Others have blogged on this from the WorldNutsDaily:
Soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality. That’s why most of the medical (not socio-spiritual) blame for today’s rise in homosexuality must fall upon the rise in soy formula and other soy products. (Most babies are bottle-fed during some part of their infancy, and one-fourth of them are getting soy milk!) Homosexuals often argue that their homosexuality is inborn because “I can’t remember a time when I wasn’t homosexual.” No, homosexuality is always deviant. But now many of them can truthfully say that they can’t remember a time when excess estrogen wasn’t influencing them.
So where is the medical blame? Apparently, there is none.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Tom, please stop spreading lies. And yes, saying that there is “little or no evidence” with respect to global warming is, indeed, a lie.
And while this is idle speculation on my part, I suspect you’re not nearly as non-judgmental as you might otherwise appear to be, what with not knowing whether Hitler was evil, soy makes you gay, or other really tough questions.
MB is correct — global warming is real. In fact, Jefferson commented on the warming climate in his Notes on Virginia. NASA has also found evidence of such warming on Mars.
MB
The world is a rather complex place. We often do not have much idea about the consequences of what we doing. However, with over 7 billion of us, it is awfully hard to argue our activities do pose serious environmental hazards. Yet people do. On the other hand, other people treat their own doom and gloom beliefs as sacred cows. Have you ever considered how such an attitude interferes with serious discussion?
The theory of global warming rests on the presumption the we can generate carbon dioxide faster than the oceans can absorb it. Nobody knows how fast the oceans can absorb carbon dioxide.
In addition, what little data have is confusing and tainted by our own activities. Have you ever heard of, for example, the heat island effect? Check this out. http://www.epa.gov/heatisland/
In point of fact, we have theories about global warming. We do not have much data that backs it up. Our experiment evidence is virtually nil. Unfortunately, we still cannot accurately predict the weather a week in advance. You think we can predict into the next century?
There is far more to the theory of global warming than CO2 emission and absorption. Melting ice is pregressive, as open ocean absorbes energy from the sun, but ice reflects it back into space. (Of course, the reverse is true, too, as happened during the Ice Ages.) There is also evidence that sunspot activity may be a driving factor. The Little Ice Age 400 years ago corresponded to a lull in sunspot activity, and that activity has been increasing ever since.
Your last argument is by far your worst: “We still cannot accurately predict the weather a week in advance. You think we can predict into the next century?”
I do not know whether the S&P 500 will be higher or lower next week, but I’m pretty darned sure it will be higher 50 years from now.
(I can’t believe Jack & MB are agreeing.)
Jack
Do you think you can get that theory about the S&P pass the Democrats and fix Social Security?
When I was growing up, the fashionable thing was to predict the coming ice age. Now we have folks predicting global warming. We have some theories, and we have some anecdotal evidence. We have lots of excitable reporters.
Wikipedia has an article about global warming that is interesting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming). Supposedly, the majority of scientists accept the theory. Science by democracy. We vote on it? It is how we feel about it? If that is our best evidence, I think it best to reserve judgment.
How long have we been collecting accurate data on the weather? Not very long. The Wiki article would have you believe the data goes back to the 1800’s, but once you look at the heat island effect, you know that is horse fecal matter.
Have you ever heard of the Little Ice Age? That occurred around Thomas Jefferson’s and George Washington’s time. When Lief Erickson and Eric the Red were exploring America, there were Viking settlements in Greenland. Then it got too cold.
We just recently discovered the El Nino – La Nina effect out in the Pacific Ocean(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_nino). Supposedly, after the tilt of the earth on its axis, this shifting warm spot in the Pacific Ocean has the most effect on the earth’s weather. Do you suppose we might still have a lot to learn?
Global warming may be happening. We may even be causing it. I do not know. However, instead of income taxes, I would be happy to see a tax on fossil fuels.
So, to review:
In one corner, we have me, Jack, and an overwhelming majority of climate scientists. In the other, we have Tom, Sen. Inohofe, and a few PR flacks from Exxon Mobil.
I like my chances, thanks. Tom, you’re welcome to stick your head in the sand as long as you like. I really don’t care. Just don’t expect to spout ridiculous lies like “there is little to no evidence” with respect to global warming, and not be called on it.
I’ll drop this thread now, and get back to my soy.
“If Soy makes you gay, then what food makes you straight?” 😀
That’s like when people were saying that homosexuality was a disease, and Robin Williams (and Margaret Cho, and pretty much every comedian working) said something along the lines of “if homosexuality is a disease, why can’t I call in gay to work? Sorry, boss, can’t work today, still gay.”
Maybe we should call in Ann “Bill Clinton is gay for having affairs with women” Coulter on this one. Seems like this logic is up her alley. 😉
Tom — Social Security is an easy fix. Just lock down the PERCENTAGE of people eligible, and as the population ages, the age for SS benefits oges up, and the worker-retiree ratio stays healthy.
And we already have a taxes on gasoline ($0.39 per gallon in VA, I think) and I’m sure if I look, my natural gas bill has a tax on it, too.
“If Soy makes you gay, then what food makes you straight?”
I was under the impression that red meat increased testosterone levels. Anyway, the question is like, “If tobacco smoke causes cancer, what smoke keeps you healthy?” Stupid.
If arsenic makes you die instantly, then what poison makes you live forever.
MB
When scientists discovered the certain chemicals that we use in air conditioners and refrigerators damaged the ozone layer, we banned the chemicals. So far the “consensus” on “global warming” has had virtually no effect on public policy. Perhaps you are not working hard enough. Maybe you and Al Gore need to insult more people.
The thing is that the concensus is that there IS global warming, but there is no concensus on WHY. Since it started before industrialization, and is also occurring on Mars, it is difficult to argue that it is caused by industrialization.
I’m surprised no one has blamed it on the gays! But I wouldn’t be surprised if Jerry Foulwell doesn’t now that I’ve given him the idea…
That’s really hard to believe if he just said soy products have estrogen and didn’t provide any evidence. I don’t buy it, there should be some experiments conducted on this. I doubt anyone is willing to make their baby gay though…
Now, wait. Would that mean that eating a lot of meat would make one straight?
… That seems sort of unintuitive…