periods for billions of years and all of a sudden we notice a pattern in the last 50 years and think we know exactly what's going on? Bull.
Being a bit of a scientific thinker myself, I can safely say that all new sciences are severely flawed. That's why once upon a time people believed that the sun revolved around the earth, or that blood-letting would cure any disease. Being a free-thinker, I know not to buy into the hype because if logic and science has taught us anything, it's that human interpretation and understanding of science is limited and greatly flawed.
Reply
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
on what??
by littleriver Mon June 8, 2009 @ 3:51 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
I agree..
by littleriver Mon June 8, 2009 @ 3:52 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|