The 2017 General Political discussion thread, Part 2!

[KLB]

Ok, so I used a throw away that I shouldn't have. The 97% to 99% was the main point anyway.

But it as usual if someone can find a weakness somewhere they'll go to any length to use it. This time someone wanted to inject gender into a discussion about climate change. Weak

I don't think your 97-99% is accurate either. I think that the percentage is based upon articles published. That is a vastly different thing.

 

[KJQ6945]

I wonder if it comes with lots of electrolytes?

Brawndo is what plants crave.

 

[KJQ6945]

Ok, so I used a throw away that I shouldn't have. The 97% to 99% was the main point anyway.

But it as usual if someone can find a weakness somewhere they'll go to any length to use it. This time someone wanted to inject gender into a discussion about climate change. Weak

If everybody else in the room gets it, ............... never mind.

 

[Dddrees]

I don't think your 97-99% is accurate either. I think that the percentage is based upon articles published. That is a vastly different thing.

Wow!! We have someone here who didn't use gender as part of their argument when it comes to climate change.

 

[jagee]

Wow!! We have someone here who didn't use gender as part of their argument when it comes to climate change.

 

[Dddrees]

If everybody else in the room gets it, ............... never mind.

You could say the same about climate change. You keep opening the doors and eventually you'll find a room of folks that will agree with you.

 

[KJQ6945]

Wow!! We have someone here who didn't use gender as part of their argument when it comes to climate change.

And still, you don't address his issue. Do you play dodgeball professionally, or just as a hobby?

 

[jagee]

And still, you don't address his issue. Do you play dodgeball professionally, or just as a hobby?

If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball!

 

[Dddrees]

And still, you don't address his issue. Do you play dodgeball professionally, or just as a hobby?

Drop him already. He was a throw away.


Or would you like me to find another scientist that has a flaw that has nothing to do with the subject at hand so you can discredit him as well?

 

[indiucky]

Wow!! We have someone here who didn't use gender as part of their argument when it comes to climate change.

I don't know why you are so fixated on gender...Just be who you are....Of course I wouldn't quote Bill Nye on climate science because he thinks gender is fluid...Not very scientific but what do you expect from an engineer rather than a scientist??? LOL...I mean am I right???? LOL...Whooo HOOO I am LITERALLY LOL at someone quoting Bill Nye as a "scientist"....Wait...Hold on...I am LOL'ing so much that I am now down on the floor clutching my stomach...LOL....LOL....


LOL!!!!!!


LOL!!!!!

 

[Birds Away]

He reacts without thinking about any of the consequences and he does it all the time. Many have tried to excuse this as something else, but time and time again it's proven to be nothing more than Trump reacting without thinking.

I don't know what you call that?

You have a habit of using words like "fact" and "proven" when you are actually discussing your opinion. You're very obviously entitled to that opinion and you are also free to attempt to sway others to agree with your opinion. But, the words fact and opinion are not interchangeable regardless of how often or how vociferously you proclaim your opinion as fact.

 

[bwframe]

I think this is fairly close to my thinking. Human nature can be overcome through knowledge and will--okay, and brainwashing. We learn to control our nature as children, if we have descent parents who've learned to control their natures. But as far as fundamentally changing our nature, that process takes millions of years.

I'm not a climate change denier, but I'm not a climate change believer either. I'm more of a climate change skeptic. I'm not saying the climate isn't changing, and I'm not saying whatever climate change there is isn't due to human activity. I have many reasons to strongly suspect that the alarmists are full of ****. We're asked to believe what a few people tell us the experts are telling us. And they do it in a way which seems like it is very dogmatic, pretty much like a religion. And, they're behaving like they're trying to hide something. So it is very natural for skeptical people to wonder if they're hiding something to protect the gods of climate.

I see the public global warming argument as a bunch of ideologically minded people arguing about a topic that really, very VERY few people participating are actual climate scientists. The people calling people "climate change deniers" have no more clue about "science" than the people they're mocking. They just want to feel like they're on the morally correct side, their tribe, and so when these people throw about terms like "science deniers", I think they're just virtue signaling for their tribe.

So about the climate, people should calm the **** down. The truth is most certainly in the middle somewhere and if we could decide the truth is a more important virtue than our tribe's virtue, we'd stand a better chance of finding it, and it would be much easier for people to believe it.

Who pays these "climate scientists?" Why would they report anything other than career advancing information?

 

[indiucky]

[video=youtube;8Q4rgILy06k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q4rgILy06k[/video]


[video=youtube;YKGwxGrdCjg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKGwxGrdCjg[/video]

 

[KJQ6945]

Drop him already. He was a throw away.


Or would you like me to find another scientist that has a flaw that has nothing to do with the subject at hand so you can discredit him as well?

Hell, just find a real scientist, in stead of a kids show host, and we'll go from there.

 

[Birds Away]

Drop him already. He was a throw away.


Or would you like me to find another scientist that has a flaw that has nothing to do with the subject at hand so you can discredit him as well?

You haven't mentioned a scientist yet. You did bring up a mechanical engineer although I'm still not sure why.

 

[jamil]

'What was that number? Wasn't it something like 97% or even as high as 98% or 99% of scientist believe green house gasses which were emitted by human beings heavily influenced this climate change? Besides those overwhelming numbers Bill Nye the science guy agrees. So if you have a problem believing the overwhelming numbers and numerous studies then you really can't deny because after all Bill Nye the science guy super nerd knows what he's talking about.

If you're going to make the "97% of climate scientists..." claim, please provide the information that would give credibility to the statement. So, it's reasonable to ask exactly who comprises the 97%, what are their actual credentials (were they actually climate scientists?), exactly what do they agree on, and how did the claimers connect the dots to get 97%?

 

[jamil]

'What was that number? Wasn't it something like 97% or even as high as 98% or 99% of scientist believe green house gasses which were emitted by human beings heavily influenced this climate change? Besides those overwhelming numbers Bill Nye the science guy agrees. So if you have a problem believing the overwhelming numbers and numerous studies then you really can't deny because after all Bill Nye the science guy super nerd knows what he's talking about.

It's fine to appeal to experts when you don't know. But Bill Nye? I know you've already conceded that point, but really?

 

[indiucky]

You have a habit of using words like "fact" and "proven" when you are actually discussing your opinion. You're very obviously entitled to that opinion and you are also free to attempt to sway others to agree with your opinion. But, the words fact and opinion are not interchangeable regardless of how often or how vociferously you proclaim your opinion as fact.

I miss mrjarrel and I am so glad we got Dddrees to fill his shoes...It's beautiful man...I remember mrjarrel would use "sigh" the way Dddrees uses "lol"...Good times...Good times....

 

[Birds Away]

'What was that number? Wasn't it something like 97% or even as high as 98% or 99% of scientist believe green house gasses which were emitted by human beings heavily influenced this climate change? Besides those overwhelming numbers Bill Nye the science guy agrees. So if you have a problem believing the overwhelming numbers and numerous studies then you really can't deny because after all Bill Nye the science guy super nerd knows what he's talking about.

I nominate this for the INGO Hall of Fame. It has to be one of the funniest posts I have ever seen on this forum.

 

[jagee]

If you're going to make the "97% of climate scientists..." claim, please provide the information that would give credibility to the statement. So, it's reasonable to ask exactly who comprises the 97%, what are their actual credentials (were they actually climate scientists?), exactly what do they agree on, and how did the claimers connect the dots to get 97%?

76% of statistics are made up.