Poppycock.
That's what that all is.
Poppycock.
That's what that all is.
Poppycock.
Climate change
- Thread starter Mafesto
- Start date
C'mon man!
Nobody reads it if you post ONE link.
What makes you think that we'll read 17 of them?
Hey, at least there's a video this time.
I believe I stated I knew it was wishful thinking. Don't worry, it was pretty low effort on my part.
Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
That statement sums up a lot. Basically if people don't believe what you post they are evil or just here to retaliate. Difference between retaliate and difference of opinion.
S
https://www.naturalnews.com/055151_global_warming_science_hoax_climate_skepticism.html
PS. I read it !! LOL.
PS. I read it !! LOL.
Watch this one, it will help to under stand why most of your links are junk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSVkSCN_hLQ
I'm sorry you think so, but it definitely doesn't do that.
The link exists, whether you acknowledge it or not. The majority of people around the world acknowledge it, and I guess that will have to be good enough.
Every statement in the videos and links posted is refuted in one or more of the actual papers I've posted. Read them, and if you don't understand them, think of the expertise you have at your job.
These people are proficient at their jobs, and most are decent people, just like most people everywhere. They know what they are doing better than armchair pundits.
Yes, there will be some outliers, that's great. Doesn't make those outliers correct, but I'm glad they exist.
Anyway, believe what you want, I've done more than I intended to do countering a self admitted troll. (That one's not you, that one is mafesto)
Last edited:
You are a true libtard, it doesn’t fit your molded /wrapped viewpoint so it isn’t true. When the contrary is actually the truth. Just because the libtards are sadly the majority these days, does not make you right. No matter how many busssh!t links you post to try to justify your position. The facts are you like the brainwashed senators in the video, would rather believe doctored data and bullsh!t over true data and fact. Libtard on! May you someday make the Darwin Awards among with the rest of your brainwashed idiotic clan.
None of that means anything because it's not supported by a link.
The only relevant “link” here is Libtards are descendants of monkeys but forgot to think for themselves. They sadly are but lemmings following each other blindly. May fate treat them accordingly.
I did not say your links do exist, the data they are based on has been doctored or adjusted as NOAA puts it. The global warming scare is about money and power. when I was a kid it was about global cooling.
We tied a record low temp with -13 for March yesterday in MN. That record was last set in 1873. Imagine that, a climate cycle of weather has repeated itself. It must of been all traffic and industrial pollution back then too. Bring on more EPA regulations please!!!
We are a lot colder than that here.
S
Just another climate , world is gonna end , sheep. Standing around bleating , waiting to be sheared.
S
confused puppy in a supermod cape.
I don't completely buy into the fear tactics or data of Climate change/Global warming. In much the same way I don't buy into the fear tactics of the Right/DJT regarding the southern border, Islam, etc.
The thing I think Idcatman is trying to get across is READ for yourself & then make a decision. When you base your opinions on what the pundits say, or on what you can only observe in your small sphere, surrounded by echo-chambers of right wing radio (or left wing, or whatever) you're missing the bigger picture.
The label of "Libtard" is completely asinine. If nothing else, read and study your opposition so you can better oppose them. You want to understand whats wrong with socialism & why its so evil? Read Karl Marx. You want to shoot holes in Evolution? Read Darwin.
You talk about Lemmings, sheep, whatever. First off, Lemmings don't actually run off cliffs en masse. Which I learned from reading. What Shepherd(s) are you following blindly? Do you think for yourself or do you follow the fictitious right wing lemming?
The thing I think Idcatman is trying to get across is READ for yourself & then make a decision. When you base your opinions on what the pundits say, or on what you can only observe in your small sphere, surrounded by echo-chambers of right wing radio (or left wing, or whatever) you're missing the bigger picture.
The label of "Libtard" is completely asinine. If nothing else, read and study your opposition so you can better oppose them. You want to understand whats wrong with socialism & why its so evil? Read Karl Marx. You want to shoot holes in Evolution? Read Darwin.
You talk about Lemmings, sheep, whatever. First off, Lemmings don't actually run off cliffs en masse. Which I learned from reading. What Shepherd(s) are you following blindly? Do you think for yourself or do you follow the fictitious right wing lemming?
Last edited:
S
More condescending academic snobbery ! If it’s written down it’s true ??? How naive ! The written word is truth , because the motives of the writer are somehow deemed to be fact , but the spoken word , no matter who speaks it , is false ? That’s asinine. And to compare the issues of communism and evolution to global warming , global cooling , climate change or whatever , is just silly .
Published papers have a peer review process. YouTube does not.
Print journalism has professional standards that they are supposed to meet. (They don't always succeed, but usually the ones that don't are sanctioned.)
YouTube does not.
Intellectual investigation of any topic is relevant, to not understand that is part of the problem.
Do any of you ever investigate WHY you think what you think about things? Do you know how your brain constructs arguments and why we are all drawn to fallacious arguments? This stuff is actually really interesting, and illustrative of part of the reasons we get stuck in these arguments.
But let me guess, that's just more "academic snobbery" like education is worthless. Guess who tells you that? People that have an interest in keeping you uneducated.
The principle is called "Cui bono" and you should use it whenever you question the motives. Who benefits from you thinking how you do?
Big fossil fuel corporations? The general public?
These questions matter, but you guys are so stuck on "owning libtards" that you can't be bothered to ask.
Not trying to compare the issues. I'm just saying if you really want to be able to understand any issue, read what the professionals in that field say about it. You kind of missed the point. I'm certainly not saying if something is written down, it must be true. But if it's written down, you CAN see what their logic is & where it may be lacking. Why I only read things like the SOTU address instead of just trust the radio or pundit interpertations of it, (not to mention save the time of actually listening to the absurd pageantry of it live).
Last edited:
S
Cui bono is a definition and it seems to me pretty much most of the people you’re debating with are way ahead of you on that point. You could call it a lot of things like “suspicious minds” or “conspiracy theorists” and many other descriptive terms. But you are correct, “cui bono sounds more scholarly.
Similar threads
