17to85

That's because you don't have to pay for it. How much do you suppose it costs to switch from fossil fuels as an energy source? How many nuclear plants will it take to replace the coal oil or gas burning ones? Hell even switching from coal to gas is pricey enough.

15 years of anecdotal evidence in one geographic location is weather not climate. Trust me on this one, climate is not something you can comment on without a lot of data on a global scale.

I stayed long enough to get banned for telling Colin why people left. Banned me then not long after that he made a post basically saying the same things I told him. Sad really that he was so touchy he couldn't take constructive criticism.

You are talking about weather not climate. Climate is a long term pattern not what happens year to year. Calgary is especially problematic because of the chinooks, they make winters unpredictable as well.

I believe the point that people were trying to make is that it's a slippery slope and how long before they have to add more challenges because the refs are missing so many calls?

fine! Did you read that Matthew Ridley lecture I posted? You can pretty much substitute what he is saying for my opinion. He agrees that it is a thing too. There is absolutely no argument based in science against the greenhouse effect. Without the greenhouse effect the temperature on Earth would resemble Mars. Hell compare Venus as well to see what a runaway greenhouse effect looks like. It's hard and fast science that greenhouse gasses do warm a planet up. Denying it is pointless and shows a great lack of understanding of the concept. Now be my guest and argue about the effects of these CO2 emissions, I'll be right there beside you doing the same, but gotta make sure that the science is given it's proper due.

Don't get me started on that. Canada contributes 2% of global CO2 emissions. If we stopped every single source of emissions tomorrow global levels will STILL rise because China keeps firing up more and more coal power plants which are the worst. The Oil Sands are a good way for those Europeans and Americans to deflect the blame and cluck their tongues about that dirty dirty oil. And how DARE us Canadians have a high per capita CO2 emission rate. Shame on us for living in a cold northern climate with long winters and a huge area to transport people and goods across. Shame on us for needing to avoid freezing in the winter.

"worse" is too subjective a term. I am not even sure they are accurate when they claim that temperature is rising faster than it ever has, pretty sure there's evidence in the past of faster climate changes (usually when coming out of ice ages) but here is the biggest thing, when we're talking about the Earth and the time scale we use to measure events in the past centuries are irrelevant. + or - hundreds of thousands of years is well within the margin of error. So taking recordings from a century and a half and making grandiose claims strikes me as a bit egotistical. Most people can't even comprehend geologic time scales. If the temperature starts dropping in 50 years time then in the big picture this warming here never happened at all because the mean is still right there. Something else to consider is given that tens of thousands of years isn't really that long we are still pretty close to the last ice age. Hell in Victorian times they called it a little ice age. There is a lot to argue about in terms of climate still. With it being a relatively new discipline of science there are bound to be many discoveries that will change the way we think, and that has happened, the problem is that too many people latch onto the worst case scenario that they came up with 10 years ago and still cling to all of that.

See this is the only point we really disagree on and you are wrong to try and deny that it is a thing. Yeah reports on the severity change, but I agree with you that it's not as dire as people want to make it, but there is a relationship. I have a geology major and a geography minor, if there's anything I know it's how the Earth works and I am well aware of different climates in the past and different atmospheric conditions, but the science is settled, more green house gasses in the atmosphere means more heat trapped which means the climate changes. They can and will quibble about the extent of it and what kinds of things is causes but the facts are that there is a change as a result. So you really just need to clarify what you're arguing. Don't argue that man made climate change is not real because that is a losing argument. Argue the things that you do, just leave out the whole bit about denying it's a thing.

The simple fact is that if people really wanted to stop all the emissions they never talk about the surefire way to do it... dealing with the over population that's going on right now. You want to have a big impact? Trim a couple billion people off the population and suddenly there's a lot less demand for energy globally and a lot of environmental problems are lessened. Good luck getting anyone to listen to that though. Instead they'll just scream about spending trillions of dollars trying to make the problem go away instead, which is a laughable solution at best. Money won't fix this problem, changing our energy sources is the only solution and it just so happens that fossil fuels are just about the most efficient energy source we have and we do like our energy.

Well it's about as proven as it's going to get. The relationship between greenhouse gases and their heat trapping effect is real, the fact that since the industrial revolution there has been a metric crap load of greenhouse gasses pumped into the atmosphere is a fact, it's still science and yeah it's a hypothesis, but it's as sound a hypothesis as gravity or evolution at this point. (or do you want to argue about how those are just unproven hypotheses now too?) I am far from a doom and gloomer, but the science is pretty straight forward in this matter, the questions are about what the effect will be and there is a lot of debate there because there are so many variables it is nearly impossible to accurately predict. The debate is all about whether it's worth spending the amount it would cost to do something that it's probably already too late to do anything about or not.

Kids today don't know nothing about anything.

The fact is that the CFL allows holding to happen because they don't want qbs getting killed.

Holding for sure, why not review whether a receiver was offside in his waggle too? Where does it end? Are we going to give coaches 20 challenge flags per game because there are a lot of calls get missed or are questionable in the course of a game. Hell why even have referees on the field? After every play let someone in Toronto watch a replay and call a penalty if there is one and review everything. Just say no to reviews. Go back to letting the onfield officials do it all and if they're wrong they're wrong. It will balance itself out over the course of a season.

The hockey stick is wrong, there's a bump in the middle of it, but that in and of itself doesn't say much about the science behind global warming, just that one guy is wrong about one aspect of things. At this point it's not about whether global warming (climate change is a better term anyway) is real or not, it's about what if anything to do about it, and that is a very good debate that is worth having because there are so many things to say. All the projections about what might happen, lots of speculation and doom and glooming there.

This. It's exactly the kind of position you'd expect from Doug Brown. He was a player rep, he was involved in these dealings before, he's still a player at heart I think so naturally he's on their side. Trouble is that the CFL would never go through a lock out. It wouldn't survive one and the players quite simply are replaceable except for a handful. If push comes to shove they'll fold faster than superman on laundry day purple monkey dishwasher.

Dominos I always found to be OK. It's not terrible but it's nothing to get super excited over... That being said I swear to god they lace their cheesy bread with crack it is that good.

Guess I'll be "that guy"...... Umm welcome to the board. How is it you know of Rob and why do you feel he will have a great CFL career? Thanks for the welcome. I've known Robert since he was in middle school. Extended family...brother in law. He's a good kid and is so very focused and talented. I won't pretend to know much about the CFL rules and the game in general but from what I've seen, it's a pass oriented league and the QB should have a strong arm and good mobility which are both strengths for Robert. How's the Offensive line in Winnipeg? Receivers? RB's? Kinda figured you knew him pretty well. You will quickly learn we have an extremely passionate fan base here and are very championship Hungary (it's been a while) This makes the majority of us grumpy and a little on edge sometimes when we have someone come in and start talking up someone we don't know as the next best thing. No offence to you and Robert. We have had plenty of players come through our league that just fizzle out or leave during training camp due too many different reasons especially QBs. This is why we are usually pretty sceptical about a new guy. If Robert is committed and passionate about football he will fit in here quite quickly. I wish him the best if he makes it through mini camp and into camp. Winnipeg is a fun place to play football. How is our Oline?...let's just say it's a work in progress. RB...we have had pretty solid RBs as far back as I can remember and not a possiision to worry about. Nothing wrong with a family member pumping another family members tires here. On CFL Horsemen, Eric Fraser's sister who went by the handle kkpfrase would attack anyone who said anything negative about her brother. It got pretty funny at times, especially when Stamps fans on that board would say Eric sucked in coverage after a game as she'd lose her mind. Now she's on the Ottawa fan board. That'll get interesting. I once told her going to war with every fan who criticized her brother was not very smart. And that maybe Eric didn't appreciate the fact that she did. I just told her she should either stay away from CFL H or just relax. But I know it would be hard... If I had family in the CFL, I'd disappear from here as I'd know I'd end up saying something I shouldn't & later regret it. I just don't know why family or friends of players who can't handle criticism of their friend/relative even show up to places like this. Gotta understand how fans are and if you're not prepared to ignore the stuff that gets said you're in for a bad time.

There is no lawsuit that can win because someone said something on the internet. That's what free speech is there to protect. Now they could I suppose depending on what was said go in front of one of those unconstituational human rights commissions but those are a whole different discussion that is probably best left alone cause it'll get more than a few people riled up. Libel laws still apply to internet postings. And there are limits to what is protected with respect to Freedom of Expression in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Free speech on a message board is a myth - you give it up when you agree to the terms of service that lets the board owner(s) and their appointees edit or remove your posts. There is a difference between freedom of expression as guaranteed by the government and the owners of a website moderating and editing what can be said, a very big difference. The only way I would worry about libel applying to something said on the internet is if it was said by someone in the media or some other person with some degree of fame. Joe Average says something? Big deal that's not going to hold up anywhere.

There is no lawsuit that can win because someone said something on the internet. That's what free speech is there to protect. Now they could I suppose depending on what was said go in front of one of those unconstituational human rights commissions but those are a whole different discussion that is probably best left alone cause it'll get more than a few people riled up.

no YOU'RE dumb... It's "your" dumb, Einsteen! are we sure it's not yore?

And don't think the CFL in general doesn't love it either. They probably had a talk with Buono about hyping it up good. Free publicity is free publicity.

no YOU'RE dumb...

I dunno what's up with all the subway hate, I don't mind it and it's pretty much the go to fast food place (now maybe that's because there's one very close to my house) Mr. Sub I like but may have over done that in university since that was the sub place in the cafeteria on campus. Quiznos is good as well but I find the subs aren't quite as filling.

Maybe not but it's a lot of fun none the less.