And In Wingnut News

From the obscene to the sad:

  • Haiti deserved it because they’re devil-worshipping black people – Pat Robertson.
  • President Obama unpatriotically betrayed America at Christmas by declining to jam Christianity down unbelievers’ throats – Chuck Norris.
  • How to become the most obnoxious dinner guest ever “Argue With Loud Mouthed Liberals About Any Constitutional Issue And Win Every Single Time!” – internet scammers targeting gullible WorldNetDaily readers.

If I were to start going into detail on the last one, this would be a fairly long post. Instead, just have a look, and feel free to share the bits you found most ridiculous in the comments.

Advertisements

66 responses to “And In Wingnut News

  1. “bunker-busting info bombs” – gold.

  2. The Norris thing … my brain hurts.

    Upchuck.

  3. The constitutional study set is clearly inadequate. The advert says nothing about guns, slavery or creation science. None of the founding fathers believed in evolution and most of them owned slaves and guns. Hell, Alexander Hamilton died in a duel to defend his honour, but that sort of decency is not respected any more.

    How do they expect to cash in on their target market when they miss the key selling points like these?

  4. “Angry lesbians and Abortion enthusiasts”

    Lol. Just, lol.

  5. I’m with Keri though I am not sure whether I ought to laugh or cry.

    American’s can really do my head in sometimes.

  6. Deep Green Heart

    I wanna World Combat League tee-shirt, as advertised on Chuck’s website: now that’s real Christian values stuff.
    In WCL, you can punch, kick and do some serious kneeing. But please, no passivity or stalling or clinching (which stops your opponent from hitting you, apparently).
    Oh yeah, and I think it’s shocking Obama doesn’t stick up for them christians folk.

  7. “Gideon defeated tens of thousands of Midianites with the right ammo…
    300 men and the truth.”

    lol. order now by credit card for your free golden ephod and 70 wives

  8. I didn’t know Chuck Norris could write.

  9. chuck norris doesn’t actually write, the words assemble themselves out of fear

  10. “Now, I don’t know about you, but there’s no way I’m going to sit back and let the liberals take over our country.” And at $149 a copy for my book and CD, you can help me become rich enough that I don’t have to give a stuff.

  11. It was only a matter of time before Pat Robinson said something like this, it puzzles me why they give that moron airtime – especially at a time like this.

    Chuck Norris doesn’t make any sense at all. Christmas cease to be a religious holiday years ago and originally it was a pagan festival. There are a shit load of Christians out there who don’t celebrate Christmas at all.

    “…owned slaves and guns. Hell, Alexander Hamilton died in a duel to defend his honour, but that sort of decency is not respected any more.”

    SB, you write the most unfortunate things sometimes. This kind of suggests that it is a decent thing to do to own slaves (I know this was most likely unintentional). And I’m not sure of blasting somebody’s head off for expressing their opinion is compatible with free speech or is in any way noble, decent or civilised.

    “chuck norris doesn’t actually write, the words assemble themselves out of fear”

    lol

  12. Lynda Hopgood

    I am without speech.

    Americans scare me.

  13. Northern Exposure

    That whole constitutional arsenal for the righties was hilarious, but what actually made me laugh out loud was the $149.95 + $15 postage and handling price tag.

  14. That would put Pat Robertson up their with Climate Idiotarians Tim Costello and Danny Glover.

  15. Up their what?

  16. Certainly not their brains – they don’t have any.

  17. “That would put Pat Robertson up their with Climate Idiotarians Tim Costello and Danny Glover.”

    In your universe maybe. Danny Glover??? Who cares what he says, he’s an actor his opinions carry as much weight as Bono’s IMNSHO.

    However conparing Robertson to Costello speaks volumes……..about you! Costello is a good bloke3, Robertson is an idiotic hate monger, check this:

    “In late 1976, Robertson predicted that the end of the world was coming in November or October 1982. In a May 1980 broadcast of The 700 Club he stated, “I guarantee you by the end of 1982 there is going to be a judgment on the world.”[60]”

    LOL – what a clown…

    then this:

    “2007: Terror attack

    On the January 2, 2007 broadcast of The 700 Club, Robertson said that God spoke to him and told him that “mass killings” were to come during 2007, due to a terrorist attack on the United States. He added, “The Lord didn’t say nuclear. But I do believe it will be something like that.”[62] When a terrorist attack failed to happen in 2007, Robertson said, in January 2008, “All I can think is that somehow the people of God prayed and God in his mercy spared us.””

    There is NO comparison!

  18. Pat Robertson controversies:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson_controversies

    LOL – read it SB then if you have a shred of credibility be honest enough to admit that Costello is not “up their(sic)” with Robertson,

  19. Some Costello:

    “As elected Mayor of St Kilda Council in 1993, he became well known for championing the cause of local democracy and his clashes with Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett. Kennett attacked Costello as being un-Victorian for speaking out against the gaming-led recovery of the state and often referred to him as “that leftist cleric””

    Hmmm seems like a top bloke to me, I think even Kennett now regrets the pokies led recovery.

  20. I said Costello was a “Climate Idiotarian” rather than an Idiotarian pure and simple. Robertson looks kooky, but for all I know he probably has, like Costello, some virtues. Funnily both Robertson and Costello have done work with aid organisations.

    Still blaming a tidal wave on Climate Change is pretty loopy. What is the problem with calling out Costello for being a prattling leftist wanker? This reminds me of Harry Reid’s racist statements. If your a lefty you always get a pass. If not, scorn pours down upon you like a bukakke shower.

  21. “I said Costello was a “Climate Idiotarian””

    AND you said he was up there with Robertson, you are wrong, Robertson is a hate monger. You had your chance to admit that Costello and Robertson are not in the same league (they aren’t) you failed, as far as I am concerned you have no credibility, in fact you’re either insane or dishonest to place Costello “up there” with Robertson.

    “Still blaming a tidal wave on Climate Change is pretty loopy”

    Yeah but not nearly as loopy as the shit Robertson has claimed (I’ve even provided links)

    “What is the problem with calling out Costello for being a prattling leftist wanker? ”

    Nothing, though it seems that you’re implying that it’s OK for Robertson to be a total hateful twat because of Costello. Why else would you bring Costello into the argument? Look over there????

    “prattling leftist wanker? ”

    So you brought him up because of your own partisan tendencies?

  22. “? This reminds me of Harry Reid’s racist statements. If your a lefty you always get a pass. ”

    Right, like Reid’s statements caused no controversy. Just do a Google News search on him.

  23. More wingnut news:

    Mr Tomarchio confirmed this week that he lent between $3000 and $5000 a day, charged interest of 33 per cent to borrowers and took the bank cards and PINs of his clients in order to withdraw his money, plus interest, on the days when the Aborigines received welfare payments.

    On Wednesday, Mr Tomarchio said: “The thing you need to understand about these people is that, unlike you and I, they don’t do anything for their money and they have no respect for it.”

    He claims he’s providing a humanitarian service despite charging 33% interest on loans, taking keycards and PINs and withdrawing almost all of their centrelink payments leaving people locked into a cycle of having to borrow again. What a creep! And where are all those who like to whinge long and loud about aboriginals receiving “special treatment” and “reverse racism”?

  24. Reid’s statement did cause controversy, but he got a pass from the huckster shake-down merchants like Al Sharpton. Harry hasn’t resigned or anything, has he?

  25. “Harry hasn’t resigned or anything, has he?”

    Hmmmm, Did Pat Robertson get executed or something for his statements?……Didn’t think so! Oh that’s right, the Whitehouse called his statement ‘stupid’, what a harsh punishment.

    By the way I don’t consider Harry Reid a Lefty, he’s right of centre, he can’t possibly be a Lefty, I guess this is just another of your feeble ‘look over there’ debating tactics?

  26. Also SB, the idot Reid actually apologised for his crass statements, has Robertson?

    You’re the one who’s reaching for a comparison, desperately trying to point out that there are twats on both sides of the political divide. Here’s a good one, Rush Lumbaugh & Pat Robertson ooops, same side I think 😉

  27. Hey SB.

    You might find this article by Alexander Cockburn to be interesting.

    He uses the Harry Reid episode as a segue to bash Bill Clinton for racism.

    Cheers.

  28. Trent Lott apologised, but he still had to stand down as Senate majority leader. Reid doesn’t have to do that because he is a lefty and all is forgiven. My whole point was that stupidity is not a one way street.

  29. You’re reaching SB…

    “My whole point was that stupidity is not a one way street.”

    You’re right but you put Costello ‘up there’ with Robertson and still haven’t admitted that there’s no comparison..

  30. Oh yeah, and what are the consequences for Robertson? See, he hasn’t had to resign, religious wingnuts still love him….

  31. SB: are you defending Robertson’s vile statement? It sure looks like it to me, otherwise what’s with the try-hard effort to find some kind of equivalence among those you believe are politically opposite to him?

    And I agree with Rob about Democrats not being lefties: the Democrats are where the Republicans used to be before they went wingnut feral.

  32. I’m not defending Robertson’s stupid statement, just noting that he is in fine company on his idiocy. Obviously Jeremy didn’t notice the crackpots who blame every natural disaster on AGW. Just trying to add a bit of balance.

    The Democrats are what all leftists become when they get power – corrupt meretricious buffooons. Its at about this point that decent leftists disown them.

  33. Who is a decent ‘leftist’ SB? Apart from me and Bob Brown 😉 (Remember, not many Federal Labor MPs are actually leftists)

  34. That’s a nice conundrum, Rob, Present company excepted of course.

    Eric Blair is my favourite. Also Christopher Hitchens, but then he became so decent he ditched leftism. The thing I respect is the ability to follow reason, even to uncomfortable places, rather than remain loyal to then party (or the Team).

    In the present case it would be someone who could see that the idiots aren’t all on one side.

    Anyone who is not thoroughly sickened by Obama’s behaviour, given his earlier promises for more open and accountable government is not decent, and probably plug stupid as well.

  35. “In the present case it would be someone who could see that the idiots aren’t all on one side.”

    I can, though I still maintain that Robertson is a hateful idiot and Costello is a top bloke who can say some silly (but not hateful) things.

    “Anyone who is not thoroughly sickened by Obama’s behaviour, given his earlier promises for more open and accountable government is not decent, and probably plug stupid as well.”

    Hmm, I’m no Obama fan, he’s right wing but compared to the prick he succeeded he’s a saint. You can’t get into a position like Obama’s or Rudd’s (or Gordon Brown’s etc etc) without being a prick, it just doesn’t happen, thing is some are bigger pricks than others.

  36. Eric Blair is my favourite.

    Is this the same Eric Blair who identified himself as a socialist all of his life, and fought with the anarchists in the Spanish Civil War?

    Also, re: Hitchens – he appears to view his conversion to a supporter of ‘humanitarian intervention’ (vis-a-vis Iraq and the war on terror) not as a renunciation of leftism and Enlightenment values, but a different version of it. In Hitchen’s eyes, this does not preclude support for a Palestinian state, for instance, or a defence of Noam Chomsky from the slanders against him.

  37. Clearly Costello is also a considerable idiot – in this case, mouthing platitudes without considering whether they were even plausible, much less true.

    While it is true that Obama is slightly to the right of Chavez, there is not really much in it. Obama’s difficulty is that he has to destroy a more robust democracy to get total control.

    THR, Orwell couldn’t bring himself to fight on the side of the Stalinists, which is one example of his decency.

    Hitchens was vivlified by the left for departing from its orthodoxy, and made the point at the time that he was no longer of the left, although obviously he still retains leftist views on many issues.

    Hitchens has always been capable of independent rational thought, whereas most leftists just roll with the platform, narrowing the world in all its complexity to two sides, and sticking to the one that makes them feel better about themselves.

    BTW Israel/Palestine is not a left-right issue. It is a civilisation vs islamic barbarism issue.

  38. “Clearly Costello is also a considerable idiot – in this case, mouthing platitudes without considering whether they were even plausible, much less true.”

    FFS – He isn’t a hateful bigoted prick though, I guess the difference is utterly lost on you, after all you don’t even know you’re right from your left.

    “BTW Israel/Palestine is not a left-right issue. It is a civilisation vs islamic barbarism issue.”

    Oh yeah, Israel is really civilised in their actions toward Palestinians. But hey, what would you know? You’ve consistently demonstrated in this thread that you can’t even differentiate between left and right.

    “narrowing the world in all its complexity to two sides, ”

    LOL – this coming from the person who categorises right wingers as left wingers because he/she doesn’t agree with them!

  39. OK. So we can just agree that Costello is an idiot when it comes to climate change. He is not alone in this.

    Now, perhaps you could clarify matters and tell me what you think the difference between left and right is.

  40. [Now, perhaps you could clarify matters and tell me what you think the difference between left and right is.]

    I regard the political compass as fair dinkum, google it.

  41. “most leftists just roll with the platform, narrowing the world in all its complexity to two sides, and sticking to the one that makes them feel better about themselves”

    Project much? Yeah, right wingers don’t do this at all, huh? Or when they do, it doesn’t concern you so much for some reason. Or you don’t even notice. Oh that’s right, I forgot – you’re not right wing. You just disagree with virtually every left wing viewpoint. You’re a bi-partisan troll.

  42. According to that I am a libertarian centrist, which is reasonable.

    I think we have got to the stage now where most people are within the central third of both axes ie draw a circle a third of the way out from the centre along each axis. Beyond that is the outer darkness, the home of ideologues and idiots.

  43. Fred you should do the test. You’re probably up in idiot’s corner with Stalin!

  44. I’m far more centrist than you SB: I haven’t fallen victim to just about every rightwing conspiracy from AGW the communist plot to Obama the kenyan born socialist!

    As for Hitch, I dont believe he can be categorised as either left or right. He’s a foreign policy and war hawk who has recently well and truly left the reservation by calling for the US to begin military action against Iran. Sheer lunacy.

  45. I’m over with Gandhi and Jesus 🙂

  46. what’s with the try-hard effort to find some kind of equivalence among those you believe are politically opposite to him?

    He didn’t have to try very hard – Robertson falsely linked a natural disaster to his crusade and so did Costello (and Glover). You can disagree about the extent to which each of them is an objectionable character, but you can’t deny that what they have done in this case is comparable.

    If it’s bad when their side does it then it’s bad when ours does too.

    Of course once SB started comparing the centre-right Obama to Chavez, and painting the Palestinian conflict as a manichean good vs evil issue he went off into his standard la-la land . . .

  47. Confessions I haven’t fallen victim to either of those theories. The broadbrush hyperbole you are so fond of is indicative of the hive-minded partisanship that keeps potentially sane people in the outer darkness of the lunatic fringe.

    I spend my time here as a voice of reason, speaking common sense and trying to put the leftist herd to rights. Unforunately, like many who dedicate their time to special needs cases, I am often subject to the cackling insanity of a lunatic poo-flinger for whom rational thought is an impossibility.

  48. Mondo, I don’t get the characterisation of Obama as ‘right’ or even ‘centre’. He is the most left wing president ever, which is why he will only last one term. Even worse, his hope and change amounts to less transparency, more backroom deals and bringing the Chicago machine to Washington.

  49. “Mondo, I don’t get the characterisation of Obama as ‘right’ or even ‘centre’.He is the most left wing president ever,”

    So, that still doesn’t make him left of centre. Like I say you appear to lack the ability differentiate between left and right, it seems that if you don’t like someone then they’re left wing!

  50. Rob J, I dislike lying rodent Howard, but I never thought of him as left wing.

    I also think the libertatian-totalitarian axis is far more important than the left-right axis. The essential characteristics for political freedom – representative government, rule of law and free speech – should be something we all have in common. The real problems start when some nutter decides they have the answers and are therefore obliged to seize power in order to implement them.

    Representative government is a good limit on the power of governments to get too far away from the economic centre. Coalition governments are elected to generate wealth. When they have done this, or when they start to de-regulate the market too much, they get the boot.

    Labor governments come in restore community services. When they start to expand them too far (they always leave the country with more debt than when they came to power), they also get the boot.

    The people understand the necessity for balancing earning capacity of the country with its spending capacity. Leftists on the other hand are only interested in the spending side, and have not a clue how to generate the wealth they are so anxious spend.

  51. He is the most left wing president ever, which is why he will only last one term.

    Nonsense – Obama has presided over a massive taxpayer-funded bailout of capitalism, just obtained additional billions of dollars to expand a war of choice, and sold out genuine health care reform to the lobbyists of the health insurance industry. He didn’t even insist on a public option SB – the absolute minimum that would be required for your description of him as close to Chavez to be even vaguely defendable.

    Just because Fox News hysterically tells you he is a socialist doesn’t make it so, and if he only lasts one term it will be because Democrats abandon him for his lack of genuine commitment to progressive politics, not because he’s seen as too progressive. Check the polls – he’s not losing support amongst Repuglican voters.

    Even worse, his hope and change amounts to less transparency, more backroom deals and bringing the Chicago machine to Washington.

    Hardly the mark of a socialist SB – more the mark of a man welded to the capitalist system you are accusing him of trying to dismantle. It’s time you let reality mug the inane talking points you are being fed.

  52. Mondo:

    he’s not losing support amongst Repuglican voters

    If they vote Republican Obama doesn’t have much to lose, does he?

    Taxpayer bailouts sound pretty left-wing to me, Mondo. It is not surprising that they went to some of his biggest contributers, bankers and auto unions. The SEIU will be paid off in other ways.

    On the health thing I entirely agree with you. A rational system of health care may be impossible due to the inbuilt corruption of the US political process.

    Obama’s leftism is apparent from his skirting of Senate oversight by appointing a huge number of policy czars, many of whom are leftist drongos like Van Jones. And there was the one said Mao was her favourite philosopher, and the one that supports transnational government.

    I doubt the democrats will dump Obama and run a different campaign. More likely the Democrats will be out of power for a generation due to the stench generated by Obama, Harry Reid and Sleazy Pelosi.

  53. Taxpayer bailouts sound pretty left-wing to me, Mondo.

    Really – how is the transfer of government money to prop up capitalist enterprises a left-wing activity? What tenet of socialist theory does this behaviouor satisfy?

    Failing an ability to name such a tenet perhaps you could cite an example of Chavez doing something similar in Venezuala – i.e. using public money to prop up private enterprise? This might go some way towards justifying your claim that he and Obama are nearly the same.

    Maybe I’m going crazy but I thought socialism was about government ownership/control of the means of production. Now you’re telling me that it’s really about the exact opposite -excessive corporate influence over government.

    It seems to me that you’re simply indulging in your standard “if it’s bad it is, by definition, Left-wing” bullcrap.

    Fun for you but utterly devoid of any rational basis.

  54. Fred Phillips

    “Fred you should do the test. You’re probably up in idiot’s corner with Stalin!”

    I don’t need to do the test. I’m not in denial about where I fall on the political spectrum.

    What is it with right wing trolls and their need to convince us all that they are centrists?

  55. He didn’t have to try very hard – Robertson falsely linked a natural disaster to his crusade and so did Costello (and Glover).

    Except there’s an emerging evidence base that supports Costello’s position (according to that link), whereas Robertson’s were driven by ignorance and hate. SB trying to compare the two men is simply ridiculous. And as for Glover, he’s an actor who does not speak on behalf of an organisation much less climate scientists. I’ve noticed it’s largely the denialosphere which has latched onto Danny Glover as if he and his opinion is in any way representative of anything significant to do with AGW.

  56. Confessions I haven’t fallen victim to either of those theories.

    Before xmas you were wailing like a banshee over so-called climategate, as if that in and of itself was supposed to be the smoking gun that shows AGW to be a massive global fraud. And here you are today trying to convince rational people that obama is a socialist and the most left-wing president the US has ever had. Not only does political theory not support the egs you’ve given to argue this point, neither does US presidential history.

    I spend my time here as a voice of reason, speaking common sense and trying to put the leftist herd to rights.

    The majority of your time spent here that I’ve observed is simply rehashing whatever rightwing faux indignation du jour is being thrashed to death in the blogosphere. I don’t see much “voice of reason” in the majority of your comments SB. I’m happy to be proved wrong however.

  57. Confessions: Except there’s an emerging evidence base that supports Costello’s position . You are not being serious, right?

    About a week before Climategate I had a lengthy discussion with Michael, Mondo and maybe even you about the shaky nature of the case for AGW. Climategate certainly gave an insight into the machinations and biases of a group of major players in the AGW caper. However, the climategate emails were never proof of fraud, and I have not claimed that they were. My position on that was and is based on the reasonable proposition that before we take drastic action, the underlying scientific work should be open to scrutiny.

    Tell me confessions, on how many issues to you depart from the path of leftism? I can’t recall many or even any.

  58. You are not being serious, right?

    I am being serious, based on some of the stuff I’ve read. Common sense dictates that climate change will impact for eg the veracity of major bushfires: the more extreme and more persistent the drought conditions the more likely the surrounding environment and landscape creates the ‘perfect’ conditions for serious wildfires.

    My position on that was and is based on the reasonable proposition that before we take drastic action, the underlying scientific work should be open to scrutiny.

    It *is* open to scrutiny. The problem for you is that those doing the ‘scrutinising’ are motivated by base political agendas and have limited ability to parse the research in a methodical, intellectually honest way. They are therefore left to rely upon criminal activities such as email hacking in order to argue their point. Take for eg the latest nontroversy in The Australian about Himalayan glaciers. That was reported in New Scientist a fortnight ago which showed the dodgy way in which individual citations can get swept into major publications. At least one such eg is routinely reported in every journal each year, yet for reasons suspected to do with pushing a denialist agenda unknown is only reported in the MSM today.

    You can now walk back your climategate hysteria all you like, but those of us who were subjected to your screeching at the time know what position you had taken.

    Tell me confessions, on how many issues to you depart from the path of leftism?

    Your definition of leftism? Probably nothing. But your definition of leftism has already been shown to be deficient and flawed.

  59. Costello’s position was that climate change was somehow responsible for volcanic activity, earthquakes and tidal waves. You must have missed that bit in the link I posted above. We may disagree from time to time, but I can’t believe you would be up for this type of nonsense.

    Given that Jones threatened to destroy data rather than hand it over under FOI, data which has not yet been made public, I don’t understand how you can say that the Hockey Team work is open to scrutiny.

  60. Costello’s position was that climate change was somehow responsible for volcanic activity, earthquakes and tidal waves.

    I see. This is that dishonest game denialists play whereby we can snatch an article from Oct last year, compare it to vile remakrs made about Haitian earthquake this week, and hey presto! we have an exact analogous match. What a genius you are SB!

    For the record, there is emerging evidence that AGW is creating environmental conditions that are responsible for tectonic activity (that’s earthquakes in SB land), wildfires and tsunamis. All of this is consistent with Costello’s remarks in your Oct 09 link. OTOH Robertson’s statements that Haitians’ history of slavery was responsible for earthquake payback is supported by what evidence base and what logic?

    And on Jones and OMG DATA!!!1! the man had been subjected to how many hundreds of spurious claims (usually by denialists) under the guise of “FOI”. For fuck’s sake, I’d want to destroy the data rather than have to go through yet another witch hunt led by those with ulterior political motives.

  61. I don’t understand how you can say that the Hockey Team work is open to scrutiny.

    Because there are all the *other* researchers around the world whose data correlates with the so-called hockey stick stuff. All this is available at your fingertips on google scholar. But if your workdplace/home doesn’t support access to academic literature you should still be able to access it free of charge at a nearby university library.

  62. Except there’s an emerging evidence base that supports Costello’s position (according to that link), whereas Robertson’s were driven by ignorance and hate.

    As far as increased flooding and malaria outbreaks I agree with you – but to suggest that tsunamis and earthquakes (sort of the same thing really) are a result of global warming is thoroughly dishonest. Using the latest natural disaster to push your pet cause regardless of whether there is any actual connection between the two is a bit contemptible in my view.

    While I personally agree with you that Costello’s motives place him in a different category to Robertson, this belief is coloured by my preference for helping people in reality (i.e. World Vision) vs helping people by “saving their souls” (i.e. evangelical Christianity).

    There are many who would argue the opposite though – which I suppose is their right.

    It’s not the ends that I’m criticising, but the means.

  63. Confessions, I had a look at an article on this, and I have to admit that there are indeed scientists arguing that sea level and rainfall changes can cause earthquakes and increased volcanic. It almost seems plausible. Not proven, but at least plausible. Costello may have been a little incautious, but he is not as stupid as I suggested above.

    On the other issue, ‘open to scrutiny’ means full disclosure of data and methods. That is the minimum if you expect the world to invest trillions in your theory.

  64. And with the presentation of that article, my argument falls to pieces.

    Damn.

    Nonetheless it’s good to hear that there is actual science underpinning my instinctive preference for Costello over Robertson.

  65. “And with the presentation of that article, my argument falls to pieces.”

    I wondered what the hell Costello was on about, I hardly post on climate change because I neither have the time, inclination or possibly the nous to get my head around it, though it wouldn’t be too silly to give Costello the benefit of the doubt, he comes across as a highly intelligent and compassionate person to me, this is why I spat the dummy with SB’s comparison to the malicious bigot called Robertson. I’ve maintained that the comparison is ridiculous and feel quite vindicated. I’m glad to see SB has recanted and look forward to future ‘debates’.

  66. There is also an emerging theory that melting ice caps may influence tectonic plate movement, which may in turn lead to more/more severe earthquakes. Personally this sounds the least plausible to me, but I’m not a climate scientist or a geologist.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s