Comments (26) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   parkersinthehouse said, 4 months ago

   eow Davey oy dew luv ye

2. 

   oldlegodad said, 4 months ago

   The Canadians have the perfect health care system, copy them

   http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=331254362316405

3. 

   NoFearPup said, 4 months ago

   Horsey must have went to public school. Aritosthenes knew the earth was round about 500 years before Christ. Good link Lego -Sir

4. 

   dtroutma said, 4 months ago

   A lot of cultures knew it before then, the Catholic church admitted it in 1992. This one sums the “denier” mentality pretty well.

5. 

   HUMPHRIES said, 4 months ago

   Inquireing minds “want” to know!

6. 

   Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

   Global warming is a hoax.

   Smoking tobacco is good for you.

   Exact same “science” in both cases.

7. 

   believecommonsense said, 4 months ago

   welcome back humps!

8. 

   Corosive Frog said, 4 months ago

   I love this one!

9. 

   Gary Kleppe said, 4 months ago

   “Aritosthenes knew the earth was round about 500 years before Christ”

   But the Republicans of the day continued to insist it wasn’t.

10. 

    oldlegodad said, 4 months ago

    nofear It didn’t work from Gorrel< but it works here WTF??

11. 

    lalas said, 4 months ago

    NFP – You must “have went” to remedial English and failed.

12. 

    TrickyPickle said, 4 months ago

    dtroutma: Citation please. 1992 was when the church declared Galileo innocent of any wrongdoing. They have never claimed any shape to the Earth because it is not a religious matter.

    Anthropogenic Global Warming is a theory. Nothing more. Not yet anyway, though I feel the time is not far off where it is proven to be irrefutable fact. Nevertheless, as long as it is theoretical, regardless of how close to becoming a fact it is, it remains theoretical. This allows some latitude to those who think differently to have a say.

    Evolution occupies the same category as Anthro.G.W. It remains a theory. An excellent one and certainly the best we have to explain biodiversity on Earth but despite all the evidence for it, there remains enough doubt that it is still referred to as the Theory of Evolution.

    I feel it is unfair to lump folk who believe in outright misinformation (the earth is flat) with folk who may have problems with theories. Until such time as those theories become fact, the naysayers have some small chance of being right.

13. 

    parkersinthehouse said, 4 months ago

    oh lalas you beat me to it.

    welcome back humps. (?)

    Tricky! THANK YOU! i do have a lot more to say, but not now. sane and beautiful argument, yo

14. 

    Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

    Evolution is a fact. Exactly how it occurs is the theory.

    Gravity is a fact. Exactly how it occurs is the theory.

    Do religious fundies deny gravity because “it’s only a theory”? No, because it doesn’t contradict their mythology, which is the only reason they deny evolution. Has nothing to do with whether or not it’s a theory; that’s just part of their desperate rationalization.

15. 

    M Kitt said, 4 months ago

    TrickyP, evolution is an established fact in terms of biology, specifically adaptation of germ/virus/disease vectors. To state that Humans are somehow insulated from that process by some sort of “Divine State” derived from God is pretentious and so unlikely as to be marginal, especially if you consider that the human immune system is itself adaptive to disease (yet this is the theological position). By the way, if I allow some latitude in terms of scriptural interpretation and don’t ascribe the bible to be irrefutably written in stone by the “hand of God” like the tablets on Sinai, (as if there were eyewitness accounts at the creation of the universe, “Genesis” for example), why shouldn’t some hypothetical super-being allow for evolution? Fundamentalists regard this as blasphemy, of course.

    Far as I can tell the big deniers are promoters of the 5-6K year old earth creationist theories so that evolution, paleontology, archeology, geology, the sciences that depend on the earth and everything else evolving (and carbon-dating) must be obvious hoaxes, correct? Even DNA based generational characteristics (IE animal husbandry models, and humans, Geneology) are projected using methods that isolate the “Donor” strands from each parent, evolution in action. Good luck with denying that.

16. 

    M Kitt said, 4 months ago

    And credits due to David, nice toon (belated thanks!)

17. 

    deadheadzan said, 4 months ago

    Humphrey, I’m glad to see your back. Hope you are feeling great.

18. 

    M Kitt said, 4 months ago

    Let the corporate politicos try to explain away the ozone layer peeling away at the poles and as a direct effect of that the level of ultraviolet radiation is high enough to have to wear sunblock year round……that wasn’t the case until the last 20-25 years and is directly tied to CFC (chlorofluorocarbon) propellants. So let’s all pretend that hydrocarbon residuals like CO & CO2 have nothing to do with environmental change, just pay attention to and trust the swill the petrochemical manufacturers are putting out to the corporate media, no conflict of interest there, yeah right. Just like they said manufacturing and driving gas guzzling pieces of fecal matter that are unmarketable outside of the U.S. would be good for the economy, gluttonous a$$holes.

19. 

    NoFearPup said, 4 months ago

    No lalas, I dropped out of high school. And I am less concerned about my usage than you are about the truth. Again you Libs floor me with your tolerance and understanding. Maybe you’ll evolve a “compassion” gene soon?

20. 

    Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

    No way this is a coincidence:

    Puppy: No lalas, I dropped out of high school

    Puppy: I’m always amazed at how little provable fact the beliefs of Humanistic Materialists are based on. Darwin’s “theory” has been proven un-workable by the Evolutionists that really want to find the truth. Yet the syncophants have to believe it’s true or there is no “bottom” to their cosmogony.

    Just another example that there’s nothing more valuable to a fundie christian than ignorance. Here’s Puppy proclaiming one of the most proven scientific theories invalid, using all of her “dropped out of high school” education…along with a healthy dose of fundie christian propaganda.

    No wonder science has such a hard time in this country.

    (Source of Puppy’s 2nd comment: http://www.gocomics.com/glennmccoy/2009/07/01/)

21. 

    davidjrzr said, 4 months ago

    What an idiot. Real science has shown global warming to be real but not caused by man. Gobal cooling is real too. This guy is just a cartoonist. He is really not up to the job to be a serious editorialist.

22. 

    M Kitt said, 4 months ago

    So, Dave, why is it that the U.S. has been denying the existence of any such warming cycle for the last several years against the judgment of the majority of the planet, bet it will take that long again for our “experts” to admit links to hydrocarbons. The “idiots” you refer to of that opinion include several global commissions and most significantly the consensus of Nobel winners meeting at Lindau for the 59th Meeting of Nobel Laureates. http://www.lindau-nobel.d then go to /PressReleaseOpeningPhysics2008.AxCMS

    Among the varied other “idiots” to be included are providers of signatures on the Kyoto treaty, as well as many other award winning scientists/scholars around the world.

    The only large online consensus of scientists against the hydrocarbon/global warming link I was able to find were A) within the U.S. and B) funded by private industry both of which are obvious conflicts of interest as measured against the huge PetroChemical interests here, they represent vast $ and corporate legal protections, virtually unlimited resources. And these “scientists” are not putting their reputations on the line since they’re not award merit scholars.

    Show me large groups of Nobel winners willing to sign on with the U.S. petroleum industry in denial of CO/CO2 links to global warming, then we’ll talk.

23. 

    Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

    From another thread, brought here just for David:

    If you enter “oil company global warming” into Google, you get almost 10 million results. Here’s one of them:

    http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/ExxonMobil-GlobalWarming-tobacco.html

    “Scientists’ Report Documents ExxonMobil’s Tobacco-like Disinformation Campaign on Global Warming Science

    Oil Company Spent Nearly $16 Million to Fund Skeptic Groups, Create Confusion ”

24. 

    M Kitt said, 4 months ago

    Thanks Tony, also http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2008/06/nasas-leading-c.html, further disinformation against reputable authorities.

25. 

    Anthony 2816 said, 4 months ago

    Wish I hadn’t read that, Kitt. Every time I read about how the Bush administration denied and suppressed scientific reports, it makes me nauseous.

26. 

    M Kitt said, 4 months ago

    Yep, and the effects linger.