DC Tom Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Are you of the opinion that I'm not? He's also of the opinion that I'm not a scientist, the Fed is part of the government, and he's an intellectual. I wouldn't take his statement too seriously. Frankly, given historical patterns, his questioning whether or not you're a Christian is a pretty sure indicator that you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 He's also of the opinion that I'm not a scientist, the Fed is part of the government, and he's an intellectual. I wouldn't take his statement too seriously. Frankly, given historical patterns, his questioning whether or not you're a Christian is a pretty sure indicator that you are. Well, you kind of stole the thunder of the point I was leading up to...but thanks for saving us all the trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Well, you kind of stole the thunder of the point I was leading up to...but thanks for saving us all the trouble. Sorry. I've just seen you get into the "What is a real Christian?" argument with too many mouth-breathers in the past, and thought this was just another "Oh, no, not again" instance. Didn't realize you were going for a whole new highlighting of his idiocy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Australia turns a cold eye to climate change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 A Friendly Reminder Remember: these are the same people who say that we know everything we need to know about climate change and how to fix it, and if you disagree you’re an immoral person and should shut up or be prosecuted and jailed: June 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Sorry. I've just seen you get into the "What is a real Christian?" argument with too many mouth-breathers in the past, and thought this was just another "Oh, no, not again" instance. Didn't realize you were going for a whole new highlighting of his idiocy. The difference is that gatorman isn't smart enough to have that conversation. What he does is wait for someone to make a comment about themselves, and then spend the next few weeks weaving it into one of his already incoherent comments. So, when I mentioned I studied journalism in college, he later tried to explain how I couldn't possibly be a journalist because I lied when stating that he was laughing at what happened in Benghazi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Is that right? Well I am recycling opinions from real scientists and I could care less what a moron like you has to say at all. Especially one that is suppose to be ignoring me So you admit that the scientist are giving opinions. You do know there is a difference between opinion and fact right. Man made global warming is real. Ha! Now eat sh it Well there it is. Very Wide Right you can close this thread now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Is that right? Well I am recycling opinions from real scientists and I could care less what a moron like you has to say at all. Especially one that is suppose to be ignoring me Why do you think I should be ignoring you? Every time you respond to me, you make me laugh. It's a net gain for me every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 (edited) http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/268843-supreme-court-blocks-obamas-climate-rule-for-power-plants The Supreme Court has blocked President Obama's landmark climate rule for power plants, dealing a major blow to the president's climate agenda. In an order released Tuesday night, the court said it is placing a stay on the Environmental Protection Agency's plan to cut carbon pollution from power plants while industry and state lawsuits move forward. The court granted the request in a 5-4 vote on Tuesday night, saying the rule was on hold until the circuit court reviews it and Supreme Court appeals are exhausted. The court’s four liberal justices dissented from the decision. The rule — the Clean Power Plan — is the main plank of Obama's climate change agenda. It’s designed to cut carbon pollution from the electricity sector by 32 percent over 2005 levels by 2030 by assigning states individual reduction targets based on their energy mix. White House press secretary Josh Earnest said in a statement that the administration disagrees with the order, but “we remain confident that we will prevail” when the rule is argued on its merits. A senior administration official downplayed the decision, calling it “a temporary procedural determination that does nothing to affect first our confidence in the legal soundness of this rule.” Another official said the White House is “very surprised” by the decision, but has “complete confidence that the rule is lawful.” The stay means Obama will likely leave office with the fate of his premier climate policy undecided. The circuit court plans to hear arguments on the rule in June, meaning the Supreme Court probably won’t get a chance to hear or rule on the regulation until after Obama’s term ends next January. It also elevates the Clean Power Plan’s status as a major issue in the presidential election Edited February 10, 2016 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Supreme Court halts Obama carbon emissions rule by Victor Morton Original Article DEVELOPING: In another blow to the Obama administration’s regulatory agenda, the U.S. Supreme Court halted the EPA’s regulations limiting carbon emissions. The justices ordered all enforcement of the sweeping plan to limit fossil-fuel use for the sake of climate change until all legal disputes have been decided. The case had been brought by 27 states and industry opponents that denounced the EPA’s regulations as “an unprecedented power grab.” The Supreme Court action likely ends the regulations’ possibilities of taking effect before the Obama administration leaves office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Why do you think I should be ignoring you? Every time you respond to me, you make me laugh. It's a net gain for me every time. I thought you said you were. Tell us again how global warming is a religion. I apologize if I laughed that off the first time it was mentioned. I really am interested in that Supreme Court halts Obama carbon emissions rule by Victor Morton Original Article DEVELOPING: In another blow to the Obama administration’s regulatory agenda, the U.S. Supreme Court halted the EPA’s regulations limiting carbon emissions. The justices ordered all enforcement of the sweeping plan to limit fossil-fuel use for the sake of climate change until all legal disputes have been decided. The case had been brought by 27 states and industry opponents that denounced the EPA’s regulations as “an unprecedented power grab.” The Supreme Court action likely ends the regulations’ possibilities of taking effect before the Obama administration leaves office. Alright!! More pollution! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 I thought you said you were. Tell us again how global warming is a religion. I apologize if I laughed that off the first time it was mentioned. I really am interested in that Alright!! More pollution! Alright! Less power-grabbing executive orders designed to further a cause that only money-laundering SoProgs believe the government can fix! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 More jobs for the poor people in West Virginia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 More jobs for the poor people in West Virginia. Doubt it. Natural gas is putting coal out of business. If you have been to WV you'd know about the propaganda war big coal is waging against fracking. It's pretty funny actually. Suddenly the coal operators are arguing that fracking is bad for the environment. It's almost like DCTom moved there with a budget to obfuscate on a mass scale. Pretty interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Tell us again how global warming is a religion. I apologize if I laughed that off the first time it was mentioned. I really am interested in that I didn't say that. Nobody did. Here's what was said - try to pay attention: Your opinion isn't based on science. It's based on religious doctrine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 I didn't say that. Nobody did. Here's what was said - try to pay attention: And religious doctrine in global warming refers to what? Anybody? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 The WaPo and 'reporter' @ChrisCMooney have entirely obliterated the line between reporting and personal commentary. https://twitter.com/postgreen/status/697442473916833792 … The Supreme Court could block Obama's climate plans - but it can't stop clean energy http://wpo.st/qpSA1 and there is this. Climate Dispatch@ccdeditor 1h1 hour ago Warmist Romm fumes: 'Will John Roberts Destroy His Reputation And A Livable Climate At The Same Time?' http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/02/09/warmist-joe-romm-fumes-will-john-roberts-destroy-his-reputation-and-a-livable-climate-at-the-same-time/ … Well..........why wouldn't they write it ?..Bullying John Roberts has certainly worked in the past Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 REALLY, IS THERE NOTHING IT CAN’T DO? Climate Change Causes Cats. Breaking news from the Sydney Morning Herald: http://jfbeck.net/2016/02/09/kitty-plague/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts