4merper4mer Posted October 24, 2020 Share Posted October 24, 2020 On 9/25/2020 at 2:04 PM, Deranged Rhino said: As one of six, I can say this is absurd... though my older siblings might agree. Normally I’d find that ad scary, stupid, ridiculous and disgusting on many levels. But it was posted in Canada so....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 24, 2020 Share Posted October 24, 2020 1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said: Climate Denying? Geez Tibs can you guys stop with the name calling. For a party that worships diversity, the modern Left is the most intolerant cult that’s ever existed. She said she thought it was debatable whether climate change was happening, I.e. denying the basic science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 25, 2020 Share Posted October 25, 2020 6 hours ago, Tiberius said: She said she thought it was debatable whether climate change was happening, I.e. denying the basic science. Tibsy misquoting and not providing a link everyone knows what that means “Do you believe that climate change is happening and threatening the air we breathe and the water that we drink?” Ms. Harris asked. Judge Barrett responded, “You asked me uncontroversial questions, like Covid-19 being infectious or if smoking causes cancer” to solicit “an opinion from me on a very contentious matter of public debate,” climate change. “I will not do that,” Judge Barrett concluded. “I will not express a view on a matter of public policy, especially one that is politically controversial.” By Calling Climate Change 'Controversial,' Barrett Created ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan boy '92 Posted October 25, 2020 Share Posted October 25, 2020 Climate change satisfies a need for a certain sect of the population to feel like they matter. Religion used to do this. Global warming took its place. Psychology of liberals requires the sky to be falling in some way. Then they're told by their leaders they have to do certain things to correct the problem. The solutions are always just out of reach, but you can demonize the other side and feel great that you care and they don't. Basically marketing for morons. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurmal34 Posted October 25, 2020 Share Posted October 25, 2020 2 hours ago, Fan boy '92 said: . Psychology of liberals requires the sky to be falling in some way. Then they're told by their leaders they have to do certain things to correct the problem. \Can you expand on what you mean here? Maybe drop specifics so we can come together? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 25, 2020 Share Posted October 25, 2020 10 hours ago, B-Man said: Tibsy misquoting and not providing a link everyone knows what that means “Do you believe that climate change is happening and threatening the air we breathe and the water that we drink?” Ms. Harris asked. Judge Barrett responded, “You asked me uncontroversial questions, like Covid-19 being infectious or if smoking causes cancer” to solicit “an opinion from me on a very contentious matter of public debate,” climate change. “I will not do that,” Judge Barrett concluded. “I will not express a view on a matter of public policy, especially one that is politically controversial.” By Calling Climate Change 'Controversial,' Barrett Created ... So she does believe in it? She wouldn’t say.. ignorant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted October 25, 2020 Share Posted October 25, 2020 4 hours ago, Thurmal34 said: \Can you expand on what you mean here? Maybe drop specifics so we can come together? Solution:. Communize Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 25, 2020 Share Posted October 25, 2020 18 minutes ago, Tiberius said: So she does believe in it? She wouldn’t say.. ignorant The better, non-controversial question for a liberal senator would have been—“With respect to her own deeply held beliefs on climate change, did Ruth Bader Ginsburg stay on the court too long?”. Serious question. It seems clear that RBG was failing over the past several years, and we can presume she was disappointed in the election of DJT. Do you think it would have been impactful had she retired a year or two into his term, and actively stumped for a nominee of her choosing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted October 25, 2020 Share Posted October 25, 2020 ...Mother Nature has NOT done too bad a job as the "Boss" over BILLIONS of years......and she's STILL employed.......certainly we can make improvements but forget the fear mongering, "sky is falling" tree huggers wanting to sink us economically with absurd worldly compliance.....poor 'ol China is just a "developing nation (we know what THEY are DEVELOPING)" gets a huge pass.....that right there tells me "a farce"...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan boy '92 Posted October 25, 2020 Share Posted October 25, 2020 5 hours ago, Thurmal34 said: \Can you expand on what you mean here? Maybe drop specifics so we can come together? Coming together is the best! At a fundamental level conservatives and liberals have different worldviews. It's psychologically based. Liberal thought requires a feeling of collectivism that leaders have honed in on and use to their advantage to establish and maintain power. Global warming is a perfect example of this. You are told that you're the good guy because you care. Liberals don't understand the science of global warming, but they don't need to. They're told that all the scientists agree and that's enough for them, when in fact there is significant diversion of opinon. Scientists choose data to feed into computer models and predict results decades and centuries into the future, the results of their guesswork they call settled science. They're very similar models to what scientists are using for Covid, the ones that have been consistently wrong by multiple orders of magnitude. Opinion and politics disguised as science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 (edited) On 10/25/2020 at 1:05 AM, Fan boy '92 said: Climate change satisfies a need for a certain sect of the population to feel like they matter. Religion used to do this. Global warming took its place. Psychology of liberals requires the sky to be falling in some way. Then they're told by their leaders they have to do certain things to correct the problem. The solutions are always just out of reach, but you can demonize the other side and feel great that you care and they don't. Basically marketing for morons. Yes, climate change has been politicized and as such its an issue used by politicians to either gain support or opposition to specific issues. My assessment is that climate change is happening. Its always been happening on the planet. The planet is a dynamic system. It is always changing. There are periods when the average temperature rises and periods when it falls. Both occurring when humans existing and when they did not exist. And CO2 levels does not explain all those variations. The core questions here are: 1) Do CO2 emissions and the concentration of the gas in the atmosphere impact the direction and magnitude of the change? 2) Is this the only factor causing the climate to "change" or are there other variables? My contention is the climate change crowd endorses the first but ignores the second. My questions to the "science" crowd would be: 1) What's the perfect temperature and conditions you are looking for? 2) What if we cut CO2 concentrations and nothing happens? 3) Do you believe we as the human race have the ability to determine what the climate of the Earth should be? 4) What about things you can't control? Like geological activity such as earthquakes and volcanoes? Variations in the Sun's energy output. Periodic perturbations in the Earth's orbit and tilt. Edited October 26, 2020 by All_Pro_Bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 When Rep. Kendra Horn (D-Okla.) heard Joe Biden say he would “transition from the oil industry” to combat climate change at the last presidential debate, she instantly felt troubled. “I definitely paused and had a reaction,” Horn recalled. “I disagreed with him.” Biden’s words struck a very different chord with climate activist Evan Weber. “I was very happy to see the vice president be honest and go on offense,” said the co-founder of the youth-led Sunrise Movement. For months, the Democratic presidential nominee has walked a careful line with policies and rhetoric calibrated to satisfy both sides of the long-simmering divisions in the Democratic Party over climate change, fossil fuels and how to talk about them in the campaign while seeking to head off attacks from Republicans. But in the last days of the race, that balancing act has been thrust into jeopardy, creating new challenges for Democrats up and down the ballot. “Trump, he’s obviously looking for something to try and hang his hat on at this point, said Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), whose district abuts the border with Pennsylvania, a region where fracking is a major issue. “That’s what makes it difficult.” The United States is already moving away from fossil fuels, and carbon emissions must go down by 7 percent each year by 2030 to avoid catastrophe, but President Trump and his allies seized on Biden’s comments throughout the weekend, portraying them as evidence that he is beholden to his party’s left wing and would eliminate many blue-collar jobs. Some moderate House Democrats in competitive districts where oil is an economic engine distanced themselves from the remarks. And liberals who championed a sweeping “Green New Deal” climate blueprint vowed to pressure Biden to go big on climate change if elected. The effect has been a muddying of the Democratic Party’s stance, forcing Biden and other candidates into a defensive posture with just over a week until Election Day. Climate change has been one of the most politically vexing issues of the Trump presidency for a Democratic Party that is powered by an energetic liberal base but reliant on suburban moderates in the oil-rich Sun Belt and bent on regaining lost ground with White, working-class voters in the Rust Belt, whose jobs are often connected to fossil fuels.https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-climate-change-democrats-division/2020/10/25/5a2e8da4-16c4-11eb-aeec-b93bcc29a01b_story.html 10 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Yes, climate change has been politicized and as such its an issue used by politicians to either gain support or opposition to specific issues. My assessment is that climate change is happening. Its always been happening on the planet. The planet is a dynamic system. It is always changing. There are periods when the average temperature rises and periods when it falls. Both occurring when humans existing and when they did not exist. And CO2 levels does not explain all those variations. The core questions here are: 1) Do CO2 emissions and the concentration of the gas in the atmosphere impact the direction and magnitude of the change? 2) Is this the only factor causing the climate to "change" or are there other variables? My contention is the climate change crowd endorses the first but ignores the second. My questions to the "science" crowd would be: 1) What's the perfect temperature and conditions you are looking for? 2) What if we cut CO2 concentrations and nothing happens? 3) Do you believe we as the human race have the ability to determine what the climate of the Earth should be? 4) What about things you can't control? Like geological activity such as earthquakes and volcanoes? Variations in the Sun's energy output. Periodic perturbations in the Earth's orbit and tilt. We are excellerating the changes in the environment, no doubt. Changes that occur regularly, like ice ages, do happen, bit since we evolved to live in this environment, we have a very deep financial interest in keep the climate as stead as possible. So to answer your questions, we want to keep the change as "Normal" as possible and not excellerate changes that hurt us. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 37 minutes ago, Tiberius said: We are excellerating the changes in the environment, no doubt. New word?? Making them better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 1 minute ago, Wacka said: New word?? Making them better? Typo, so what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 35 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Typo, so what? Tibs May I ask.....what have YOU personally done to reduce YOUR impact on the environment? Or is it like taxes and health care....it only works if OTHER PEOPLE do their fair share? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said: Tibs May I ask.....what have YOU personally done to reduce YOUR impact on the environment? Or is it like taxes and health care....it only works if OTHER PEOPLE do their fair share? Me? Why me? What really can I do? Government policy does so much more. I'm glad I can vote for people that will FORCE change on a big scale to save the planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 Tibs, that isn't a typo. It's a new word. Eccelerating is a typo. Your word id mot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Tim Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 On 10/26/2020 at 1:20 PM, Tiberius said: Me? Why me? What really can I do? Government policy does so much more. I'm glad I can vote for people that will FORCE change on a big scale to save the planet. This is the exact response I expect from Liberals when questioned on why they do not show us the way things should be done. Liberals understand that they need conservative people to do the heavy lifting for any of their ideas to work properly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 On 10/26/2020 at 10:20 AM, Tiberius said: Me? Why me? What really can I do? Government policy does so much more. I'm glad I can vote for people that will FORCE change on a big scale to save the planet. Yikes! This is an internet chat room, and you couldn't even come up with a few lies about what you've been you've personally done? That tells me you've done NOTHING. And assuming that's the case....then STFU! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBBills Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 Looks like Trump was wrong and lying to everyone again .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts