Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
That is absolutely the best part
US college professor demands imprisonment for climate-change deniers
- Thread starter squarepush3r
- Start date
- Status
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
you can lead a baboon to history, but you can't make them learn from it.
the heartland institute and other dupers of right wingers everywhere will be validated...some day. some day.
Doer
Well-Known Member
The best part, is you care so strongly. That's the mind fuck.
Doer
Well-Known Member
the best part is you muttering these words over and over
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
By the way this thread reads, it looks like you and Wavels are the ones with a dog in the fight, and he's been up against the ropes since the bell rang..
Doer
Well-Known Member
the heartland institute is evil
centimeter sea rise
methane, no wait.....carbon?
MUST DO SOMETHING
These are notions I oppose in you....especially that last. Do something, always means spend my money. It can't be your money. What money?
You seem to think this is a fight to win. To me the Saganists have already lost and that is why you are still telling everyone about the Great Flood of 2050 or some made up nonsense about Carbon 13.
It is why you think suing and jailing is a clever response to opposition. Running scared. The mob hates fake science worse than real science.
I remember when I began a discussion back the Science Section when my Friend, Heisenberg brought up the term Denier. I thought we could have a discussion.
But, instead of bringing facts, you all bring scorn and diversion into attacking the messengers.
The Fartbrain Institute is how I think of it. And you are a founding member.
That's when I knew you all were Saganists. You can't find a single fact, but you cling to the lies.
The oceans will rise 20 feet?.....12 feet....2 feet?. 2 centimeters? No 1 millimeter or so, if we can even measure it.
Sure, have some koolaide, children. That has happened before. Crazy Town, I mean. All the shinny monkeys love Crazy Town.
Just look at the spread of Religions, false science, and war cults across the world, and back through time, if you think we all don't just love Crazy Town.
Wavels
Well-Known Member
These guys are so smug and condescending, that as I have mentioned repeatedly, the inevitable intervention of reality will be so traumatic that the resulting cranial detonations will be quite messy. This is clearly a political tug of war over ideology. The obvious fact that the resident alarmists cannot, or simply refuse to recognize this, is self evident. There is also a forthcoming IPCC report which backpedals significantly regarding ACC. It will be fun to see how they blithely dismiss this as well. This is politics, it has nothing whatsoever to do with any semblance of true science.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
smoking isn't harmful, you smug, condescending prick!
Wavels
Well-Known Member
Deflect much?
Never smoked cigs, I have a hunch that you do or have? I concluded it was stupid when I first saw the Sugeon General warning on my Mom's packs before you were born.
Explains your resentful bitterness. You were duped into a dopey habit, and you need to blame someone other than yourself. Am I right?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
you are aware that the heartland institute that you are so fond of has tried to deny the harmful effects of smoking because they were paid to do so, right?
guess who they're getting paid by now.
go ahead, refuse to learn from history and call me a smug, condescending, bitter prick for laughing at your ignorance.
it only serves to enhance my entertainment value.
Wavels
Well-Known Member
Buck, I am sorry, but I do not need to use the word "prick"...it is not in my "thesaurus".you are aware that the heartland institute that you are so fond of has tried to deny the harmful effects of smoking because they were paid to do so, right?
guess who they're getting paid by now.
go ahead, refuse to learn from history and call me a smug, condescending, bitter prick for laughing at your ignorance.
it only serves to enhance my entertainment value.
It appears to be in yours however.
Hahaha.
Doer
Well-Known Member
He a 2 pack a day, most likely. All these pics he posts, usually has him with a cig.
He was born after the Surgeon General put the warning on the pack. He sat through DEM Waxman almost getting it labeled as a drug delivery device.
My first act of disobedience (many many to follow,) was to refuse to light a cig for my mom on the stove and carry it to her....maybe I was 7. I knew I was risking the belt. But, I remember the satisfied look on my Dad's face. "Nah, son. Come here. You don't ever have to do that."
The day the Packs came out with the warning, was the day he stopped cold turkey. He needed the following order, excuse, in the smoke drenched Air Force. Then he was able to make fun of them all. "A monkey on your back," he chortled. He is 86 now. A leathered old veteran from WW2.
My mom, never stopped although she lied about it constantly. At 78 she was gone from small cell Lung Cancer, in less than I year.
Wavels
Well-Known Member
Thanks for sharing Mr. Doer.
I think it was 1964 or maybe '65 when I noticed the warning on my Mom's pack of Winstons.
Amazingly enough I am blessed to still have her around.
Sorry for your loss Doer.
Doer
Well-Known Member
I guess the only way to win is to get them like this....sputtering about personal attacks and assuming bitterness, as the light of facts, swarms the mindless hive.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Do you not understand why using the heartland institute (what you and Wavels have been using this entire thread) as a source of information regarding climate change is retarded?
It's literally the opposite of science
You're the ones saying the debate is political, duh! We are the ones saying the only debate that exists is in the political arena, there is no debate among scientists about the causes of ACC
Wavels
Well-Known Member
Actually we should thank the author of this screed, Nick Cohen, for unwittingly revealing exactly what is wrong at the core of the climate campaign: they want to smash up democracy and market economies and substitute their authoritarian rule. Seldom has this been admitted so candidly (though unwittingly) than this:
More to come as we see the IPCC WG II report on Monday
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/03/the-climate-souffle.php#!
Climate change deniers are as committed. Their denial fits perfectly with their support for free market economics, opposition to state intervention and hatred of all those latte-slurping, quinoa-munching liberals, with their arrogant manners and dainty hybrid cars, who presume to tell honest men and women how to live. If they admitted they were wrong on climate change, they might have to admit that they were wrong on everything else and their whole political identity would unravel.
The inability of the climate campaign to ponder whether environmental problems can be solved with means that are compatible with individual liberty, democratic institutions, and market economics is the chief reason they are losing. The real “denialists” in this story are the reactionaries like Cohen. I do hope he keeps writing on the subject. He’s even more helpful than Al Gore.
More to come as we see the IPCC WG II report on Monday
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/03/the-climate-souffle.php#!
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
In light of all the evidence against you, how in the world could you possibly think you're winning anything?
This is hilarious!
This is hilarious!
Doer
Well-Known Member
You will define scientist for me, so I can knock this one out of the ball park, once and for all? The debate has only been political since the anti-big oil, unproven, Greenhouse effect on Venus, was speculated about, by Sagan.
We still don't know if that happened to Venus. We know you will swallow.
It alll has been fear and emotion since then. I watch it all. You woke up yesterday, thinking you cannot be fooled.
Not a single fact has ever lined up. Ever. And as an adult I have all the years on you. You were born into Saganism. I watched it occur.
This is the 3rd time. Just give me a definition. What is the set, you call "the scientists" that all agree with ACC?"
It is simple set math after that, so i see why you will not come up to the line on this one.
- Status