<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=JonS123</id>
	<title>Conservapedia - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=JonS123"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/JonS123"/>
	<updated>2026-10-27T23:12:32Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.35.14</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Windows_7&amp;diff=853124</id>
		<title>Windows 7</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Windows_7&amp;diff=853124"/>
		<updated>2011-03-02T03:52:17Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Windows 7''' (previously known as &amp;quot;Vienna&amp;quot; [formerly known as &amp;quot;Blackcomb&amp;quot;]) is the name for the most recent version of [[Microsoft|Microsoft's]] [[Windows (operating system)|Windows]] [[Operating system|operating system]], originally announced in February 2000, but was subject to major delays such as [[Windows XP|Windows XP SP2]] and [[Windows Vista (which was also delayed by XP SP2). &amp;quot;Seven&amp;quot; was released on October 22, 2009. Work on Windows Seven began right after Windows Vista was released. &lt;br /&gt;
Some early details of a few core operating system features surfaced at developer conferences such as WHEC in 2006.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== History &amp;amp; Development ==&lt;br /&gt;
The codename &amp;quot;Windows Blackcomb&amp;quot; was first assigned to Windows NT 6.0, an operating system that was planned to follow [[Windows XP]]. Blackcomb was supposed to be the successor to both Windows XP (Windows NT 5.1) and Windows Server 2003 (Windows NT 5.2). In late 2001 &amp;quot;Blackcomb&amp;quot; was said to be scheduled for release in 2005 then in August it was announced that a minor intermediate release, codenamed Windows &amp;quot;Longhorn&amp;quot;, would release in 2002 to update the Windows NT 5.x line. In the years that followed &amp;quot;Longhorn&amp;quot; was transformed to include many features previously promised for &amp;quot;Blackcomb&amp;quot; and became Windows NT 6, and was given a name, [[Windows Vista]]. The codename &amp;quot;Blackcomb&amp;quot; was eventually discarded, however the ideas and features behind &amp;quot;Blackcomb&amp;quot; that were not included in Windows Vista got a new name codename Windows &amp;quot;Vienna&amp;quot;. Windows Vista's successor (Windows Seven) was released in late 2009.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Focus ==&lt;br /&gt;
Sources in Microsoft have stated that Windows Seven will not just be a major change to Windows, but a complete departure from the way users today usually think about using a computer. For example, the &amp;quot;Start&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Taskbar&amp;quot; philosophy, introduced in Windows 95, might be replaced by a &amp;quot;new interface&amp;quot; that was said in 1999 to be scheduled for Windows Seven (&amp;quot;Vienna&amp;quot;). While Windows Vista was intended to be an evolutionary release, Windows Vienna is targeted directly at revolutionizing the way users of the product interact with their PCs.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Bill Gates]], in an interview with Newsweek &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16934083/site/newsweek/page/4/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;, also suggested that the next version of Windows would &amp;quot;be more user-centric.&amp;quot;. When asked to clarify what he meant, Gates said:&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;That means that right now when you move from one PC to another, you've got to install apps on each one, do upgrades on each one. Moving information between them is very painful. We can use Live Services to know what you're interested in. So even if you drop by a [public] kiosk or somebody else's PC, we can bring down your home page, your files, your fonts, your favorites and those things. So that's kind of the user-centric thing that Live Services can enable. [Also,] in Vista, things got a lot better with [digital] ink and speech, but by the next release there will be a much bigger bet. Students won't need textbooks; they can just use these tablet devices. Parallel computing is pretty important for the next release. We'll make it so that a lot of the high-level graphics will be just built into the operating system. So we've got a pretty good outline.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Shipment ==&lt;br /&gt;
Microsoft released Windows Seven at the end of 2009.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Microsoft originally had planned for Vista to include a number of big changes to Windows, including a new file system ([[WinFS]]) and a completely new user interface, but after Windows XP was hit by huge worm outbreaks in 2003, Microsoft moved almost all of its entire engineering team to locking down Windows with the XP SP2 release.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;We put Longhorn on the back burner for awhile,&amp;quot; Fathi said. &amp;quot;Then when we came back to it, we realized that there were incremental things that we wanted to do, and significant improvements that we wanted to make in Vista that we couldn't deliver in one release.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Features ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Windows 7 includes many new features, such as support for touch screen interfaces&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;cnet&amp;quot;&amp;gt;http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/22/windows.seven/index.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; which lets users draw on the computer screen like a piece of paper&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/tabletpc/russel_03january20.mspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;.  Unlike in previous operating systems, Microsoft decided on many of these new features in conjunction with major computer manufacturers&amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;cnet&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;. Microsoft also redesigned the user interface in many applications, including Paint and Wordpad, which now sport the ribbon interface that Microsoft first introduced in several Office 2007 applications. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Undocumented Features ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Software developers are given a shortcut to various internal settings. Dubbed &amp;quot;GodMode&amp;quot; by bloggers; it was not something Microsoft used internally to refer to the undocumented settings folders.  Apparently, it has been included since Windows Vista but never discussed by Microsoft until bloggers stumbled upon it. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10426627-56.html Windows 7 has lots of 'GodModes' (exclusive), CNET.com, January 6, 2010]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
{{reflist}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Operating Systems]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Microsoft]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Open_mind&amp;diff=851607</id>
		<title>Open mind</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Open_mind&amp;diff=851607"/>
		<updated>2011-02-23T04:55:31Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: /* See Also */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Open mind''' refers in general to one's ability to [[Thought|think]], use [[logic]]al [[reason]]ing, and consider different or even opposing viewpoints. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The term is often used as a [[pejorative]], for example, &amp;quot;Don't be '' [[pro-life]]/pro-[[marriage]]/pro-[[abstinence]]'', be ''open-minded''. In this context, &amp;quot;open minded&amp;quot; simply means accepting a certain viewpoint.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Showing open-mindedness in editing of Conservapedia is considered [[Vandalism]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Examples==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Conservapedia]] (See [[Essay:Does Conservapedia Simulate a Principled Open Mind?]])&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Quotations==&lt;br /&gt;
*&amp;quot;It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.&amp;quot; ([[Aristotle]])&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==See Also==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Physiology]][[Category:Political Terms]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Open_mind&amp;diff=851606</id>
		<title>Open mind</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Open_mind&amp;diff=851606"/>
		<updated>2011-02-23T04:54:45Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Open mind''' refers in general to one's ability to [[Thought|think]], use [[logic]]al [[reason]]ing, and consider different or even opposing viewpoints. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The term is often used as a [[pejorative]], for example, &amp;quot;Don't be '' [[pro-life]]/pro-[[marriage]]/pro-[[abstinence]]'', be ''open-minded''. In this context, &amp;quot;open minded&amp;quot; simply means accepting a certain viewpoint.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Showing open-mindedness in editing of Conservapedia is considered [[Vandalism]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Examples==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Conservapedia]] (See [[Essay:Does Conservapedia Simulate a Principled Open Mind?]])&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Quotations==&lt;br /&gt;
*&amp;quot;It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.&amp;quot; ([[Aristotle]])&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==See Also==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Liberal Vandalism]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Physiology]][[Category:Political Terms]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Open_mind&amp;diff=851605</id>
		<title>Open mind</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Open_mind&amp;diff=851605"/>
		<updated>2011-02-23T04:53:47Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Open mind''' refers in general to one's ability to [[Thought|think]], use [[logic]]al [[reason]]ing, and consider different or even opposing viewpoints. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The term is often used as a [[pejorative]], for example, &amp;quot;Don't be '' [[pro-life]]/pro-[[marriage]]/pro-[[abstinence]]'', be ''open-minded''. In this context, &amp;quot;open minded&amp;quot; simply means accepting a certain viewpoint.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Showing open-mindedness in editing of Conservapedia is considered [[Vandalism]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Examples==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Conservapedia]] (See [[Essay:Does Conservapedia Simulate a Principled Open Mind?]])&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Quotations==&lt;br /&gt;
*&amp;quot;It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.&amp;quot; ([[Aristotle]])&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==See Also==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Physiology]][[Category:Political Terms]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Liberal&amp;diff=851602</id>
		<title>Liberal</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Liberal&amp;diff=851602"/>
		<updated>2011-02-23T04:39:32Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: /* Alternative meanings of 'liberal' */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:Liberal Brain.jpg|thumb|470px|top|&amp;lt;center&amp;gt;A [[satire|satirical]] conception of the liberal brain.&amp;lt;/center&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A '''liberal''' (also '''leftist''') is someone who rejects logical and biblical standards, often for self-centered reasons.  There are no coherent liberal standards; often a liberal is merely someone who craves attention, and who uses many words to say nothing.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;As one liberal website candidly observes, &amp;quot;Obama is a shallow narcissist, not a believer in any cause higher than himself. Every American president has had a healthy ego, but none has ever been as purely motivated by vanity as the childishly self-loving [[Barack Obama]].&amp;quot;[http://www.opednews.com/articles/Barack-Obama-s-ego-driven-by-Christopher-Calder-091210-804.html]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Liberalism began as a movement for individual liberties, but today is increasingly [[statist]] and, as in Europe, [[socialist]]ic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to current dictionaries and their own beliefs, a liberal is &amp;quot;a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets&amp;quot;.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&amp;amp;sub=Search+WordNet&amp;amp;o2=&amp;amp;o0=1&amp;amp;o7=&amp;amp;o5=&amp;amp;o1=1&amp;amp;o6=&amp;amp;o4=&amp;amp;o3=&amp;amp;h=00&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;, or &amp;quot;open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;.  In practice, however, liberals are often the most intolerant of people, and frequently are on the side of disorder, chaos, anarchy, and lawbreaking.  According to Webster's Unabridged Dictionary - and matched by current observation - liberals are '''&amp;quot;unchecked by a sense of the decorous, the fitting, or the polite...lacking significant moral restraints&amp;quot;''' or '''&amp;quot;...an emancipation from convention, tradition, or dogma that extends from a belief in altering institutions to fit altering conditions to a preference for lawlessness&amp;quot;'''&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged'', Volume II; Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. Chicago, 1986. (pg. 1303, column 1)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A liberal generally supports many of the following political positions and practices:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Taxpayer-funded and/or legalized [[abortion]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Censorship]] of teacher-lead [[prayer]] in classrooms and school sponsored events&lt;br /&gt;
* Support for [[gun control]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Support of obscenity and pornography as a [[First Amendment]] right&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;The [[Warren Court]], led by [[liberal]] Justices [[William O. Douglas]], [[Hugo Black]], [[Abe Fortas]], [[William Brennan]] and Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]] issued 36 decisions granting [[First Amendment]] rights to obscenity and pornography. These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Income redistribution]], usually through progressive taxation&lt;br /&gt;
* Government-rationed medical care, such as [[Universal Health Care]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Taxpayer-funded and government-controlled [[public education]]&lt;br /&gt;
* The denial of inherent [[gender differences]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Insisting that men and women be placed in the same jobs in the [[military]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Legalized [[same-sex marriage]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Tax and spend&lt;br /&gt;
* Trying to impede the freedoms of others&lt;br /&gt;
* Implementation of [[affirmative action]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Political correctness]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Support of [[labor union]]s&lt;br /&gt;
* Teaching acceptance of promiscuity through sexual &amp;quot;education&amp;quot; rather than teaching [[abstinence]] from sex.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286671,00.html Democrats Aim To Kill Abstinence-Only Program Funding], [[Fox News]], Monday, June 25, 2007&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* A &amp;quot;[[living Constitution]]&amp;quot; that is reinterpreted as liberals prefer, rather than how it was intended&lt;br /&gt;
* Government programs to [[rehabilitate criminals]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Abolition of the death penalty&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Johnwaynegacyrosalynncarter.jpg|right|300px|thumbnail|[[Serial killer]] [[John Wayne Gacy]] was a [[Democratic Party]] activist who had his picture taken with First Lady [[Rosalynn Carter]] in 1978. In an interview where he denied killing any of his victims, John Gacy said he was [[bisexuality|bisexual]] and &amp;quot;very liberal&amp;quot;.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://s151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/candypop_02/Serial%20Killers/John%20Wayne%20Gacy/?action=view&amp;amp;current=SERIAL_KILLER_John_Wayne_Gacy_In-1.mp4&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Environmentalism]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[[Greenpeace]], for example.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Disarmament treaties]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Globalism]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Opposition to the [[Bible]].&lt;br /&gt;
* Opposition to full private property rights&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;For example, the liberal wing of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] issued the 5-4 [[Kelo v. City of New London]] decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* Reinstating the [[Fairness Doctrine]]&lt;br /&gt;
* In 2005, it was reported by CBS News that [[Theory of evolution and liberalism|liberals were the most likely supporters of the theory of evolution]]. The theory of [[evolution]] is a key component of [[atheistic]] ideologies in the [[Western World]]. &lt;br /&gt;
* Opposition to domestic wire-tapping as authorized in the [[Patriot Act]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Calling anyone they agree with a &amp;quot;professor&amp;quot; regardless of whether he earned that distinction based on a real peer review of his work (see, e.g., [[Richard Dawkins]] and [[Barack Obama]]).&lt;br /&gt;
* Opposition of [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]], a major part of the [[War on Terrorism]].&lt;br /&gt;
* Withholds support to our armed forces fighting overseas to protect their freedoms.&lt;br /&gt;
* Promote arrogance through what they consider superior lifestyles.&lt;br /&gt;
* &amp;quot;The long romance of Western leftists with some of the bloodiest regimes and political movements in history is a story not told often enough ....&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://www.city-journal.org/2009/bc0605bt.html Dupes by Bruce S. Thornton], City Journal - 5 June 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Liberals and Uncharitableness==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:228130875 35181424e3.jpg|thumb|right|175px|[[United States|American]] liberals give less to charity than American conservatives.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  In addition,  [[per capita]] [[atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] in the United States [[Atheism and Uncharitableness|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians][http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/][http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&amp;amp;page=2] ]]&lt;br /&gt;
''For more information please see'': [[Liberals and uncharitableness]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In March of 2008, [[George Will]] wrote at [[RealClearPolitics]] concerning the [[United States]]:&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at [[Syracuse University]], published &amp;quot;Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.&amp;quot; The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than [[conservative]]s....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
[[Atheism|Atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] often reject [[Bible|Biblical]] [[morality]] (and therefore [[conservative Christianity]] ) and hold to [[moral relativism]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&amp;amp;BarnaUpdateID=152&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  Therefore, it is not surprising that [[per capita]] atheists and agnostics in [[United States|America]] [[Atheism and Uncharitableness|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians][http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/][http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&amp;amp;page=2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Liberal politicians and uncharitableness ==&lt;br /&gt;
The political magazine the [[American Spectator]] featured an article which focused on [[liberal politicians and uncharitableness]] and the article exposed the hypocrisy of the liberal politicians it featured.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1c5_1238044128&amp;amp;c=1&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, [[Barack Obama]] has been criticized concerning [[Barack Obama and uncharitableness|his charitable giving]].&lt;br /&gt;
== Nazism and socialism ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''For more information please see:'' [[Nazism and socialism]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Hitler.jpg|thumb|250px|right|One of the most well known political parties of the 20th century which was [[socialism|socialistic]] was the [[National Socialist German Workers Party]] (NAZI) which was headed by the [[evolution|evolutionary racist]] [[Adolf Hitler]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://mises.org/daily/1937&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://creation.com/darwinism-and-the-nazi-race-holocaust&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.hourofthetime.com/socialist.htm&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; ]]&lt;br /&gt;
The [[Ludwig von Mises Institute]] declares:&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|The identification of [[Nazi]] [[Germany]] as a [[socialism|socialist]] state was one of the many great contributions of [[Ludwig von Mises]]...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
De facto government ownership of the means of production, as Mises termed it, was logically implied by such fundamental collectivist principles embraced by the Nazis as that the common good comes before the private good and the individual exists as a means to the ends of the State. If the individual is a means to the ends of the State, so too, of course, is his property. Just as he is owned by the State, his property is also owned by the State.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://mises.org/daily/1937&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Liberal atheists, pederasty and NAMBLA ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''see also:'' [[Atheism, pederasty and NAMBLA]] and [[Teenage homosexuality]] and [[Homosexuality and pederasty]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Harry Hay.jpg|thumbnail|150px|Many consider [[Harry Hay]] to be the founder of the American [[homosexuality|homosexual]] movement.]]&lt;br /&gt;
Some of the well known [[atheism|atheist]] advocates of the [[North American Man-Boy Love Association]] (NAMBLA) are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1. The atheist, political activist and [[homosexuality|homosexual]] [[David Thorstad]] was a founding member of the North American Man-Boy Love Association.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/100822&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. '''[[Harry Hay]]''' (1912 - 2002) was a liberal atheist advocate of [[statutory rape]] and the widely acknowledged founder and progenitor of the  activist [[homosexual agenda]] in the [[United States]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;The American Spectator Special Report, [http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450 When Nancy Met Harry], Jeffrey Lord, 10/5/2006.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Hay joined the [[Communist Party of the United States]] (CPUSA) in 1934.  &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''The Boston Phoenix'', [http://bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/other_stories/documents/02511115.htm The real Harry Hay], Michael Bronski, October 31 - November 7, 2002. &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  He was a vociferous advocate of man/boy love. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;The American Spectator Special Report, [http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450 When Nancy Met Harry], Jeffrey Lord, 10/5/2006.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; In 1986, Hay marched in a [[homosexual|gay]] parade wearing a shirt emblazoned with the words &amp;quot;[[NAMBLA]] walks with me.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mega.nu/ampp/baldwin_pedophilia_homosexuality.pdf&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. The writer [[Samuel R. Delaney]] is an atheist and a [[homosexuality|homosexual]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Samuel R. Delaney, ''About writing: seven essays, four letters, and five interviews'', page 36&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.enotes.com/contemporary-literary-criticism/delany-samuel-r&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Dalaney has served as a professor at several universities. Delaney said he was a supporter of NAMBLA.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Delany, Samuel R.; Freedman, Carl (2009). Conversations with Samuel R. Delany. Univ. Press of Mississippi, page 143&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== John Maynard Keynes and pederasty ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''see also:'' [[John Maynard Keynes and pederasty]] and [[Teenage homosexuality]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[John Maynard Keynes]] was the founder of [[Keynesian economics]]. Lytton Strachey, his male bed partner, wrote that Keynes was a “A liberal and a [[homosexuality|sodomite]], An atheist and a statistician.”&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Keynes and his friends made numerous trips to the resorts surrounding the Mediterranean.  At the resorts, little boys were sold by their families to bordellos which catered to homosexuals.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Keynes was a [[bisexual]] who married Lydia Lopokova. In his work ''The Cambridge Apostles, 1820-1914: Liberalism, Imagination, and Friendship in British Intellectual and Professional Life'', William C. Lubenow expresses the opinion that Keynes was an [[agnosticism|agnostic]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;The Cambridge Apostles, 1820-1914: Liberalism, Imagination, and Friendship in British Intellectual and Professional Life, 1998, Cambridge University Press, page 402&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Sam Harris claims atheist is right next to child molester as a designation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
see also: [[Views on Atheists]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Dr. [[Sam Harris]] is a founder of the [[New Atheism]] movement. [[Sam Harris]] is quite aware of the stigma surrounding atheism and has even advocated that atheists no longer call themselves atheists.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://newsinitiative.org/story/2007/06/19/interview_with_an_atheist&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; In fact, Dr. Harris has said concerning the label of atheist, &amp;quot;It's right next to child molester as a designation.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://newsinitiative.org/story/2007/06/19/interview_with_an_atheist&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Liberals and Superstition==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|right|150px]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: &amp;quot;A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Also, in September of 2008, the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|The reality is that the [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign, by discouraging [[religion]], won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith &amp;amp;mdash; it's what the empirical data tell us.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;What Americans Really Believe,&amp;quot; a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book &amp;quot;The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener,&amp;quot; skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in [[pseudoscience]], cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Liberalism in North America Today ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Smear merchants.jpg|right|200px]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Democrats]] and most media outlets in the [[U.S.]] are blatantly [[liberal]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{cite web|url=http://www.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp|title=Media Bias basics|publisher=Media Research Center}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Liberalism in North America today practices three primary tactics to attack the Republican Party, and sometimes to attack American values in general. These three liberal tactics can be pronounced using the following [[acronym]]: ''SIN''. Liberals (1) '''S'''hift the subject, they (2) '''I'''gnore the facts, and they (3) '''N'''ame call.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Scott Baker. [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/did-herman-cain-give-the-dont-miss-speech-at-cpac/ Did Herman Cain Give the ‘Don’t Miss’ Speech at CPAC?], ''[[The Blaze]], February 12, 2011.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[[YouTube]]. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N3-j3HM7-A&amp;amp; Herman Cain: &amp;quot;Stupid People Are Ruining America&amp;quot;], February 11, 2011.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Liberals typically support a &amp;quot;''mixed''&amp;quot; economy, a policy similar to that of [[fascism]]. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{cite web|url=http://fora.tv/2008/01/30/Liberal_Traits_of_Fascism|title=Video discussion about how modern liberalism is actually fascist by author Jonah Goldberg.}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Liberals claimed a monopoly on [[compassion]], [[decency]], and [[social justice]] (as defined by themselves), posing as the sole defenders of [[civic virtue]] against a horde of backwoodsmen, racists, and religious fanatics. [http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/the_disgrace_of_liberalism.html]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|'''There's another goal, from my point of view, which is to try to lay the groundwork for a radical political force which would conceive of itself as distinctly to the left of moderate, reformist American liberals. And that has two aspects. One is to try to change that liberalism, to transform it by analysis, critique, and activism; the second is to build a radical movement which would be an autonomous force in its own right, which would be distinct from the traditional American liberal consensus. This radical part of the program involves not simply supporting the liberal students against conservative students and conservative professors, but trying to act on them, to push them to the left. It also involves trying to find and support, even trying to help create, networks of radical students in law school and of radical professors around the country — students and teachers who see themselves as wanting to go a lot further than most people want to go. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&amp;amp;p=liberal+teachers&amp;amp;fr=yfp-t-501&amp;amp;fp_ip=MX&amp;amp;u=duncankennedy.net/documents/Liberal%2520Values%2520in%2520Legal%2520Education.pdf&amp;amp;w=liberal+liberals+teachers+teacher&amp;amp;d=BNZFhPReRjC1&amp;amp;icp=1&amp;amp;.intl=us Liberal Values in Legal Education] Duncan Kennedy (professor at Harvard Law School)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Liberal Rankings of Congress Members===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The National Journal compiles the votes of each congress member each year and uses the information to create rankings&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/index.htm&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; of how liberal each member of the United States [[Congress]] is. In addition to showing the voting records of each member and given an overall all ranking of liberalness, the National Journal also ranks congress members by liberalness in the areas of social, economic, and foreign policy.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Liberalism in Europe today==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In Europe, on the other hand, parties that call themselves ''liberal'' are moderate in outlook, ranging from centre-left to centre-right, promote typically economic and business freedom. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.alde.eu&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; is a party of the European Parliament that represents most ''liberal'' parties from European countries. Similar policies are promoted by many ''liberal'' parties throughout the world,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.liberal-international.org/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; such as the Liberal Party of Australia.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.liberal.org.au/]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Trade unions and socialist parties often criticize politicians for promoting lower taxes on business, or more flexible hiring and firing laws, by calling them &amp;quot;liberals&amp;quot; or [[neoliberal|neoliberals]]. Thus, just as in the US, &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot; may occasionally be used as a term of abuse. But when someone is called &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot; in Europe, it has an entirely different meaning than in the US. In fact, the US meaning of liberal is more similar to the politics of European [[socialist]] or [[social democracy|social democratic]] parties.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.pes.org]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Historical Liberalism ==&lt;br /&gt;
In history, the word &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot; has meant different things at different times, and was associated with individual liberty in prior centuries. In the postwar period, liberals supported government intervention in the economy and welfare state policies, as well as peaceful coexistence with the communist block, which are not liberal policies in the sense of classical liberalism. After the end of the cold war, with the demise of socialism and communism, many liberals embraced some ideas from economic neo-liberalism, and coined it the &amp;quot;Third Way&amp;quot;. In the area of national security and foreign policy liberals in the [[U.S.]] failed to define a consistent stance, even after the events of 9/11 and the beginning of the war in Iraq.  Liberals generally support affirmative action, gay marriage, and abortion.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;&amp;quot;Political liberals tend, for whatever reason, to be ardent supporters of both gay rights and pro-choice programs.&amp;quot; Greenberg and Bailey [http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Greenberg-Bailey/Homosexual%20Eugenics.pdf]  &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Original meaning: Classical Liberalism==&lt;br /&gt;
Liberalism is a political philosophy with freedom as its core value. The term was originally applied to supporters of individual liberties and equal rights, but, in America, the term has come to represent a movement of social change that often conflicts with [[conservative]] values such as moral values and tradition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See [[Classical Liberal|Classical Liberalism]]. Compare [[Libertarianism]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Alternative meanings of 'liberal'==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One definition of liberal is anything that is not conservative.  For example, the American Heritage Dictionary includes this definition of &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot;:&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Stalin-140508 27880t.jpg|right|150px|thumb|[[Joseph Stalin]]'s [[atheism|atheistic]] regime killed tens of millions of people.]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Merriam-Webster defines &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot; as:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 broad-minded; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberal&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Infamous liberals ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''See also:'' [[Infamous liberals]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Joseph Stalin]] was an [[atheism|atheist]], [[communism|communist]], and [[evolution|evolutionist]] dictator who was responsible for the deaths of tens of millions. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Mao Tse Tung]] - atheist and communist dictator responsible for the deaths of tens of millions.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Margaret Sanger]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*[[John Wayne Gacy]] - In an interview where he denied killing any of his victims, [[serial killer]] John Wayne Gacy said he was [[bisexuality|bisexual]] and &amp;quot;very liberal&amp;quot;.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://s151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/candypop_02/Serial%20Killers/John%20Wayne%20Gacy/?action=view&amp;amp;current=SERIAL_KILLER_John_Wayne_Gacy_In-1.mp4&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Gacy was also a [[Democratic Party]] activist who had his picture taken with [[Rosalynn Carter]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.digitaljournal.com/image/45527&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Liberal Organizations == &lt;br /&gt;
*[[AARP|AARP - American Association of Retired People]] &lt;br /&gt;
*[[ACLU|ACLU - American Civil Liberties Union]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[ACORN|ACORN - Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[AFL-CIO|AFL-CIO - American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Amnesty International|AI - Amnesty International]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Democratic National Committee]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Greenpeace]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[NARAL|NARAL - National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[NAACP|NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Colored People]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[National Committee for an Effective Congress]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[National Education Association]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[National Organization of Women]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Planned Parenthood|Planned Parenthood Federation of America]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Progressives for Obama]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Rainbow/PUSH Coalition]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[MoveOn.org]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[A.N.S.W.E.R.]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[U.S. Peace Council]]&lt;br /&gt;
Source: [http://www.politixgroup.com/lo.htm The Politix Group]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
{{reflist|2}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==See Also==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Conservative resources]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Conservapedia:Articles about liberals|Articles about liberals]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Classical liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Drinking Liberally]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Godless liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Last wordism]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Essay:Liberal celebrity obsession|Liberal celebrity obsession]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Essay:Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia|Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Christianity]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Democrats]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Elite]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Essay: Liberal Falsehoods|Liberal Falsehoods]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Fascism]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal friendship]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Gloss]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal grading]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal hypocrisy]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Essay:Liberal hysteria|Liberal hysteria]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Essay:Liberal Intellectualism|Liberal Intellectualism]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberalism and art]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal labels]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right|Liberal Lies About the American Right]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal logic]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness|Liberal Mind]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Party]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal supremacist]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Massachusetts liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Progressives]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Scientific Illiteracy and Liberals]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Further Information==&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Best_New_Conservative_Words#New_Liberal_Terms|New Liberal Terms]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Conservative Links]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{liberalism}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Political Ideologies]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Politics]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category: Liberals]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Liberal&amp;diff=851601</id>
		<title>Liberal</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Liberal&amp;diff=851601"/>
		<updated>2011-02-23T04:38:54Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: /* Alternative meanings of 'liberal' */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:Liberal Brain.jpg|thumb|470px|top|&amp;lt;center&amp;gt;A [[satire|satirical]] conception of the liberal brain.&amp;lt;/center&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A '''liberal''' (also '''leftist''') is someone who rejects logical and biblical standards, often for self-centered reasons.  There are no coherent liberal standards; often a liberal is merely someone who craves attention, and who uses many words to say nothing.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;As one liberal website candidly observes, &amp;quot;Obama is a shallow narcissist, not a believer in any cause higher than himself. Every American president has had a healthy ego, but none has ever been as purely motivated by vanity as the childishly self-loving [[Barack Obama]].&amp;quot;[http://www.opednews.com/articles/Barack-Obama-s-ego-driven-by-Christopher-Calder-091210-804.html]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Liberalism began as a movement for individual liberties, but today is increasingly [[statist]] and, as in Europe, [[socialist]]ic.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to current dictionaries and their own beliefs, a liberal is &amp;quot;a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets&amp;quot;.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=liberal&amp;amp;sub=Search+WordNet&amp;amp;o2=&amp;amp;o0=1&amp;amp;o7=&amp;amp;o5=&amp;amp;o1=1&amp;amp;o6=&amp;amp;o4=&amp;amp;o3=&amp;amp;h=00&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;, or &amp;quot;open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;.  In practice, however, liberals are often the most intolerant of people, and frequently are on the side of disorder, chaos, anarchy, and lawbreaking.  According to Webster's Unabridged Dictionary - and matched by current observation - liberals are '''&amp;quot;unchecked by a sense of the decorous, the fitting, or the polite...lacking significant moral restraints&amp;quot;''' or '''&amp;quot;...an emancipation from convention, tradition, or dogma that extends from a belief in altering institutions to fit altering conditions to a preference for lawlessness&amp;quot;'''&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged'', Volume II; Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. Chicago, 1986. (pg. 1303, column 1)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A liberal generally supports many of the following political positions and practices:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Taxpayer-funded and/or legalized [[abortion]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Censorship]] of teacher-lead [[prayer]] in classrooms and school sponsored events&lt;br /&gt;
* Support for [[gun control]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Support of obscenity and pornography as a [[First Amendment]] right&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;The [[Warren Court]], led by [[liberal]] Justices [[William O. Douglas]], [[Hugo Black]], [[Abe Fortas]], [[William Brennan]] and Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]] issued 36 decisions granting [[First Amendment]] rights to obscenity and pornography. These decisions remain fully supported by liberals today.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Income redistribution]], usually through progressive taxation&lt;br /&gt;
* Government-rationed medical care, such as [[Universal Health Care]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Taxpayer-funded and government-controlled [[public education]]&lt;br /&gt;
* The denial of inherent [[gender differences]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Insisting that men and women be placed in the same jobs in the [[military]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Legalized [[same-sex marriage]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Tax and spend&lt;br /&gt;
* Trying to impede the freedoms of others&lt;br /&gt;
* Implementation of [[affirmative action]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Political correctness]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Support of [[labor union]]s&lt;br /&gt;
* Teaching acceptance of promiscuity through sexual &amp;quot;education&amp;quot; rather than teaching [[abstinence]] from sex.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286671,00.html Democrats Aim To Kill Abstinence-Only Program Funding], [[Fox News]], Monday, June 25, 2007&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* A &amp;quot;[[living Constitution]]&amp;quot; that is reinterpreted as liberals prefer, rather than how it was intended&lt;br /&gt;
* Government programs to [[rehabilitate criminals]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Abolition of the death penalty&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Johnwaynegacyrosalynncarter.jpg|right|300px|thumbnail|[[Serial killer]] [[John Wayne Gacy]] was a [[Democratic Party]] activist who had his picture taken with First Lady [[Rosalynn Carter]] in 1978. In an interview where he denied killing any of his victims, John Gacy said he was [[bisexuality|bisexual]] and &amp;quot;very liberal&amp;quot;.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://s151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/candypop_02/Serial%20Killers/John%20Wayne%20Gacy/?action=view&amp;amp;current=SERIAL_KILLER_John_Wayne_Gacy_In-1.mp4&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Environmentalism]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[[Greenpeace]], for example.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Disarmament treaties]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Globalism]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Opposition to the [[Bible]].&lt;br /&gt;
* Opposition to full private property rights&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;For example, the liberal wing of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] issued the 5-4 [[Kelo v. City of New London]] decision authorizing the taking of private property by government in order to give the property to another private entity rather than convert it to a public use.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* Reinstating the [[Fairness Doctrine]]&lt;br /&gt;
* In 2005, it was reported by CBS News that [[Theory of evolution and liberalism|liberals were the most likely supporters of the theory of evolution]]. The theory of [[evolution]] is a key component of [[atheistic]] ideologies in the [[Western World]]. &lt;br /&gt;
* Opposition to domestic wire-tapping as authorized in the [[Patriot Act]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Calling anyone they agree with a &amp;quot;professor&amp;quot; regardless of whether he earned that distinction based on a real peer review of his work (see, e.g., [[Richard Dawkins]] and [[Barack Obama]]).&lt;br /&gt;
* Opposition of [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]], a major part of the [[War on Terrorism]].&lt;br /&gt;
* Withholds support to our armed forces fighting overseas to protect their freedoms.&lt;br /&gt;
* Promote arrogance through what they consider superior lifestyles.&lt;br /&gt;
* &amp;quot;The long romance of Western leftists with some of the bloodiest regimes and political movements in history is a story not told often enough ....&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://www.city-journal.org/2009/bc0605bt.html Dupes by Bruce S. Thornton], City Journal - 5 June 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Liberals and Uncharitableness==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:228130875 35181424e3.jpg|thumb|right|175px|[[United States|American]] liberals give less to charity than American conservatives.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  In addition,  [[per capita]] [[atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] in the United States [[Atheism and Uncharitableness|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians][http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/][http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&amp;amp;page=2] ]]&lt;br /&gt;
''For more information please see'': [[Liberals and uncharitableness]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In March of 2008, [[George Will]] wrote at [[RealClearPolitics]] concerning the [[United States]]:&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at [[Syracuse University]], published &amp;quot;Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.&amp;quot; The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than [[conservative]]s....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
[[Atheism|Atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] often reject [[Bible|Biblical]] [[morality]] (and therefore [[conservative Christianity]] ) and hold to [[moral relativism]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&amp;amp;BarnaUpdateID=152&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  Therefore, it is not surprising that [[per capita]] atheists and agnostics in [[United States|America]] [[Atheism and Uncharitableness|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians][http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/][http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&amp;amp;page=2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Liberal politicians and uncharitableness ==&lt;br /&gt;
The political magazine the [[American Spectator]] featured an article which focused on [[liberal politicians and uncharitableness]] and the article exposed the hypocrisy of the liberal politicians it featured.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1c5_1238044128&amp;amp;c=1&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, [[Barack Obama]] has been criticized concerning [[Barack Obama and uncharitableness|his charitable giving]].&lt;br /&gt;
== Nazism and socialism ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''For more information please see:'' [[Nazism and socialism]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Hitler.jpg|thumb|250px|right|One of the most well known political parties of the 20th century which was [[socialism|socialistic]] was the [[National Socialist German Workers Party]] (NAZI) which was headed by the [[evolution|evolutionary racist]] [[Adolf Hitler]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://mises.org/daily/1937&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://creation.com/darwinism-and-the-nazi-race-holocaust&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.hourofthetime.com/socialist.htm&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; ]]&lt;br /&gt;
The [[Ludwig von Mises Institute]] declares:&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|The identification of [[Nazi]] [[Germany]] as a [[socialism|socialist]] state was one of the many great contributions of [[Ludwig von Mises]]...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
De facto government ownership of the means of production, as Mises termed it, was logically implied by such fundamental collectivist principles embraced by the Nazis as that the common good comes before the private good and the individual exists as a means to the ends of the State. If the individual is a means to the ends of the State, so too, of course, is his property. Just as he is owned by the State, his property is also owned by the State.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://mises.org/daily/1937&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Liberal atheists, pederasty and NAMBLA ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''see also:'' [[Atheism, pederasty and NAMBLA]] and [[Teenage homosexuality]] and [[Homosexuality and pederasty]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Harry Hay.jpg|thumbnail|150px|Many consider [[Harry Hay]] to be the founder of the American [[homosexuality|homosexual]] movement.]]&lt;br /&gt;
Some of the well known [[atheism|atheist]] advocates of the [[North American Man-Boy Love Association]] (NAMBLA) are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1. The atheist, political activist and [[homosexuality|homosexual]] [[David Thorstad]] was a founding member of the North American Man-Boy Love Association.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/100822&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. '''[[Harry Hay]]''' (1912 - 2002) was a liberal atheist advocate of [[statutory rape]] and the widely acknowledged founder and progenitor of the  activist [[homosexual agenda]] in the [[United States]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;The American Spectator Special Report, [http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450 When Nancy Met Harry], Jeffrey Lord, 10/5/2006.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Hay joined the [[Communist Party of the United States]] (CPUSA) in 1934.  &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''The Boston Phoenix'', [http://bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/other_stories/documents/02511115.htm The real Harry Hay], Michael Bronski, October 31 - November 7, 2002. &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  He was a vociferous advocate of man/boy love. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;The American Spectator Special Report, [http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450 When Nancy Met Harry], Jeffrey Lord, 10/5/2006.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; In 1986, Hay marched in a [[homosexual|gay]] parade wearing a shirt emblazoned with the words &amp;quot;[[NAMBLA]] walks with me.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mega.nu/ampp/baldwin_pedophilia_homosexuality.pdf&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
3. The writer [[Samuel R. Delaney]] is an atheist and a [[homosexuality|homosexual]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Samuel R. Delaney, ''About writing: seven essays, four letters, and five interviews'', page 36&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.enotes.com/contemporary-literary-criticism/delany-samuel-r&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Dalaney has served as a professor at several universities. Delaney said he was a supporter of NAMBLA.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Delany, Samuel R.; Freedman, Carl (2009). Conversations with Samuel R. Delany. Univ. Press of Mississippi, page 143&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== John Maynard Keynes and pederasty ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''see also:'' [[John Maynard Keynes and pederasty]] and [[Teenage homosexuality]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[John Maynard Keynes]] was the founder of [[Keynesian economics]]. Lytton Strachey, his male bed partner, wrote that Keynes was a “A liberal and a [[homosexuality|sodomite]], An atheist and a statistician.”&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Keynes and his friends made numerous trips to the resorts surrounding the Mediterranean.  At the resorts, little boys were sold by their families to bordellos which catered to homosexuals.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Keynes was a [[bisexual]] who married Lydia Lopokova. In his work ''The Cambridge Apostles, 1820-1914: Liberalism, Imagination, and Friendship in British Intellectual and Professional Life'', William C. Lubenow expresses the opinion that Keynes was an [[agnosticism|agnostic]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;The Cambridge Apostles, 1820-1914: Liberalism, Imagination, and Friendship in British Intellectual and Professional Life, 1998, Cambridge University Press, page 402&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Sam Harris claims atheist is right next to child molester as a designation ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
see also: [[Views on Atheists]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Dr. [[Sam Harris]] is a founder of the [[New Atheism]] movement. [[Sam Harris]] is quite aware of the stigma surrounding atheism and has even advocated that atheists no longer call themselves atheists.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://newsinitiative.org/story/2007/06/19/interview_with_an_atheist&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; In fact, Dr. Harris has said concerning the label of atheist, &amp;quot;It's right next to child molester as a designation.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://newsinitiative.org/story/2007/06/19/interview_with_an_atheist&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Liberals and Superstition==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|right|150px]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: &amp;quot;A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Also, in September of 2008, the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|The reality is that the [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign, by discouraging [[religion]], won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith &amp;amp;mdash; it's what the empirical data tell us.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;What Americans Really Believe,&amp;quot; a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book &amp;quot;The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener,&amp;quot; skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in [[pseudoscience]], cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Liberalism in North America Today ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Smear merchants.jpg|right|200px]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Democrats]] and most media outlets in the [[U.S.]] are blatantly [[liberal]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{cite web|url=http://www.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp|title=Media Bias basics|publisher=Media Research Center}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Liberalism in North America today practices three primary tactics to attack the Republican Party, and sometimes to attack American values in general. These three liberal tactics can be pronounced using the following [[acronym]]: ''SIN''. Liberals (1) '''S'''hift the subject, they (2) '''I'''gnore the facts, and they (3) '''N'''ame call.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Scott Baker. [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/did-herman-cain-give-the-dont-miss-speech-at-cpac/ Did Herman Cain Give the ‘Don’t Miss’ Speech at CPAC?], ''[[The Blaze]], February 12, 2011.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[[YouTube]]. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N3-j3HM7-A&amp;amp; Herman Cain: &amp;quot;Stupid People Are Ruining America&amp;quot;], February 11, 2011.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Liberals typically support a &amp;quot;''mixed''&amp;quot; economy, a policy similar to that of [[fascism]]. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{cite web|url=http://fora.tv/2008/01/30/Liberal_Traits_of_Fascism|title=Video discussion about how modern liberalism is actually fascist by author Jonah Goldberg.}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Liberals claimed a monopoly on [[compassion]], [[decency]], and [[social justice]] (as defined by themselves), posing as the sole defenders of [[civic virtue]] against a horde of backwoodsmen, racists, and religious fanatics. [http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/the_disgrace_of_liberalism.html]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|'''There's another goal, from my point of view, which is to try to lay the groundwork for a radical political force which would conceive of itself as distinctly to the left of moderate, reformist American liberals. And that has two aspects. One is to try to change that liberalism, to transform it by analysis, critique, and activism; the second is to build a radical movement which would be an autonomous force in its own right, which would be distinct from the traditional American liberal consensus. This radical part of the program involves not simply supporting the liberal students against conservative students and conservative professors, but trying to act on them, to push them to the left. It also involves trying to find and support, even trying to help create, networks of radical students in law school and of radical professors around the country — students and teachers who see themselves as wanting to go a lot further than most people want to go. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&amp;amp;p=liberal+teachers&amp;amp;fr=yfp-t-501&amp;amp;fp_ip=MX&amp;amp;u=duncankennedy.net/documents/Liberal%2520Values%2520in%2520Legal%2520Education.pdf&amp;amp;w=liberal+liberals+teachers+teacher&amp;amp;d=BNZFhPReRjC1&amp;amp;icp=1&amp;amp;.intl=us Liberal Values in Legal Education] Duncan Kennedy (professor at Harvard Law School)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Liberal Rankings of Congress Members===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The National Journal compiles the votes of each congress member each year and uses the information to create rankings&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/index.htm&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; of how liberal each member of the United States [[Congress]] is. In addition to showing the voting records of each member and given an overall all ranking of liberalness, the National Journal also ranks congress members by liberalness in the areas of social, economic, and foreign policy.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Liberalism in Europe today==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In Europe, on the other hand, parties that call themselves ''liberal'' are moderate in outlook, ranging from centre-left to centre-right, promote typically economic and business freedom. The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.alde.eu&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; is a party of the European Parliament that represents most ''liberal'' parties from European countries. Similar policies are promoted by many ''liberal'' parties throughout the world,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.liberal-international.org/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; such as the Liberal Party of Australia.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.liberal.org.au/]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Trade unions and socialist parties often criticize politicians for promoting lower taxes on business, or more flexible hiring and firing laws, by calling them &amp;quot;liberals&amp;quot; or [[neoliberal|neoliberals]]. Thus, just as in the US, &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot; may occasionally be used as a term of abuse. But when someone is called &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot; in Europe, it has an entirely different meaning than in the US. In fact, the US meaning of liberal is more similar to the politics of European [[socialist]] or [[social democracy|social democratic]] parties.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.pes.org]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Historical Liberalism ==&lt;br /&gt;
In history, the word &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot; has meant different things at different times, and was associated with individual liberty in prior centuries. In the postwar period, liberals supported government intervention in the economy and welfare state policies, as well as peaceful coexistence with the communist block, which are not liberal policies in the sense of classical liberalism. After the end of the cold war, with the demise of socialism and communism, many liberals embraced some ideas from economic neo-liberalism, and coined it the &amp;quot;Third Way&amp;quot;. In the area of national security and foreign policy liberals in the [[U.S.]] failed to define a consistent stance, even after the events of 9/11 and the beginning of the war in Iraq.  Liberals generally support affirmative action, gay marriage, and abortion.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;&amp;quot;Political liberals tend, for whatever reason, to be ardent supporters of both gay rights and pro-choice programs.&amp;quot; Greenberg and Bailey [http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Greenberg-Bailey/Homosexual%20Eugenics.pdf]  &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Original meaning: Classical Liberalism==&lt;br /&gt;
Liberalism is a political philosophy with freedom as its core value. The term was originally applied to supporters of individual liberties and equal rights, but, in America, the term has come to represent a movement of social change that often conflicts with [[conservative]] values such as moral values and tradition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
See [[Classical Liberal|Classical Liberalism]]. Compare [[Libertarianism]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Alternative meanings of 'liberal'==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One definition of liberal is anything that is not conservative.  For example, the American Heritage Dictionary includes this definition of &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot;:&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Stalin-140508 27880t.jpg|right|150px|thumb|[[Joseph Stalin]]'s [[atheism|atheistic]] regime killed tens of millions of people.]]&lt;br /&gt;
* Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Merriam-Webster defines &amp;quot;liberal&amp;quot; as:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 &amp;quot;broad-minded; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberal&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Infamous liberals ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''See also:'' [[Infamous liberals]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Joseph Stalin]] was an [[atheism|atheist]], [[communism|communist]], and [[evolution|evolutionist]] dictator who was responsible for the deaths of tens of millions. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Mao Tse Tung]] - atheist and communist dictator responsible for the deaths of tens of millions.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Margaret Sanger]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*[[John Wayne Gacy]] - In an interview where he denied killing any of his victims, [[serial killer]] John Wayne Gacy said he was [[bisexuality|bisexual]] and &amp;quot;very liberal&amp;quot;.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://s151.photobucket.com/albums/s151/candypop_02/Serial%20Killers/John%20Wayne%20Gacy/?action=view&amp;amp;current=SERIAL_KILLER_John_Wayne_Gacy_In-1.mp4&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Gacy was also a [[Democratic Party]] activist who had his picture taken with [[Rosalynn Carter]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.digitaljournal.com/image/45527&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Liberal Organizations == &lt;br /&gt;
*[[AARP|AARP - American Association of Retired People]] &lt;br /&gt;
*[[ACLU|ACLU - American Civil Liberties Union]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[ACORN|ACORN - Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[AFL-CIO|AFL-CIO - American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Amnesty International|AI - Amnesty International]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Democratic National Committee]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Greenpeace]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[NARAL|NARAL - National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[NAACP|NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Colored People]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[National Committee for an Effective Congress]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[National Education Association]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[National Organization of Women]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Planned Parenthood|Planned Parenthood Federation of America]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Progressives for Obama]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Rainbow/PUSH Coalition]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[MoveOn.org]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[A.N.S.W.E.R.]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[U.S. Peace Council]]&lt;br /&gt;
Source: [http://www.politixgroup.com/lo.htm The Politix Group]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
{{reflist|2}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==See Also==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Conservative resources]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Conservapedia:Articles about liberals|Articles about liberals]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Classical liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Drinking Liberally]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Godless liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Last wordism]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Essay:Liberal celebrity obsession|Liberal celebrity obsession]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Essay:Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia|Liberal Behavior on Conservapedia]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Christianity]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Democrats]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Elite]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Essay: Liberal Falsehoods|Liberal Falsehoods]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Fascism]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal friendship]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Gloss]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal grading]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal hypocrisy]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Essay:Liberal hysteria|Liberal hysteria]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Essay:Liberal Intellectualism|Liberal Intellectualism]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberalism and art]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal labels]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right|Liberal Lies About the American Right]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal logic]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness|Liberal Mind]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal Party]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Liberal supremacist]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Massachusetts liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Progressives]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Scientific Illiteracy and Liberals]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Further Information==&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Best_New_Conservative_Words#New_Liberal_Terms|New Liberal Terms]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Conservative Links]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{liberalism}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Political Ideologies]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Politics]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category: Liberals]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Agnosticism&amp;diff=850644</id>
		<title>Agnosticism</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Agnosticism&amp;diff=850644"/>
		<updated>2011-02-20T20:18:13Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: /* Famous Agnostics */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:65375.jpg|thumb|David Hume]]&lt;br /&gt;
'''Agnosticism''' is, in weaker forms, an affirmation of ignorance regarding the existence of God, and in stronger forms, the assertion that God's existence is not capable of being known (unknowable).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The proponent of the weaker form does not make a claim to knowledge about existence, but he simply suspends from making a decision. A suspension of decision, in terms of logic, does not have a truth value, and therefore he is not making an argument. The proponent of the stronger form goes a step further and makes a claim to knowledge by saying, ''I know that the existence of God cannot be known''. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The word &amp;quot;agnostic&amp;quot; was coined in 1869 by [[T. H. Huxley]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;T. H. Huxley was also an early and influential supporter of Darwinism.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; from the Greek roots ''a-'' not, and ''-gnostic,'' knowing; the philosopher [[Herbert Spencer]] was influential in spreading its use. One nineteenth-century saw held that &amp;quot;There is no god but the Unknowable, and Herbert Spencer is his prophet.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;London, Jack (1913), ''Martin Eden,'' [http://london.sonoma.edu/Writings/MartinEden/chapter13.html Chapter 13]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
{{Clear}}&lt;br /&gt;
==Atheism and agnosticism==&lt;br /&gt;
Some agnostics bristle at the term ''atheist''. They say they aren't atheists, because they don't &amp;quot;believe that God does not exist&amp;quot; but rather &amp;quot;neither believe nor disbelieve&amp;quot;. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Agnostics differ from regular [[Atheism|atheists]] in that they do not deny God's existence.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Many religious believers make no distinction among non-believers. If you're not sure that God exists, they combine the unsure and &amp;quot;surely not&amp;quot; into one lump. For these believers, an &amp;quot;atheist&amp;quot; is anyone who doesn't believe in God.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Among those who have not decided whether to believe in God, or to disbelieve in Him, there are two main groups:&lt;br /&gt;
#Those who simply haven't made a decision&lt;br /&gt;
#Those who declare no rational decision is possible, on the grounds that the existence of God is not knowable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Bertrand Russell]] once wrote that, in describing his beliefs,&lt;br /&gt;
:I never know whether I should say 'Agnostic' or whether I should say 'Atheist'.... As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one [can] prove that there is not a God. On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Russell, Bertrand (1947) [http://www.luminary.us/russell/atheist_agnostic.html Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?] Most online sources say &amp;quot;by which one prove,&amp;quot; probably a mistake.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== Norman Geisler on Complete Agnosticism ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[Norman Geisler]] wrote on complete agnosticism: &lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|Complete agnosticism is self-defeating; it reduces to the self-destructing assertion that &amp;quot;one knows enough about reality in order to affirm that nothing can be known about reality.&amp;quot; This statement provides within itself all that is necessary to falsify itself. For if one knows something about reality, then he surely cannot affirm in the same breath that all of reality is unknowable. And of course if one knows nothing whatsoever about reality, then he has no basis whatsoever for making a statement about reality. It will not suffice to say that his knowledge about reality is purely and completely negative,  that is, a knowledge of what one cannot meaningfully affirm that something is not – that it follows that total agnosticism is self-defeating because it assumes some knowledge about reality in order to deny any knowledge of reality (Geisler,  Apologetics, p. 20).&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.greatcom.org/resources/secular_religions/ch01/default.htm&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Frequency==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Belief-god.jpg|thumb|550px|Financial Times (FT)/Harris Poll among adults in 5 countries in 2006]]&lt;br /&gt;
Agnosticism has become a fairly common belief system in Western culture with 14% of people in the United States, 32% of people in France and 35% of people in Great Britain self-identifying as agnostics.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=1131&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Agnosticism and Uncharitableness==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Per capita]] atheists and agnostics in the [[United States]] [[Atheism and Uncharitableness|give significantly less to charity than theists]].&lt;br /&gt;
== Famous Agnostics ==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Bill Maher]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Larry King]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Albert Einstein]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/quotes_einstein.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Steve Wozniak]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Agnostic population and health habits ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''For more information please see:'' [[Agnosticism, obesity and self-esteem]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:11834504 3cc3c49559.jpg|180px|right|thumbnail|Two of the major risk factors for becoming [[obesity|obese]] according to the [[Mayo Clinic]] are poor dietary choices and inactivity.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Thus, it appears as if agnostics/non-religious are more prone to becoming [[obese]] than very religious individuals.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;small&amp;gt;(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/wader/11834504/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement])&amp;lt;/small&amp;gt; ]]&lt;br /&gt;
According to the [[Gallup Organization]], &amp;quot;Very religious Americans are more likely to practice healthy behaviors than those who are moderately religious or nonreligious.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Gallup further declares:&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|Very religious Americans make healthier choices than their moderately religious and nonreligious counterparts across all four of the Healthy Behavior Index metrics, including smoking, healthy eating, and regular exercise. Smoking is one area of particular differentiation between the very religious and less religious Americans, with the nonreligious 85% more likely to be smokers than those who are very religious.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two of the major risk factors for becoming [[obesity|obese]] according to the [[Mayo Clinic]] are poor dietary choices and inactivity, thus it appears as if agnostics/non-religious may be more prone to becoming [[obese]] than very religious individuals.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== See also ==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== External Links ==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.greatcom.org/resources/secular_religions/ch01/default.htm Atheism, Agnosticism, and Skepticism] Synopsis of Understanding Secular Religions by [[Josh McDowell]] and Don Stewart&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;References/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[category:religion]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[category:philosophy]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Agnosticism]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Agnosticism&amp;diff=850643</id>
		<title>Agnosticism</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Agnosticism&amp;diff=850643"/>
		<updated>2011-02-20T20:17:36Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: /* Famous Agnostics */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:65375.jpg|thumb|David Hume]]&lt;br /&gt;
'''Agnosticism''' is, in weaker forms, an affirmation of ignorance regarding the existence of God, and in stronger forms, the assertion that God's existence is not capable of being known (unknowable).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The proponent of the weaker form does not make a claim to knowledge about existence, but he simply suspends from making a decision. A suspension of decision, in terms of logic, does not have a truth value, and therefore he is not making an argument. The proponent of the stronger form goes a step further and makes a claim to knowledge by saying, ''I know that the existence of God cannot be known''. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The word &amp;quot;agnostic&amp;quot; was coined in 1869 by [[T. H. Huxley]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;T. H. Huxley was also an early and influential supporter of Darwinism.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; from the Greek roots ''a-'' not, and ''-gnostic,'' knowing; the philosopher [[Herbert Spencer]] was influential in spreading its use. One nineteenth-century saw held that &amp;quot;There is no god but the Unknowable, and Herbert Spencer is his prophet.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;London, Jack (1913), ''Martin Eden,'' [http://london.sonoma.edu/Writings/MartinEden/chapter13.html Chapter 13]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
{{Clear}}&lt;br /&gt;
==Atheism and agnosticism==&lt;br /&gt;
Some agnostics bristle at the term ''atheist''. They say they aren't atheists, because they don't &amp;quot;believe that God does not exist&amp;quot; but rather &amp;quot;neither believe nor disbelieve&amp;quot;. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Agnostics differ from regular [[Atheism|atheists]] in that they do not deny God's existence.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Many religious believers make no distinction among non-believers. If you're not sure that God exists, they combine the unsure and &amp;quot;surely not&amp;quot; into one lump. For these believers, an &amp;quot;atheist&amp;quot; is anyone who doesn't believe in God.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Among those who have not decided whether to believe in God, or to disbelieve in Him, there are two main groups:&lt;br /&gt;
#Those who simply haven't made a decision&lt;br /&gt;
#Those who declare no rational decision is possible, on the grounds that the existence of God is not knowable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Bertrand Russell]] once wrote that, in describing his beliefs,&lt;br /&gt;
:I never know whether I should say 'Agnostic' or whether I should say 'Atheist'.... As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one [can] prove that there is not a God. On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Russell, Bertrand (1947) [http://www.luminary.us/russell/atheist_agnostic.html Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?] Most online sources say &amp;quot;by which one prove,&amp;quot; probably a mistake.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== Norman Geisler on Complete Agnosticism ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[Norman Geisler]] wrote on complete agnosticism: &lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|Complete agnosticism is self-defeating; it reduces to the self-destructing assertion that &amp;quot;one knows enough about reality in order to affirm that nothing can be known about reality.&amp;quot; This statement provides within itself all that is necessary to falsify itself. For if one knows something about reality, then he surely cannot affirm in the same breath that all of reality is unknowable. And of course if one knows nothing whatsoever about reality, then he has no basis whatsoever for making a statement about reality. It will not suffice to say that his knowledge about reality is purely and completely negative,  that is, a knowledge of what one cannot meaningfully affirm that something is not – that it follows that total agnosticism is self-defeating because it assumes some knowledge about reality in order to deny any knowledge of reality (Geisler,  Apologetics, p. 20).&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.greatcom.org/resources/secular_religions/ch01/default.htm&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Frequency==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Belief-god.jpg|thumb|550px|Financial Times (FT)/Harris Poll among adults in 5 countries in 2006]]&lt;br /&gt;
Agnosticism has become a fairly common belief system in Western culture with 14% of people in the United States, 32% of people in France and 35% of people in Great Britain self-identifying as agnostics.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=1131&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Agnosticism and Uncharitableness==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Per capita]] atheists and agnostics in the [[United States]] [[Atheism and Uncharitableness|give significantly less to charity than theists]].&lt;br /&gt;
== Famous Agnostics ==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Timothy McVeigh]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://townhall.com/columnists/AnnCoulter/2010/04/21/wouldnt_a_miniseries_on_attila_the_hun_explain_nancy_pelosi?page=2&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Bill Maher]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Larry King]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Albert Einstein]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/quotes_einstein.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Steve Wozniak]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Agnostic population and health habits ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''For more information please see:'' [[Agnosticism, obesity and self-esteem]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:11834504 3cc3c49559.jpg|180px|right|thumbnail|Two of the major risk factors for becoming [[obesity|obese]] according to the [[Mayo Clinic]] are poor dietary choices and inactivity.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Thus, it appears as if agnostics/non-religious are more prone to becoming [[obese]] than very religious individuals.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;small&amp;gt;(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/wader/11834504/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement])&amp;lt;/small&amp;gt; ]]&lt;br /&gt;
According to the [[Gallup Organization]], &amp;quot;Very religious Americans are more likely to practice healthy behaviors than those who are moderately religious or nonreligious.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Gallup further declares:&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|Very religious Americans make healthier choices than their moderately religious and nonreligious counterparts across all four of the Healthy Behavior Index metrics, including smoking, healthy eating, and regular exercise. Smoking is one area of particular differentiation between the very religious and less religious Americans, with the nonreligious 85% more likely to be smokers than those who are very religious.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two of the major risk factors for becoming [[obesity|obese]] according to the [[Mayo Clinic]] are poor dietary choices and inactivity, thus it appears as if agnostics/non-religious may be more prone to becoming [[obese]] than very religious individuals.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== See also ==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== External Links ==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.greatcom.org/resources/secular_religions/ch01/default.htm Atheism, Agnosticism, and Skepticism] Synopsis of Understanding Secular Religions by [[Josh McDowell]] and Don Stewart&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;References/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[category:religion]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[category:philosophy]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Agnosticism]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Agnosticism&amp;diff=850642</id>
		<title>Agnosticism</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Agnosticism&amp;diff=850642"/>
		<updated>2011-02-20T20:16:58Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: /* Famous Agnostics */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:65375.jpg|thumb|David Hume]]&lt;br /&gt;
'''Agnosticism''' is, in weaker forms, an affirmation of ignorance regarding the existence of God, and in stronger forms, the assertion that God's existence is not capable of being known (unknowable).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The proponent of the weaker form does not make a claim to knowledge about existence, but he simply suspends from making a decision. A suspension of decision, in terms of logic, does not have a truth value, and therefore he is not making an argument. The proponent of the stronger form goes a step further and makes a claim to knowledge by saying, ''I know that the existence of God cannot be known''. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The word &amp;quot;agnostic&amp;quot; was coined in 1869 by [[T. H. Huxley]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;T. H. Huxley was also an early and influential supporter of Darwinism.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; from the Greek roots ''a-'' not, and ''-gnostic,'' knowing; the philosopher [[Herbert Spencer]] was influential in spreading its use. One nineteenth-century saw held that &amp;quot;There is no god but the Unknowable, and Herbert Spencer is his prophet.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;London, Jack (1913), ''Martin Eden,'' [http://london.sonoma.edu/Writings/MartinEden/chapter13.html Chapter 13]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
{{Clear}}&lt;br /&gt;
==Atheism and agnosticism==&lt;br /&gt;
Some agnostics bristle at the term ''atheist''. They say they aren't atheists, because they don't &amp;quot;believe that God does not exist&amp;quot; but rather &amp;quot;neither believe nor disbelieve&amp;quot;. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Agnostics differ from regular [[Atheism|atheists]] in that they do not deny God's existence.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Many religious believers make no distinction among non-believers. If you're not sure that God exists, they combine the unsure and &amp;quot;surely not&amp;quot; into one lump. For these believers, an &amp;quot;atheist&amp;quot; is anyone who doesn't believe in God.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Among those who have not decided whether to believe in God, or to disbelieve in Him, there are two main groups:&lt;br /&gt;
#Those who simply haven't made a decision&lt;br /&gt;
#Those who declare no rational decision is possible, on the grounds that the existence of God is not knowable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Bertrand Russell]] once wrote that, in describing his beliefs,&lt;br /&gt;
:I never know whether I should say 'Agnostic' or whether I should say 'Atheist'.... As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one [can] prove that there is not a God. On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Russell, Bertrand (1947) [http://www.luminary.us/russell/atheist_agnostic.html Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?] Most online sources say &amp;quot;by which one prove,&amp;quot; probably a mistake.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== Norman Geisler on Complete Agnosticism ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[Norman Geisler]] wrote on complete agnosticism: &lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|Complete agnosticism is self-defeating; it reduces to the self-destructing assertion that &amp;quot;one knows enough about reality in order to affirm that nothing can be known about reality.&amp;quot; This statement provides within itself all that is necessary to falsify itself. For if one knows something about reality, then he surely cannot affirm in the same breath that all of reality is unknowable. And of course if one knows nothing whatsoever about reality, then he has no basis whatsoever for making a statement about reality. It will not suffice to say that his knowledge about reality is purely and completely negative,  that is, a knowledge of what one cannot meaningfully affirm that something is not – that it follows that total agnosticism is self-defeating because it assumes some knowledge about reality in order to deny any knowledge of reality (Geisler,  Apologetics, p. 20).&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.greatcom.org/resources/secular_religions/ch01/default.htm&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Frequency==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Belief-god.jpg|thumb|550px|Financial Times (FT)/Harris Poll among adults in 5 countries in 2006]]&lt;br /&gt;
Agnosticism has become a fairly common belief system in Western culture with 14% of people in the United States, 32% of people in France and 35% of people in Great Britain self-identifying as agnostics.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=1131&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Agnosticism and Uncharitableness==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Per capita]] atheists and agnostics in the [[United States]] [[Atheism and Uncharitableness|give significantly less to charity than theists]].&lt;br /&gt;
== Famous Agnostics ==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Timothy McVeigh]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://townhall.com/columnists/AnnCoulter/2010/04/21/wouldnt_a_miniseries_on_attila_the_hun_explain_nancy_pelosi?page=2&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Bill Maher]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Larry King]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Albert Einstein]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/quotes_einstein.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Steve Wosniack]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Agnostic population and health habits ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''For more information please see:'' [[Agnosticism, obesity and self-esteem]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:11834504 3cc3c49559.jpg|180px|right|thumbnail|Two of the major risk factors for becoming [[obesity|obese]] according to the [[Mayo Clinic]] are poor dietary choices and inactivity.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Thus, it appears as if agnostics/non-religious are more prone to becoming [[obese]] than very religious individuals.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;small&amp;gt;(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/wader/11834504/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement])&amp;lt;/small&amp;gt; ]]&lt;br /&gt;
According to the [[Gallup Organization]], &amp;quot;Very religious Americans are more likely to practice healthy behaviors than those who are moderately religious or nonreligious.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Gallup further declares:&lt;br /&gt;
{{cquote|Very religious Americans make healthier choices than their moderately religious and nonreligious counterparts across all four of the Healthy Behavior Index metrics, including smoking, healthy eating, and regular exercise. Smoking is one area of particular differentiation between the very religious and less religious Americans, with the nonreligious 85% more likely to be smokers than those who are very religious.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Two of the major risk factors for becoming [[obesity|obese]] according to the [[Mayo Clinic]] are poor dietary choices and inactivity, thus it appears as if agnostics/non-religious may be more prone to becoming [[obese]] than very religious individuals.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== See also ==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== External Links ==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.greatcom.org/resources/secular_religions/ch01/default.htm Atheism, Agnosticism, and Skepticism] Synopsis of Understanding Secular Religions by [[Josh McDowell]] and Don Stewart&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;References/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[category:religion]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[category:philosophy]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Agnosticism]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Global_warming&amp;diff=850396</id>
		<title>Global warming</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Global_warming&amp;diff=850396"/>
		<updated>2011-02-19T18:24:54Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: /* Liberal claims of &amp;quot;Consensus&amp;quot; */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:NASA-1024x933.jpg|thumb|right|250px|A composite map of [[Antarctica]] showing areas of greatest warming in red, with blue indicating cooling. The Wilkins Ice Shelf lies off the peninsula in the top left corner, and shows extensive warming. Overall, Antarctica shows little warming, and many areas to the in the East (right) are cooling&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Roberts, Greg. &amp;quot;Antarctic Ice is Growing, Not Melting Away.&amp;quot; April 18, 2009. http://www.news.com.au/antarctic-ice-is-growing-not-melting-away/story-0-1225700043191&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;.]]&lt;br /&gt;
'''Global warming''', scientifically speaking, is a worldwide increase in atmospheric temperature. What's really interesting is what causes it: i.e., is it more due to natural causes or man-made activity (see [[Global warming theory]]). This type of [[climate change]] is seen as a period of increases in global temperature, which is alternating with periods of [[global cooling]], and is a natural occurrence as part of an interval [[warming trend]] which has occurred multiple times throughout [[Earth|Earth's]] geological history.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;&amp;quot;After any given warming phase begins, thousands of years later the cyclical [[Milankovitch]] decrease in the sun's heat kicks in. The warming stops, reverses and an [[ice age]] ensues.&amp;quot; [http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn06092007.html Counterpunch], June 2007&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  [[Liberal]] claims of global warming led to the resignation in October 2010 by Professor Hal Lewis from The American Physical Society because of &amp;quot;the [[global warming]] scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. '''It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist'''.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1670-hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Many political activists use the term '''&amp;quot;global warming&amp;quot;''' to refer the [[anthropogenic global warming theory]] (AGW), which asserts that human activity such as spewing &amp;quot;[[greenhouse gases]]&amp;quot; is causing more temperature increase than all natural causes combined. The AGW theory is supported by left-leaning political parties, as well as a majority of sovereign states, national agencies, and an intergovernmental panel (see [[IPCC]]). The reality is that there is no global crisis, despite dire warning by the UN's [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] (IPCC). Predictions made by [[climate model]]s publicized by the IPCC have not come to pass, and the climate has shown a mild cooling since 1995.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-7715-Portland-Civil-Rights-Examiner~y2009m8d18-Carbon-Dioxide-irrelevant-in-climate-debate-says-MIT-Scientist&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In November 2009, emails were disclosed that demonstrated wrongful manipulation and concealment of data by scientists who have insisted that there is dangerous man-made global warming. Prior to [[ClimateGate]], both the Republican and Democratic party Platforms in 2008 suggested that global warming is happening, that it is caused by human activity, and that it should be counteracted. For example, in 2007, the Republican presidential candidate Senator [[John McCain]] called global warming &amp;quot;an issue we can no longer afford to ignore&amp;quot;.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/John_McCain_Environment.htm]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The idea of dangerous anthropogenic (man-made) global warming (AGW) is promoted by liberals and socialists seeking greater government control over the production and use of energy, which is a substantial percentage of the economy. In economic terms, they would like to 'internalize' the 'externality,' which is to say that they think that producers of emissions should be directly connected to the consequences of those emissions, leading syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer to warn of an impending ''Environmental Shakedown''.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/12/11/copenhagen_shakedown.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; The unsuccessful Democratic candidate for President in 2000, [[Al Gore]], won a [[Nobel Prize]] in 2007 for claiming that there is a dangerous man-made global warming that threatens the world.  Neither he nor his supporters admit that a rapid cooling in temperatures is being observed. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Numerous scientists, especially those outside of university faculties, have been critical of anthropogenic global warming, but their general lack of comparative credentials has led to agreement that, among authorities in scientific disciplines, there is a &amp;quot;[[scientific consensus]]&amp;quot; supporting their theory for greater government control. Global warming skeptics question whether there is a financial incentive for supporting research.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.seattlepi.com/printer2/index.asp?ploc=t&amp;amp;refer=http://www.seattlepi.com/opinion/336889_climatepolicy26.html Pual Chesser, &lt;br /&gt;
''Be wary of climate policy development'', Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Act. 25, 2007]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Global warming skeptics charge that on most college campuses criticism of it is silenced or censored, and provide evidence of scientists skeptical of AGW being repressed.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1782/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&amp;amp;pageId=102031&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Temperatures have been decreasing rapidly throughout this decade (as of 2009).  Historically, natural periods of global warming and global cooling have alternated, and not long ago liberals were demanding more government control to combat an alleged cooling in temperatures, with some scientists warning of a possible ice age.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''Science: Another Ice Age?'' Time magazine, Monday, Jun. 24, 1974&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 2008 86 evangelical pastors, including Rev. Dr.[[Rick Warren]] signed a statement titled &amp;quot;Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action&amp;quot;, which called on Christians to acknowledge the moral importance of action to counteract man - made climate change. the statement includes specific support for market - based CO2 reductions such as a cap - and  - trade program.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://christiansandclimate.org/]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; In contrast, a group of evangelical scholars, comprised of scientists, economists and theologians, contend that the liberal view of pending catastrophe caused by climate change is  misleading and/or exaggerated.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.christianpost.com/article/20091204/evangelicals-push-back-against-climate-change-hoax/pageall.html ''Evangelicals Push Back Against Global Warming Doom'',  Dec. 04 2009, christianpost.com]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Presence of CO2==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One of the primary concerns of Global Warming research is the increased presence of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Original claims stated that the increase in carbon dioxide - which is a greenhouse gas - were caused primarily through the burning of [[fossil fuels]], and that such increases were the foremost cause of global temperatures rising. However, recent research has shown that the average global temperature and carbon dioxide do have a relationship, but that the relationship is the other way around. Global temperature changes precede changes in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, leading to the increasing belief amongst the skeptical science community that global temperatures are causing carbion dioxide to increase in the atmosphere. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The most obvious way that this would occur would be through the evaporation of ocean water. The oceans are the single largest storage unit for carbon dioxide gas on the planet, containing about 93% of the Earth's carbon dioxide. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Bi-Ca/Carbon-Dioxide-in-the-Ocean-and-Atmosphere.html] &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; As temperatures rise, ocean water evaporates, causing the dissolved carbon dioxide gas to enter the atmosphere, and begin trapping radiation from the sun. Scientists now believe that this cycle causes a sort of chain effect, where increased temperature causes more carbon dioxide to enter the atmosphere, which in turn causes more temperature rise. However, this discredits the idea that human contributions to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are significant enough to affect global climate change.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It is also noteworthy to point out that carbon dioxide, while not as abundant in the atmosphere, has a more significant effect on global warming than water vapor does. Carbon dioxide cannot form clouds, as water vapor does. When water vapor forms clouds, those clouds actually block some of the sun's radiation from reaching the Earth, causing water vapor to both contribute positively and negatively to global temperature rise. Carbon dioxide can only act as a greenhouse gas, causing the above mentioned cyclic effect.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==The Modern Warm Period==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Average [[Earth]] surface air temperature has risen about 1° F since 1970. &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Hansen's group at the Goddard Institute wrote, &amp;quot;Global warming is now 0.6&amp;amp;nbsp;°C [1.0&amp;amp;nbsp;°F] in the past three decades and 0.8&amp;amp;nbsp;°C [1.4&amp;amp;nbsp;°F] in the past century.&amp;quot; http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2005/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Studies have ruled out the possibility that errors in the measurements and sampling significantly affect the temperature trends detected over the past century. This accounts for spatial errors in the sampling and thus also incorporates errors associated with the urban-heating effect. According to Karl et al. (1993) ''&amp;quot;Results imply that the errors associated with century-scale trends of temperature are probably an order of magnitude smaller than the observed global warming of nearly 0.5°C per 100 years since the late nineteenth century&amp;quot;'' &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994JCli....7.1144K Karl et al. (1993) 'Global and Hemispheric Temperature Trends: Uncertainties Related to Inadequate Spatial Sampling' in Journal of Climate, 7(7); 1144 - 1168&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to temperature reconstruction made within an [[Old Earth]] paradigm, there have been many cycles of naturally-caused global warming and cooling over many millions of years (see [[climate cycles]]). Some scientists, including [[Richard Lindzen]] of [[MIT]], [[Sallie Baliunas]] of [[Harvard]] and [[Fred Singer]] (independent), say that the recent warming could be part of another natural cycle or random fluctuations in the atmosphere. However, many scientists also think that human activities were most likely the cause of the the planet's recent warming.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Sun Spots ==&lt;br /&gt;
Sunspot activity may be a primary factor in climate fluctuations, according to Willie Soon, a researcher affiliated with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and the Harvard College Observatory. '''“The sun is a great driving force to climate change.”''' Soon said that there have been much greater temperature fluctuations due to sunspots in the past and that proponents of global warming need to consider the effects of sunspot activity on global temperatures. Brian Farrell, a Harvard meteorology professor,  acknowledged a connection between sunspot activity and temperatures on the Earth, “A strong correlation between the amount of radioactive carbon and temperature from ice cores has shown that solar activity can affect temperature.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/42006/181/ Harvard astrophysicist: Sunspot activity correlates to global climate change] TGDaily.com, April 10, 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Politicization of the Issue==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Environmentalists and their political allies have presented a one-sided, anti-scientific account of global warming. They have ignored natural warming cycles and suppressed evidence which contradicts their theories. They have viciously attacked the credibility of any scientist daring to contradict them, creating a climate of fear where only a tiny handful of scientists dare speak out.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Bill Gray wrote:&lt;br /&gt;
* The contrary views of the many warming skeptics have been largely ignored and their motives denigrated.&lt;br /&gt;
* The normal scientific process of objectively studying both sides of the question has not yet occurred.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Trenberth/XchangeGray_FtCollinsFeb08.pdf Area Experts Debate Global Warming]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Journalists in the West, dominated by liberal viewpoints, have painted a misleading picture of the science. They have publicized liberal slanders against scientists who dare to speak up against the fake &amp;quot;consensus&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Even organizations that are not normally biased towards leftist ideas have publicly supported the global warming theory. The oil company Exxon/Mobil official policy is that CO2 emissions pose risks to society and ecosystems. Exxon/Mobil has also committed to reducing their own CO2 emissions, and invested $600 million in algae based fuels.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/energy_climate_views.aspx]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Agencies of the United States Government such as NASA, EPA &amp;amp; NOAA give selected information that strongly supports the global warming theory. At the same time, they reject freedom of information requests to see the raw data. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/58087 Vitter, Inhofe Ask NASA Inspector General to Probe Possible Obstruction of FOIA Requests Seeking Climate Change Records, CNSNews.com, December 04, 2009]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), for one example, states that CO2 levels in the atmosphere are rising due to human activity, and that the surface of the Earth has warmed, on average, quickly over the last 50 years, even though North America cooled slightly.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html#q2]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; In 2008 The Bush Administration requested $4.1 billion dollars of taxpayer money from Congress to fund NOAA, a 7.7 percent increase from 2008.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; [http://www.noaa.gov/budget/] &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The 2008 Democratic National Committee Platform states;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[states;http://www.democrats.org/a/party/platform.html]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;We must end the tyranny of oil in our time. This immediate danger is eclipsed only by the longer - term threat from climate change&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
and&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;...climate change is not just an economic issue or an environmental concern - this is a national security crisis.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The 2008 Republican National Committee Platform states; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/Environment.htm]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The same human economic activity that has brought freedom and opportunity to billions has also increased the amount of carbon in the atmosphere.  While the scope and long-term consequences of this are the subject of ongoing scientific research, common sense dictates that the United States should take measured and reasonable steps today to reduce any impact on the environment.&amp;quot; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There have also been some Conservatives, such as John Bliese, Ph.D., who at one point believed that global warming is a critical problem, and that [[Conservatism]] and environmental conservation are fully compatible. Speaking to those who are skeptical of global warming, in the [[Summer]] of 2001, he wrote, &amp;quot;[T]here is nothing conservative about denying scientific evidence.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.rep.org/news/GEvol5/ge5.1_globalwarming.html]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On October 10, 2009, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham coauthored (with Democrat Senator John Kerry) an op ed piece in the New York Times which stated &amp;quot;Even climate change skeptics should recognize that reducing our dependence on foreign oil and increasing our energy efficiency strengthens our national security. Both of us served in the military. We know that sending nearly $800 million a day to sometimes-hostile oil-producing countries threatens our security. In the same way, many scientists warn that failing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will lead to global instability and poverty that could put our nation at risk.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/opinion/11kerrygraham.html?pagewanted=1]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
in 2008 the Center for Naval Analyses empaneled eleven retired generals and admirals to prepare a paper titled &amp;quot;National Security and the Threat of Climate Change&amp;quot;. They concluded that Global climate change presents a serious national security threat which could impact Americans at home, impact United States military operations and heighten global tensions.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://securityandclimate.cna.org/]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Central Intelligence Agency has opened The Center on Climate Change and National Security to study the impact of climate change on US national security.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/center-on-climate-change-and-national-security.html CIA Opens Center on Climate Change and National Security], Central Intelligence Agency, September 25, 2009.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Conservative activist and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has called for a Conservative Environmentalism to find solutions to global warming by free market mechanisms.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://newt.org/EditNewt/FeaturedBloggersDB/tabid/193/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/3392/Default.aspx&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Climate Change As A Cult==&lt;br /&gt;
The zeal of climate-change advocates and lack of objectivity has led some observers to see it as a core belief in a new eco-theology, using themes of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs. columnist Deon Feder warns, that following other  attempts  such as  Marxism, overpopulation, ''Silent Spring'', &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;now we have the Church of Global Warming, under the leadership of Pope Albert I and his college of cardinals (the [[Natural Resources Defense Council]], Sierra Club and editorial board of The New York Times).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Its Office for the Propagation of the Faith works overtime, churning out books, movies (from the fictional “The Day After Tomorrow” to the fictional “An Inconvenient Truth”), textbooks, concerts, congressional hearings, media pleading and inquisitions.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Don Feder, ''The Cult of Global Warming'', GrassTopsUSA.com  7/31/2007&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Commenting on the tendency to hastily issue dire warnings of Climate Change, seen in the coming [[Ice Age]] scare of the 70's,  Maurizio Morabito asked, “Is the problem with the general public, who cannot talk about climate except in doom-laden terms, and for whom the sky is the last animist god?&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Maurizio Morabito, ''The CIA’s ‘global cooling’ files'', The Spectator December 5 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mark Steyn writes in Macleans, &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Forty years ago conventional religious belief was certainly in decline in what we once knew as Christendom, but the hole was not yet ozone-layer sized. Once the sea of faith had receded far from shore, the post-Christian West looked at what remained and found “Gaia.”&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
And while, &amp;quot;When man was made in the image of God, he was fallen but redeemable&amp;quot;, among these devotees of [[Gaia]],  &lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;Anti-humanism is everywhere, not least in the barely concealed admiration for China’s (demographically disastrous) “One Child” policy advanced by everyone from the National Post’s Diane Francis to Sir David Attenborough, the world’s leading telly naturalist but also a BBC exec who once long ago commissioned the great series The Ascent of Man. If Sir David’s any guide, the great thing about man’s ascent is it gives him a higher cliff to nosedive off.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Mark Steyn, ''Why climate change is hot hot hot'' Macleans, December 24, 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Climate &amp;quot;Science&amp;quot; Fraud==&lt;br /&gt;
{{main|Climategate}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The [[Climategate#Climategate_scandal|Climategate scandal]] revealed how liberal scientists appeared to be deceiving the public with the use of fraudulent data for use as climate science. The [[Liberal media|liberal media]] has attempted to bury the story and discount it as the work of computer hackers illegally stealing data, however, [[FOIA|Freedom of Information]] requests is likely what led to the data being leaked — intentionally.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.junkscience.com/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Dr. Willie Soon, a [[Physicist|physicist]], [[Astronomer|astronomer]] and climate researcher at the solar and stellar physics division of the [[Harvard University]]-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, said in an interview, &amp;quot;[The Climatic Research Unit climate scientists] are making scientific progress more difficult now. This is a shameful, dark day for science.&amp;quot; Dr. Soon also suggested that there has been systemic suppression of dissenting opinion among scientists in the climate change community, ranging from social snubs to e-mail stalking and even threats of harm.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Gene J. Koprowski. [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578368,00.html Global Warming Scandal Makes Scientific Progress More Difficult, Experts Say], ''[[Fox News]]'', December 01, 2009.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:GoreFireBreathing.jpg|thumb|left|250px|Al Gore's [[Schlockumentary]] under fire; [[An Inconvenient Truth]] found to be an inconvenient [[lie]] based on [[junk science]] and digitally enhanced, totally faked scenes of polar icecaps melting.]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Liberal claims of &amp;quot;Consensus&amp;quot;==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Richard Lindzen]] wrote in 1992,&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:Indeed, a recent Gallup poll of climate scientists in the American Meteorological Society and in the American Geophysical Union shows that a vast majority doubts that there has been any identifiable man-caused warming to date (49 percent asserted no, 33 percent did not know, 18 percent thought some has occurred; however, among those actively involved in research and publishing frequently in peer-reviewed research journals, none believes that any man-caused global warming has been identified so far). &amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;cato&amp;quot;&amp;gt;http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv15n2/reg15n2g.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Oddly enough, even though 82% of US climate scientists refused to support the global warming theory then, [[liberal]] activists were already claiming a scientific consensus for [[anthropogenic global warming]]. (It's hard to understand how 18 percent credence in ''any'' global warming translates into &amp;quot;consensus&amp;quot; support for ''human-caused'' global warming.)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The campaign to convince the public (and their elected representatives) that the &amp;quot;science is settled&amp;quot; began in 1988 or 1989.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
By the 2008 elections both candidates for the Presidency of the United States were proposing plans to mitigate climate change.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Over 31,000 American scientists have signed the petition rejecting global warming. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.petitionproject.org/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Teller_Card_100dpi.jpg|600px|center|thumb| Global Warming Petition]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It is well understood that most media companies do not offer balanced reporting. Many politicians have bought into the liberal claim of consensus, for example Barack Obama's views, &amp;quot;Few challenges facing America and the world are more urgent than fighting climate change. The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://cato.org/special/climatechange/ Climate Change Reality] Cato Institute&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; In fact, many scientists disagree with the &amp;quot;facts,&amp;quot; their certainty, and their interpretation. Over 100 of them have signed the statement that appears in the Cato Institute's newspaper ad. Liberals have failed to back up their claims with any scientific facts.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=more-proof-of-global-warm&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:ad.jpg|center]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Past Speculation== &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Speculation and warnings of catastrophic climate change are not unprecedented.  In 2001 the ''Guardian'' noted that some 70s headlines shouted, &amp;quot;Brace yourself for another ice age&amp;quot;. In 1971 the journal ''Science'' reported that the subsequent cooling effect resulting from a possible eightfold increased from atmospheric aerosol concentrations, &amp;quot;if sustained over a period of several years - is believed to be sufficient to trigger an ice age.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Reported by Alison George in ''Breaking the ice'', The Guardian, Thursday 28 June 2001&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In June, 1974, ''[[Time]]'' magazine published its front page article, ''Science: Another Ice Age?'',&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''Science: Another Ice Age?'' Time magazine, Monday, Jun. 24, 1974&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; while a report by the [[CIA]] in the same year stated that, &amp;quot;The world's leading climatologists have confirmed recent reports of a detrimental global climatic change”, noting such things as that the &amp;quot;world's snow and ice cover had increased by at least 10 to 15 percent&amp;quot;, and &amp;quot;the Canadian area of [[Arctic]] Greenland suffered below normal temperatures for 19 consecutive months&amp;quot;, which was unique during the last 100 years.  A &amp;quot;major climatic shift&amp;quot; was speculated, which would threaten the &amp;quot;the stability of most nations.” It further warned that &amp;quot;Scientists are confident that unless man is able to modify the climate, the  northern regions, such as Canada&amp;quot; to &amp;quot;major areas in northern China will again be covered with 100 to 200 feet of ice and snow&amp;quot;, within the next 2500 years - or sooner.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.climatemonitor.it/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/1974.pdf ''A study of climatological research as it pertains to intelligence problems'', August 1974]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Also in 1974, Nigel Calder, former editor of ''New Scientist'' and atmospheric researcher wrote in his book ''The Weather Machine'', &amp;quot;One might argue that there is a virtual certainty of the next ice age starting some time in the next 2000 years. Then the odds are only about 20-to-1 against it beginning in the next 100 years.&amp;quot; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1975 the liberal magazine ''[[Newsweek]]'' reported that &amp;quot;Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend,...but they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.&amp;quot; These authorities were skeptical that political leaders would take any positive action to compensate for the [[climate change]], and they conceded that the more dramatic solutions, such as melting the arctic ice cap, might create worse problems than that which they were designed to solve.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Natural Variability of the Climate System==&lt;br /&gt;
It is virtually universally accepted amongst secular climatologists that the earth has experienced numerous [[Ice Age|ice age]]s over two million years, during which global temperatures fluctuated created glacial and inter-glacial periods. The frigid temperatures allowed ice sheets to expand southward, covering much of [[Asia]], [[Europe]], and [[North America]]. The cooling associated with ice ages is gradual, while the terminations are relatively rapid. However, even the rapid terminations of ice ages take centuries to millennia.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Natural Climate Change on Other Planets==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Since the [[Viking spacecraft]] reached [[Mars]] in the 1970s until recent readings were taken, the average temperature on Mars has risen {{temperature|0.6|1.1}} just as the average temperature on the earth has risen.  Since human industrialization is clearly not to blame for the change on Mars, other causes are being considered.  One possibility is that dust storms are changing the albedo of the planet, allowing it to warm, while another possibility is that solar variations from the sun are causing the warming.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/070404_gw_mars.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17977&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Recently, it has also been found that similar to the Earth and Mars, [[Neptune]] is also undergoing global warming.  Measurements taken at the Lowell observatory in [[Arizona]] have shown an increase in Neptune's brightness and temperature since 1980 following the same pattern seen on Earth and Mars.  The researchers who discovered this warming suggest there may be a correlation between the warming and solar variations.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2007.../2006GL028764.shtml&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Pluto]] has also been found to be undergoing global warming.  The overall temperature increase on Pluto has been greater than that on the earth.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/pluto_warming_021009.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
On the other hand [[Uranus]] has had no net change in temperature since 1977.  A rapid increase in temperature reversed itself.  The reasons for this are not understood.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.boulder.swri.edu/~layoung/eprint/ur149/Young2001Uranus.pdf&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Global temperatures change on other planets even when there is no life, something which strongly supports the idea that humans are not necessarily the cause of earth's global warming.  Moreover, the temperature on Uranus has fluctuated back and forth.  There is no reason that fluctuations cannot occur on earth, too.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Although measurements have been made of the temperatures of other planets these are by no means thorough or comparable with the measurements used for earth. The short space of time over which measurements have been taken and the very limited spatial coverage means that reliable average figures have not been obtained. They have certainly not been taken extensively enough to produce a five year average temperature, which is the standard when determining temperature trends on earth. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
However, if accurate measurements could be made, and their accuracy and reliability is improving over time, then they may prove useful to climate science. Their different atmospheres and distances from the sun provide natural laboratories to study climatic changes without human influences. Though of course they will not be directly comparable due to the vast differences.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Beneficial effects of Global Warming==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Autumn foliage.jpg|thumb|Canoing on a Colorful Day, (NY).]]&lt;br /&gt;
Some researchers point out that benefits of health global warming have been overlooked, or minimized. As far back as 1996, Thomas Gale Moore, Senior Fellow at Hoover Institution (Stanford University) contended that positive health and amenity effects would be a result of projected increases in temperature. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.stanford.edu/~moore/health.html Health and Amenity Effects of Global Warming]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Another source notes,  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In areas that see extreme cold temperatures, deaths related to colder weather would drop significantly, leading to decreased health care costs. Warmer temperatures would also mean less energy use to heat homes and buildings, helping to conserve energy. With the changes brought about by global warming more land would become available for uses like farming and living. Forests and plants would grow stronger, healthier, and more abundant because of the warmer weather, and this would mean more oxygen being released into the atmosphere.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.bionomicfuel.com/what-are-the-benefits-of-global-warming/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Politics of Global Warming and Dissent==&lt;br /&gt;
{{main|Politics of global warming}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Christine Stewart- Canadian Environment Ministry, &amp;quot;'''No matter if the science is all phony''', there are collateral environmental benefits . . . Climate change provides the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.” &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.aim.org/wls/use-environmentalism-to-change-the-world/ Christine Stewart] Accuracy in Media&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'Global Warming Now World's Most Boring Topic’ &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://newsbusters.org/node/14167&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The need to fight &amp;quot;global warming&amp;quot; has become part of the dogma of the liberal conscience. &amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;cato&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Clearly, &amp;quot;global warming&amp;quot; is a tempting issue for many very important groups to exploit. &lt;br /&gt;
... dealing with the threat of warming fits in with a great variety of preexisting agendas [like] dissatisfaction with industrial society (neopastoralism), ... governmental desires for enhanced revenues (carbon taxes), and bureaucratic desires for enhanced power. &amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;cato&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mark Steyn writes in &amp;quot;Why climate change is hot hot hot&amp;quot;,&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
What’s also changed since the seventies is the nature of the UN and the transnational bureaucracies...“Aid” is a discredited word these days and comes with too many strings attached. But eco-credits sluiced through an oil-for-food program on steroids offers splendid new opportunities for bulking up an ambitious dictator’s Swiss bank accounts.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/12/24/why-climate-change-is-hot-hot-hot/2/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The IPCC is desperate to claim the 20th century-- the warmest on record. Thus, tying the progress of modern mankind to our supposed planet imbalance problem. Unfortunately for the IPCC, that point is disputed as well. In 2008, it was discovered that tree rings in Finland were more accurate record of the warmest century. The current era was not the warmest period-- it was the period between 931 and 1180. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://tbirdnow.mee.nu/archive/2008/6?page=2 The Trees of Finland; Temperature Readings and Historical Reconstruction] Tbirdnow.mee.nu Blog (with links to actual data sources), June 24, 2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Assessments of climate science by the [[United Nations]] (see [[IPCC]] - ''Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change'')&lt;br /&gt;
have claimed that scientists are 90% sure that over 50% of the observed global warming in recent decades is human-caused, and that continued global warming should be expected over at least the next century. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Several prominent scientists have pointed out the [[politicized science]] of the UN's assessment methods. The scientific reports are submitted to a panel of representatives appointed by each country in the IPCC. Several scientists whose research demonstrates that climate change is taking place have complained about their work being misrepresented by the U.N.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In addition, a number of the participants have testified to the pressures placed on them to emphasize results supportive of the current scenario and to suppress other results. That pressure has frequently been effective, and a survey of participants reveals substantial disagreement with the final report. &amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;cato&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Richard Lindzen wrote:&lt;br /&gt;
:Perhaps more important are the pressures being brought to bear on scientists to get the &amp;quot;right&amp;quot; results. Such pressures are inevitable, given how far out on a limb much of the scientific community has gone. The situation is compounded by the fact that some of the strongest proponents of &amp;quot;global warming&amp;quot; in Congress are also among the major supporters of science (Sen. Gore is notable among those). &amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;cato&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Christopher Monckton wrote an article titled Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered. &lt;br /&gt;
:States that Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change studies are flawed. The present analysis suggests the models failure to predict other climatic phenomena arises from defects in its evaluation of radioactive forcing, no-feedbacks climate sensitivity parameter and feedback multiplier. In conclusion, that there may be no &amp;quot;Climate Crisis&amp;quot; and for governments to reduce emissions may be pointless or even harmful. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/monckton.cfm , Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered, July 2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; This was published on a forum of the American Physical Society with the following disclaimer &amp;quot;The article has not undergone any scientific peer review&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;the APS disagrees with the articles conclusions&amp;quot; In fact, the APS disagrees with the article without ever reviewing it.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ryan N. Maue: &lt;br /&gt;
:A doctoral student at the Department of Meteorology at Florida State University did a study of global tropical cyclone activity. Its conclusions state that  global warming might be greatly overblown. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/s_617111.html# Global warming? More doubts] Pittsburgh Tribune, March 21, 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Mr. Maue found that tropical cyclone activity worldwide &amp;quot;has completely and utterly collapsed&amp;quot; during the past two to three years with energy levels sinking to those of the late 1970s.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Dr. Vincent Gray:&lt;br /&gt;
:A member of the IPCC’s expert reviewers’ panel asserts, “There is no relationship between warming and the level of gases in the atmosphere,” and &amp;quot;there is no serious threat to the climate&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://americanfreedomnow.com/2009/06/04/the-panic-over-global-warming-is-totally-unjustified-says-vice-chair-ipcc/ “THE PANIC OVER GLOBAL WARMING IS TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIED” says Vice Chair, IPCC] Americanfreedomnow.com, June 4th, 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Joe D’Aleo: Climatologist &lt;br /&gt;
:The International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project says new data &amp;quot;show that in five of the last seven decades since World War II, including this one, global temperatures have cooled while carbon dioxide has continued to rise,&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;'''The data suggest cooling''', not warming, in Earth's future.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&amp;amp;pageId=92557 Shocker: 'Global warming' simply no longer happening] Worldnetdaily, March 22, 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Dr. John S. Theon:&lt;br /&gt;
:Retired senior NASA atmospheric [[scientist]], Dr. John S. Theon, the former boss of global warming alarmist James Hansen of [[NASA]], rebukes him declaring “climate models are useless.” “My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit,” “Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2009/01/28/former-boss-rebukes-nasa-global-warming-alarmist-hansen-agw-skeptic Former Boss Rebukes NASA Global Warming Alarmist Hansen, Is AGW Skeptic] NewsBusters.org, January 28, 2009 &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sammy Wilson -Ireland's environment minister &lt;br /&gt;
:He argues that global weather patterns are naturally cooling, not warming. He calls television ads that promote global warming as &amp;quot;an insidious propaganda campaign&amp;quot; peddling &amp;quot;patent nonsense.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=43255 Belfast Environment Chief Bans Climate Change Ads] AP, February 09, 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
After the broadcast of his movie '[[The Great Global Warming Swindle]]', filmmaker Martin Durkin's statements read &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=32796  UK Broadcaster Scolded for Film on Global Warming] CNSNEWS July 22, 2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*“Everywhere you are told that man-made [[climate change]] is proved beyond doubt,”  “But you are being told lies.”&lt;br /&gt;
*“This is a story of how a theory about climate turned into a political [[ideology]] ... it is the story of the distortion of a whole area of [[science]].”&lt;br /&gt;
*“as the frenzy over man-made [[global warming]] grows shriller, many senior scientists say the actual scientific basis for the [[theory]] is crumbling.”&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In late 2008, the [[AP]] published an article by its Science Writer Seth Borenstein, which is seen by skeptics as another example of one-sided, uncritical reporting on the issue by [[liberal media]]. The report stated that global warming was &amp;quot;a ticking time bomb that President-elect Barack Obama can't avoid&amp;quot;, and that  &amp;quot;We're out of time&amp;quot;, with Al Gore calling the situation &amp;quot;the equivalent of a five-alarm fire that has to be addressed immediately.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D952LKOO1&amp;amp;show_article=1&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  In response, Fox News (December 16, 2008) reported that scientists skeptical of anthropogenic global warming criticized the report as &amp;quot;irrational hysteria,&amp;quot; &amp;quot;horrifically bad&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;incredibly biased&amp;quot;, containing sweeping scientific errors and being a one-sided portrayal of a complicated issue. Geology professor [[David Deming]] stated, &amp;quot;If the issues weren't so serious and the ramifications so profound, I would have to laugh at it&amp;quot;, and accused Borenstein of &amp;quot;writing a polemic and reporting it as fact.&amp;quot; Deming noted that &amp;quot;the mean global temperature, at least as measured by satellite, is now the same as it was in the year 1980. In the last couple of years sea level has stopped rising. Hurricane and cyclone activity in the northern hemisphere is at a 24-year low and sea ice globally is also the same as it was in 1980.&amp;quot; The AP responded to criticism by stating that, &amp;quot;It’s a news story, based on fact and the clearly expressed views of President-elect Barack Obama and others.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,468084,00.html Scientists Call AP Report on Global Warming 'Hysteria'] Fox News, December 16, 2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Also in the discussion of the biased AP report, Michael R. Fox, a retired nuclear scientist and chemistry professor from the University of Idaho stated, &amp;quot;There is little evidence to believe that man-made carbon dioxide is causing temperature fluctuation. Other factors, including sun spots, solar winds, variations in the solar magnetic field and solar irradiation, could all be affecting temperature changes.&amp;quot; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The year 2008 turned out to be the coolest year since 2000, yet the seventh to tenth warmest year on record, according to the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://news.eoportal.org/research/090127_res3.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; According to a preliminary analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, the average June-August 2009 summer temperature for the contiguous United States was below average – the 34th coolest on record.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090910_summerstats.html NOAA: Summer Temperature Below Average for U.S.]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Richard S. Courtney, a U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) expert reviewer and a U.K.-based climate and atmospheric science consultant says  &amp;quot;Rubbish! Global warming is not 'accelerating,&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;...that anybody who proclaims that 'Global warming is accelerating' is a liar, a fool, or both.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.newsmax.com/brennan/global_warming_debunked/2008/12/16/162489.html Global Warming’s Last Gasp] NewsMax, December 17, 2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Don J. Easterbrook, Ph.D., emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University, asked, &amp;quot;What does it take to ignore 10 years of global cooling....? The answer is really quite simple — just follow the money!&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Al Gore's Claims==&lt;br /&gt;
[[File:Gore GlobalWarming.jpg|right|200px]]&lt;br /&gt;
The decision by the government to distribute Al Gore's film, ''An Inconvenient Truth'', became the subject of a legal challenge by [[New Party]] member Stewart Dimmock. A school governor from Dover and father of two, Dimmock charged the Government with brainwashing children with propaganda by presenting Gore’s sci-fi film as science. In October 2007, Mr Justice Burton of London's High Court found that while the film was &amp;quot;broadly accurate&amp;quot;, it contained nine significant errors,“in which statements were made that were not supported by the current mainstream scientific consensus”, some of which had arisen in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration”. He also found the Guidance Notes drafted by the Education Secretary’s advisers only worked to exacerbate the political propaganda in the film.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/clearly_its_al_gore_whos_in_de.html American Thinker;  ''Clearly It's Al Gore Who's In Denial'']&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Times online, October 11, 2007 ''Al Gore’s inconvenient judgment''&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Taken from the official transcript,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://noteviljustwrong.com/images/nejw/docs/22161.pdf Stuart Dimmock and Secretary of State for Education and Skills]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; the nine errors the judge found were:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*1. Sea  level  rise  of  up  to  20  feet  (7 metres) will  be  caused  by melting  of either West Antarctica or Greenland in the near future. This is distinctly alarmist, and part of Mr Gore's 'wake-up call'. It is common ground that if indeed Greenland melted, it would release this amount of water, but only after, and  over,  millennia,  so  that  the  Armageddon  scenario  he  predicts,  insofar  as  it suggests that sea level rises of 7 metres might occur in the immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*2. Low  lying  inhabited  Pacific  atolls  are  being  inundated  because  of anthropogenic global warming. In scene 20, Mr Gore states &amp;quot;that's why the citizens of these Pacific nations have all had to evacuate to New Zealand&amp;quot;. There is no evidence of any such evacuation having yet happened. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*3. Shutting down of the &amp;quot;Ocean Conveyor&amp;quot;. According  to  the  IPCC,  it  is  very  unlikely  that  the  Ocean  Conveyor (known  technically  as  the  Meridional  Overturning  Circulation  or  thermohaline circulation)  will  shut  down  in  the  future,  though  it  is  considered  likely  that thermohaline circulation may slow down. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*4. Direct coincidence between rise in CO2 in the atmosphere and in temperature, by reference to two graphs. In scenes 8 and 9, Mr Gore shows  two graphs relating  to a period of 650,000 years, one  showing  rise  in  CO2  and  one  showing  rise  in  temperature,  and  asserts  (by ridiculing  the  opposite  view)  that  they  show  an  exact  fit. Although  there  is  general scientific agreement  that  there  is a connection,  the  two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*5. The snows of Kilimanjaro. The film asserted that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidenced global warming. The Government's expert was had to admit that this is not correct. Mr  Gore  asserts  in  scene  7  that  the  disappearance  of  snow  on Mt  Kilimanjaro  is expressly  attributable  to  global  warming.  It  is  noteworthy  that  this  is  a  point  that specifically  impressed Mr Milliband  (see  the  press  release  quoted  at  paragraph  6 above). However, it is common ground that, the scientific consensus is that it cannot be established that the recession of snows on Mt Kilimanjaro is mainly attributable to human-induced climate change.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*6. Lake Chad etc. The drying up of Lake Chad  is used  as  a prime  example of  a  catastrophic  result of global  warming.  However,  it  is  generally  accepted  that  the  evidence  remains insufficient to establish such an attribution. It is apparently considered to be far more likely  to result from other factors, such as population  increase and over-grazing, and regional climate variability.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*7. Hurricane Katrina. In  scene  12  Hurricane  Katrina  and  the  consequent  devastation  in  New  Orleans  is ascribed to global warming. It is common ground that there is insufficient evidence to show that. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*8. Death of polar bears. In scene 16, by reference to a dramatic graphic of a polar bear desperately swimming through  the water  looking  for  ice, Mr Gore says: &amp;quot;A new scientific study shows  that for  the  first  time  they are  finding polar bears  that have actually drowned swimming long distances up to 60 miles to find the ice. They did not find that before.&amp;quot; The only scientific  study  that  either  side  before me  can  find  is  one which  indicates  that  four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*9. Coral reefs. In scene 19, Mr Gore says: &amp;quot;Coral reefs all over the world because of global warming and  other  factors  are  bleaching  and  they  end  up  like  this. All  the  fish  species  that depend on  the coral reef are also  in  jeopardy as a result. Overall specie loss  is now occurring at a rate 1000 times greater than the natural background rate.&amp;quot; The actual scientific view, as recorded in the IPCC report, is that, if the temperature were to rise by 1-3 degrees Centigrade,  there would be  increased coral bleaching and widespread coral  mortality,  unless  corals  could  adopt  or  acclimatise,  but  that  separating  the impacts  of  climate  change-related  stresses  from  other  stresses,  such  as  over-fishing and polluting, is difficult. &lt;br /&gt;
  &lt;br /&gt;
Dimmock's lawyer, Mr. Downes,  argued that by schools making available such film to its teachers, and if teachers then showed such  film  to  their pupils, then  this would inevitably result &amp;quot;in  the promotion of partisan political views  in  the  teaching of any  subject  in  the  school, which  is  thus not only not being forbidden  by  the  local  education  authority  (and  the  DES), but  being  positively facilitated by them.&amp;quot; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mr Justice Barton stressed that the “apocalyptic vision” presented in the film was politically partisan and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change. “It is now common ground that it is not simply a science film – although it is clear that it is based substantially on scientific research and opinion – but that it is a political film.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Justice Barton also stated that, “I conclude that the claimant substantially won this case by virtue of my finding that, but for the new guidance note, the film would have been distributed in breach of sections 406 and 407 of the 1996 Education Act.”&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; BBC news, Thursday, 11 October 2007&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*1.  The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*2. If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*3.  Nine inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.newparty.co.uk/articles/inaccuracies-gore.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Science and Public Policy took issue with the response to the ruling by Al Gore’s spokesman and  environment adviser, and asserted that his film contains ''35 Inconvenient Truths''.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html 35 Inconvenient Truths]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Related to above, while Gore  claims that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and global warming is to blame, the September 2006 issue of the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported, &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and that global warming was to blame.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;sun&amp;quot;&amp;gt;http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Regarding his claims that the snow cap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and that global warming is to blame, the November 23, 2003, issue of Nature magazine stated,&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:Although it's tempting to blame the ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;ref name=&amp;quot;sun&amp;quot; /&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Many conservatives see Al Gore as an example of [[liberals]] using [[deceit]]ful tactics in important debates, i order to make a position seem more solid than it is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Reported effects of Climate Change==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Besides Global Warming, reported past or expected/possible future environmental and societal consequences of Climate Change include,&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Global cooling.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.nowpublic.com/environment/global-warming-causing-global-cooling&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Decreased food production.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; Fred Pearce, ''Climate change warning over food production,'' Newscientist.com, April 26, 2005&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Increased food production.  &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-1127111.html] William Booth, ''Global Heating Could Benefit U.S. Farmers; Prices Seen Rising As Production Falls'' The Washington Post, May 17, 1990&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Killer cornflakes.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Lisa Bricknell, Central Queensland University, at 10th World Congress on Environmental Health in Brisbane, AU. May 13,2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Shrinking forests.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/11/amazon-global-warming-trees/print David Adam, ''Amazon could shrink by 85% due to climate change''] March 11, 2009, guardian.co.uk&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Increased tree foliage.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.greenfingers.com/articledisplay.asp?id=1734&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Increased productivity of high-elevation forests.'&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;'Global Warming May Spur Increased Growth In Pacific Northwest'' Oct. 20, 2009, Forests Science Daily&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Melting glaciers.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Global warming causing hundreds of Antarctic Peninsula glaciers to melt,''&lt;br /&gt;
June 6, 2007, The Hindustan Times&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Growing glaciers.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2043047/posts?page=51&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Increasing landmass in Antarctica.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2005/05/27/antarctic-ice-a-global-warming-snow-job/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Colder winters &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''Climate change could bring colder winters,'' March 13, 2003, Canadian Broadcasting Centre&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* A new ice age.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2003/nov/13/comment.research/print Bill McGuire, The Guardian, November 13, 2003]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Prevention of an ice age.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,296060,00.html Andrea Thompson, ''Global Warming May Cancel Next Ice Age''], Monday, September 10, 2007&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Taller mountains.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Ker Than, ''Taller Mountains Blamed on Global Warming, Too'', August 4, 2006, LiveScience&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* A lop-sided planet.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Robert Roy Britt, June 29,2005 LiveScience.com&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Stronger hurricanes.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''Global Warming: Warmer Seas Linked To Strengthening Hurricanes,'' Sep. 4, 2008, ScienceDaily&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Weaker Hurricanes.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Randolph E. Schmid, AP Science Writer, ''Global warming may diminish Atlantic hurricane activity'', 04-17-2007, USA Today&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Shorter days.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.itwire.com/content/view/11220/1066/ William Atkins, ''Researchers say global warming should cause shorter days''], ITWire, April 11, 2007&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Earthquakes and volcanoes, and other geological disasters. Attempts to prevent climate change may do the same.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Richard Fisher, ''Climate change may trigger earthquakes and volcanoes,'' September 23 2009 Newscientist.com&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Earth exploding&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://nujournal.net/EarthquakeEnergyRise.pdf] Australian scientist Dr Tom Chalko, June 17,2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Shrinking brains.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Gordon G. Gallup Jr., Human Nature (Vol. 18, Issue 2, 2007U)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Shrinking sheep.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; Steve Connor, Science Editor, ''How global warming shrank St Kilda's sheep,''&lt;br /&gt;
Independent.co.uk, 3 July 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Tiger Attacks.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''Global Warming Linked to Indian Tiger Attacks'', Reuters, Mon Oct 20, 2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Shark attacks.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.junkscience.com/news3/shark.htmlBruce Johnston, ''Shark attack on boat result of global warming''] Augsut 31, 1998, Electronic Telegraph (U.K.)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*  Walrus stampede deaths.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1939754/posts ''Global warming is blamed for walrus stampede deaths'', Associated Press - December 14, 2007&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Imminent cannibalism.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Ted Turner, April 1, 2008, Charlie Rose PBS show&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The death of the the Loch Ness Monster.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2008/02/global_warming_45.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Black Hawk Down]], when 18 members of a U.S. military team were killed in a helicopter crash in Mogadishu, Somalia, in 1993.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.cnsnews.com/public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=32291&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The need for a drastic reduction of the earth’s population.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://thisistheendoftheworldasweknowit.com/archives/one-less-child-environmental-extremists-warn-that-overpopulation-is-causing-climate-change-and-will-ultimately-destroy-the-earth&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* A strong increase in people dying of [[AIDS]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Daniel Tarantola, University of NSW, Australia&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.skepticsglobalwarming.com/?p=608&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Increased risk of civil war in Africa.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://news.stanford.edu/news/2009/november23/climate-civil-wars-112309.html?view=print ''Global warming increases risk of civil war in Africa,''] Stanford Report, November 23, 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Child ''climate cops''.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&amp;amp;pageId=70811&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Increase in depression.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Emily Sohn Thurs., Discovery Channel, Dec . 10, 2009&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Increase in psychiatric illness.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;World Health Organisation&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''Climate change leads to psychiatric illness'' 04-08, 2008, Sify.com&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Increased anxiety and loss of sleep among many children.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Alan Jones, The Scotsman, February 22, 2007&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==2008 Presidential candidates on climate Change==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Bob Barr]] is the only major 2008 Presidential Candidate who has not adopted wholesale the theory of human-caused global warming.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to his website,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/PressReleases/BA6709C3-B27D-4EF9-81E6-2BA9D6F8AB20.htm John McCain on Global warming.]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; [[Republican]] Presidential candidate [[John McCain]] will take a more &amp;quot;aggressive approach&amp;quot; to global warming which he has declared as &amp;quot;undeniable and urgent.&amp;quot; He was supported in this in June 2008 by Republican governor [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]] who said McCain was the &amp;quot;real deal on the environment&amp;quot;.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/30/MNDB11H66C.DTL&amp;amp;type=politics Schwarzenegger backs McCain on climate Change]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In his own words, McCain says &amp;quot;the overwhelming majority of scientific opinion in America today, and in the world, is that climate change is real. The fact is that it ''is'' real. The fact is that the solution to it is the development of technologies.... and a [[cap and trade]] proposal.... the debate is over.&amp;quot;[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQMxIwpK_es] Unless McCain believes that Global Warming is entirely or largely man-made, there would be no sense in supporting a cap and trade solution.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Barack Obama]] believes &amp;quot;that global warming is not just the greatest [[environmental]] [[challenge]] facing our planet—it is one of our greatest challenges of any kind.&amp;quot; During his first 100 days in office, he would enact a giant and far-reaching [[tax]] &amp;quot;an economy-wide cap on U.S. carbon emissions that will reduce U.S. emissions by the amount scientists agree is necessary (80% by 2050). With worldwide cuts in emissions estimated to cost '''$45 Trillion dollars''' overall. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article4079036.ece World needs $45 trillion energy revolution] Timesonline.uk, June 6, 2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; He comments &amp;quot;Putting a price on carbon is the most important step we can to take to reduce emissions.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://presidentialprofiles2008.org/Obama/tab1.html League of Conservation Voters] presidentialprofiles2008.org&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Al Gore's &amp;quot;Inconvenient Truth&amp;quot; Movie Claims==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A [[British]] court has determined that Al Gore's movie &amp;quot;An Inconvenient Truth&amp;quot; contains at least eleven material falsehoods &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/10/09/court-identifies-eleven-inaccuracies-al-gore-s-inconvenient-truth], http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/10/09/court-identifies-eleven-inaccuracies-al-gore-s-inconvenient-truth, October 9, 2007&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Those inaccuracies include the following&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.&lt;br /&gt;
* The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found the film misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.&lt;br /&gt;
* The film uses emotive images of [[Hurricane Katrina]] and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was &amp;quot;not possible&amp;quot; to attribute one-off events to global warming.&lt;br /&gt;
* The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that this was not the case.&lt;br /&gt;
* The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.&lt;br /&gt;
* The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant's evidence was that this was a [[scientific]] impossibility.&lt;br /&gt;
* The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.&lt;br /&gt;
* The film suggests that the [[Greenland]] ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.&lt;br /&gt;
* The film suggests that the Antarctic [[ice]] covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.&lt;br /&gt;
* The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. The evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.&lt;br /&gt;
* The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to [[New Zealand]]. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Scientists ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Rogerrevelle.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Roger Revelle]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{|&lt;br /&gt;
| valign=&amp;quot;top&amp;quot; width=&amp;quot;35%&amp;quot;|&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Roger Revelle]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Achim Steiner]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Fred Singer]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Richard Lindzen]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Sallie Baliunas]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Lonnie Thompson]]&lt;br /&gt;
| valign=&amp;quot;top&amp;quot; width=&amp;quot;33%&amp;quot;|&lt;br /&gt;
* [[James E. Hansen]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Michael Mann]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Charles Keeling]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Edwin A. Hernández-Delgado]]&lt;br /&gt;
|}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Critique of the Hockey Stick Reconstruction===&lt;br /&gt;
::''See also : [[Climategate#Hockey_Stick_Graph|Climategate: hockey stick graph]]''&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;small&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://climateaudit.files.wordpress.com/2005/09/mcintyre.mckitrick.2003.pdf Corrections To The Mann et. al. (1998) Proxy Data Base And Northern Hemispheric Average Temperature Series] by Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, ''Energy &amp;amp; Enviornment'' volume 14, 2003.&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/05/the_decay_of_the_hockey_stick.html The Decay of the Hockey Stick by Von Storch] published on the journal ''Nature'''s blog, May 3, 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/13830/ A Global Warming Bombshell] by Richard A. Muller, ''Technology Review'' , Oct. 2004; calls into question famous graph by Michael Mann.&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/306/5696/679 Reconstructing Past Climate from Noisy Data] by Hans von Storch, Eduardo Zorita, Julie M. Jones, Yegor Dimitriev, Fidel González-Rouco, Simon F. B. Tett, ''Science'' magazine, 22 October 2004.&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.image.ucar.edu/~boli/manuscripts/2007-LNA-TeA.pdf The ‘hockey stick’ and the 1990s: a statistical perspective on reconstructing hemispheric temperatures] by Bo Li, Douglas W. Nychka and Casper M. Ammann, ''Institute for Mathmatics Applied to Geosciences''; (Manuscript received 22 March 2007; in final form 28 June 2007).&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/2006_articles/IceCoreSprg97.pdf Ice Core Data Show No Carbon Dioxide Increase] by Zbigniew Jaworowski, Ph.D., Spring 1997; this article examines one of the main pillars of the global warming thesis.&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://climateaudit.files.wordpress.com/2005/09/mcintyre.ee.2005.pdf The M&amp;amp;M Critique of the MBH98 Northern Hemisphere Climate Index: Update and Implications] (''Energy &amp;amp; Environment'', vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 69-100, January 2005) - Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://climateaudit.files.wordpress.com/2005/09/mcintyre.grl.2005.pdf Hockey sticks, principal components, and spurious significance] (''Geophysical Research Letters'', vol. 32, February 2005) - Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/small&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{Climategate scandal}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
{{reflist|2}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Also See == &lt;br /&gt;
*''[[Massachusetts v. EPA]]'' &lt;br /&gt;
*[[Liberal_hysteria#Global_Warming_Derangement_Syndrome|Global Warming Derangement Syndrome]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Socialist Environmental Disasters]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==External Links==&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.aim.org/wls/category/global-warming/ What Liberals Say - Category: Global Warming], [[Accuracy In Media]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://global-warming.accuweather.com/2007/12/attempting_to_stop_global_warm_1.html Attempting to Stop Global Warming is Futile and a Mistake, says letter to the UN]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=164004 Signatories of an open letter on the UN climate-conference]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://schwinger.harvard.edu/~motl/global-temperature-not-exist.pdf Does a global temperature exist?], ''Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics'', June 2007.&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2032821,00.html The appliance of science] by Mike Hulme.&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.climatecrisis.net/ ''An Inconvenient Truth''], Film by [[Al Gore]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2332531355859226455&amp;amp;q=great+global+warming+swindle ''The Great Global Warming Swindle'' - Documentary Film]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.physics.harvard.edu/~motl/iris-effect.pdf Climate Sensitivity and Observed Negative Feedbacks], lecture by Richard Lindzen and Roberto Rondanelli.&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.physics.harvard.edu/~motl/lindzen-nature-of-arguments.pdf Nature of Arguments for Anthropogenic Global Warming], by Richard Lindzen&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.independent.org/store/book_detail.asp?bookID=42 ''Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warmings's Unfinished Debate'', by S. Fred Singer]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv15n2/reg15n2g.html Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus] - [[Richard S. Lindzen]], Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?issueID=47&amp;amp;articleID=604 &amp;quot;Should We Have Acted Thirty Years Ago to Prevent Climate Change?&amp;quot;, by Randall G. Holcombe].&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?issueID=25&amp;amp;articleID=296 &amp;quot;After Kyoto: A Global Scramble for Advantage,&amp;quot; by Bruce Yandle].&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=2319 The physical evidence of earth's unstoppable 1,500-year climate cycle]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=1714 &amp;quot;Is There a Basis for Global Warming Alarm?&amp;quot;, by Richard Lindzen]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.independent.org/publications/policy_reports/detail.asp?type=full&amp;amp;id=5 &amp;quot;New Perspectives in Climate Change: What the EPA Isn’t Telling Us&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17181 Survey Shows Climatologists Are Split on Global Warming]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.magma.ca/~hurleyp/FightingTheHoax.htm Fighting the Hoax]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php Refuting the Myth of Man-made Global Warming]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.climateaudit.org Climate Audit], Steve McIntyre's blog&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.realclimate.org Real Climate], blog by a group of climatologists including Michael Mann&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/01/co2_fairytales_in_global_warmi.html &amp;quot;CO2 Fairytales in Global Warming&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm A complete list of things caused by global warming]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/11/hackers-prove-global-warming-is-scam.html Hackers Prove Global Warming Is A Scam]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{liberalism}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Earth Sciences]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Environmentalism]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Liberal Bias]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Liberal Falsehoods]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Featured articles]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Green_Bay_Packers&amp;diff=850392</id>
		<title>Green Bay Packers</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Green_Bay_Packers&amp;diff=850392"/>
		<updated>2011-02-19T18:18:35Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:Bilde.jpg|thumb|400px|right|The annual meeting of the Green Bay Packers shareholders held in Lambeau Field Wednesday, July 25, 2007. &amp;lt;br&amp;gt;Photo by H. Marc Larson/Press-Gazette. [http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage]]]&lt;br /&gt;
The '''Green Bay Packers''' are a [[National Football League]] [[NFL]] [[franchise]]  based in [[Green Bay]], [[Wisconsin]]. They are part of the National Football Conference (NFC) and play in the NFC North Division. They are the first team to win the [[Super Bowl]]. They played in Super Bowl I and defeated the [[Kansas City Chiefs]]. They also won [[Super Bowl]] II.  The Green Bay Packers have more World Championships than any other franchise in the League's history, but not the most Super Bowl victories.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The team plays its home games at Lambeau Field, named after team founder Curly Lambeau.  They are the only professional sports team owned by a city.  The team was bought by Green Bay after it suffered from great financial woes in the 1950s.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Packers won the most recent Super Bowl, XLV, on February 26,2011. They defeated the Steelers 31-25, and Packers QB Aaron Rodgers was named Super Bowl MVP.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==2009-2010 Roster==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Quarterbacks===&lt;br /&gt;
*12 - [[Aaron Rodgers]]&lt;br /&gt;
*11 - Brian Brohm&lt;br /&gt;
*10 - Matt Flynn&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Running Backs===&lt;br /&gt;
*25 - [[Ryan Grant]]&lt;br /&gt;
*32 - Brandon Jackson&lt;br /&gt;
*42 - DeShawn Wynn&lt;br /&gt;
*28 - Kregg Lumpkin&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Fullbacks===&lt;br /&gt;
*35 - Korey Hall&lt;br /&gt;
*30 - John Kuhn&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Wide Receivers===&lt;br /&gt;
*85 - [[Greg Jennings]]&lt;br /&gt;
*80 - [[Donald Driver]]&lt;br /&gt;
*89 - James Jones&lt;br /&gt;
*82 - Ruvell Martin&lt;br /&gt;
*87 - Jordy Nelson&lt;br /&gt;
*19 - Shaun Bodiford&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Tight Ends===&lt;br /&gt;
*86 - Donald Lee&lt;br /&gt;
*88 - Jermichael Finley&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Offensive Tackles===&lt;br /&gt;
*76 - Chad Clifton&lt;br /&gt;
*68 - Breno Giacomini&lt;br /&gt;
*67 - Nevin McCaskill&lt;br /&gt;
*71 - Josh Sitton&lt;br /&gt;
*65 - Mark Tauscher&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Guards===&lt;br /&gt;
*78 - Allen Barbre&lt;br /&gt;
*73 - Daryn Colledge&lt;br /&gt;
*75 - Tony Moll&lt;br /&gt;
*72 - Jason Spitz&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Centers===&lt;br /&gt;
*63 - Scott Wells&lt;br /&gt;
* - Duke Preston&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Defensive Ends===&lt;br /&gt;
*57 - Jason Hunter&lt;br /&gt;
*74 - Aaron Kampman&lt;br /&gt;
*96 - Mike Montgomery&lt;br /&gt;
*99 - Jeremy Thompson&lt;br /&gt;
*77 - Cullen Jenkins&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Defensive Tackles===&lt;br /&gt;
*91 - Justin Harrell&lt;br /&gt;
*97 - Johnny Jolly&lt;br /&gt;
*98 - Alfred Malone&lt;br /&gt;
*79 - Ryan Pickett&lt;br /&gt;
*62 - Anthony Toribio&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Linebackers===&lt;br /&gt;
*55 - Desmond Bishop&lt;br /&gt;
*54 - Brandon Chillar&lt;br /&gt;
*53 - Spencer Havner&lt;br /&gt;
*50 - [[A. J. Hawk]]&lt;br /&gt;
*58 - Danny Lansanah&lt;br /&gt;
*51 - Brady Poppinga&lt;br /&gt;
*56 - Nick Barnett&lt;br /&gt;
*93 - Kenny Pettway&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Cornerbacks===&lt;br /&gt;
*27 - Will Blackmon&lt;br /&gt;
*24 - Jarrett Bush&lt;br /&gt;
*31 - [[Al Harris]]&lt;br /&gt;
*40 - Joe Porter&lt;br /&gt;
*38 - Tramon Williams&lt;br /&gt;
*21 - [[Charles Woodson]]&lt;br /&gt;
*22 - Pat Lee&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Safeties===&lt;br /&gt;
*36 - Nick Collins&lt;br /&gt;
*26 - Charlie Peprah&lt;br /&gt;
*37 - Aaron Rouse&lt;br /&gt;
* - Anthony Smith&lt;br /&gt;
*20 - Atari Bigby&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Kickers===&lt;br /&gt;
*2 - [[Mason Crosby]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Punters===&lt;br /&gt;
*7 - Jeremy Kapinos&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==See also==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Vince Lombardi]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Chicago Bears]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Minnesota Vikings]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Detroit Lions]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[National Football Conference]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== External links ==&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/teams/packers/index.html Team site]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.packers.com/community/packers_foundation/ Green Bay Packers]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{NFL Teams}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:National Football League]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Wisconsin]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Green_Bay_Packers&amp;diff=850390</id>
		<title>Green Bay Packers</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Green_Bay_Packers&amp;diff=850390"/>
		<updated>2011-02-19T18:16:40Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JonS123: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:Bilde.jpg|thumb|400px|right|The annual meeting of the Green Bay Packers shareholders held in Lambeau Field Wednesday, July 25, 2007. &amp;lt;br&amp;gt;Photo by H. Marc Larson/Press-Gazette. [http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage]]]&lt;br /&gt;
The '''Green Bay Packers''' are a [[National Football League]] [[NFL]] [[franchise]]  based in [[Green Bay]], [[Wisconsin]]. They are part of the National Football Conference (NFC) and play in the NFC North Division. They are the first team to win the [[Super Bowl]]. They played in Super Bowl I and defeated the [[Kansas City Chiefs]]. They also won [[Super Bowl]] II.  The Green Bay Packers have more World Championships than any other franchise in the League's history, but not the most Super Bowl victories.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The team plays its home games at Lambeau Field, named after team founder Curly Lambeau.  They are the only professional sports team owned by a city.  The team was bought by Green Bay after it suffered from great financial woes in the 1950s.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Packers won the most recent Super Bowl, XLV, on February 26,2011. They defeated the Steelers 31-25, and Packers QB Aaron Rodgers was named Super Bowl MVP.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Quarterbacks===&lt;br /&gt;
*12 - [[Aaron Rodgers]]&lt;br /&gt;
*11 - Brian Brohm&lt;br /&gt;
*10 - Matt Flynn&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Running Backs===&lt;br /&gt;
*25 - [[Ryan Grant]]&lt;br /&gt;
*32 - Brandon Jackson&lt;br /&gt;
*42 - DeShawn Wynn&lt;br /&gt;
*28 - Kregg Lumpkin&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Fullbacks===&lt;br /&gt;
*35 - Korey Hall&lt;br /&gt;
*30 - John Kuhn&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Wide Receivers===&lt;br /&gt;
*85 - [[Greg Jennings]]&lt;br /&gt;
*80 - [[Donald Driver]]&lt;br /&gt;
*89 - James Jones&lt;br /&gt;
*82 - Ruvell Martin&lt;br /&gt;
*87 - Jordy Nelson&lt;br /&gt;
*19 - Shaun Bodiford&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Tight Ends===&lt;br /&gt;
*86 - Donald Lee&lt;br /&gt;
*88 - Jermichael Finley&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Offensive Tackles===&lt;br /&gt;
*76 - Chad Clifton&lt;br /&gt;
*68 - Breno Giacomini&lt;br /&gt;
*67 - Nevin McCaskill&lt;br /&gt;
*71 - Josh Sitton&lt;br /&gt;
*65 - Mark Tauscher&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Guards===&lt;br /&gt;
*78 - Allen Barbre&lt;br /&gt;
*73 - Daryn Colledge&lt;br /&gt;
*75 - Tony Moll&lt;br /&gt;
*72 - Jason Spitz&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Centers===&lt;br /&gt;
*63 - Scott Wells&lt;br /&gt;
* - Duke Preston&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Defensive Ends===&lt;br /&gt;
*57 - Jason Hunter&lt;br /&gt;
*74 - Aaron Kampman&lt;br /&gt;
*96 - Mike Montgomery&lt;br /&gt;
*99 - Jeremy Thompson&lt;br /&gt;
*77 - Cullen Jenkins&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Defensive Tackles===&lt;br /&gt;
*91 - Justin Harrell&lt;br /&gt;
*97 - Johnny Jolly&lt;br /&gt;
*98 - Alfred Malone&lt;br /&gt;
*79 - Ryan Pickett&lt;br /&gt;
*62 - Anthony Toribio&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Linebackers===&lt;br /&gt;
*55 - Desmond Bishop&lt;br /&gt;
*54 - Brandon Chillar&lt;br /&gt;
*53 - Spencer Havner&lt;br /&gt;
*50 - [[A. J. Hawk]]&lt;br /&gt;
*58 - Danny Lansanah&lt;br /&gt;
*51 - Brady Poppinga&lt;br /&gt;
*56 - Nick Barnett&lt;br /&gt;
*93 - Kenny Pettway&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Cornerbacks===&lt;br /&gt;
*27 - Will Blackmon&lt;br /&gt;
*24 - Jarrett Bush&lt;br /&gt;
*31 - [[Al Harris]]&lt;br /&gt;
*40 - Joe Porter&lt;br /&gt;
*38 - Tramon Williams&lt;br /&gt;
*21 - [[Charles Woodson]]&lt;br /&gt;
*22 - Pat Lee&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Safeties===&lt;br /&gt;
*36 - Nick Collins&lt;br /&gt;
*26 - Charlie Peprah&lt;br /&gt;
*37 - Aaron Rouse&lt;br /&gt;
* - Anthony Smith&lt;br /&gt;
*20 - Atari Bigby&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Kickers===&lt;br /&gt;
*2 - [[Mason Crosby]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Punters===&lt;br /&gt;
*7 - Jeremy Kapinos&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==See also==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Vince Lombardi]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Chicago Bears]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Minnesota Vikings]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Detroit Lions]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[National Football Conference]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== External links ==&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/teams/packers/index.html Team site]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.packers.com/community/packers_foundation/ Green Bay Packers]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{NFL Teams}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:National Football League]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Wisconsin]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JonS123</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>