"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton

"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in message
...

"John Mazor" wrote in message
news:T8Bgj.172040$TO.53294@trnddc01...

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Neil Gould wrote:

Do you understand that, historically speaking, many scientific hypotheses
are proven wrong and that doing so is consistent with the scientific method?

Absolutely. Now if only the evolutionists and global warming fanatics would come to
understand that.

Which "fanatics" are you referring to? The millions of scientists and experts
worldwide who understand the limits of the scientific method but still accept evolution
as the best explanation, and are concerned about the mounting evidence of global
warming?

What evidence of globa;l warming?

How about:

- Melting icecaps
- Melting glaciers
- Documented changes due to warming in other local climates

Or do you dismiss that as irrelevant? If so, please see below.

Or the fanatics who are in denial about the solid foundations for evolution and the
growing evidence of global warning?

Or those in denial about the fraudulent evidence for global warming.

Please demonstrate and fully explicate the perpetration of fraud in the scientific data.

You can start by specifically refuting in detail, and demonstrating the fraud in the
following:

http://www.ecobridge.org/content/g_evd.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar...ming_evidence/

which are simple enough even for the layman to follow.