Anti-Trump Hysteria and Silliness

[ShowSomePride]

Same scientists that predict doom and gloom that hasn't exactly panned out yet?

If you would like to provide some peer reviewed articles on these I'd be happy to read it. Again, you aren't talking about actual scientists.

Look, I get it, there are loud fundamentalists on the issue just like climate change deniers on the other end of the spectrum. But if you look at the link I provided they looked at over 4000 relevant papers on the issue when determining consensus.

 

[Grand Vol]

If you would like to provide some peer reviewed articles on these I'd be happy to read it. Again, you aren't talking about actual scientists.

Look, I get it, there are loud fundamentalists on the issue just like climate change deniers on the other end of the spectrum. But if you look at the link I provided they looked at over 4000 relevant papers on the issue when determining consensus.

I saw your link and perused it. Same links Bart used to toss in the other thread.

Now, I will give you the climate is changing. Mankind very likely has a part in that. But the most important question to ask yourself...

How much of an impact is mankind purely responsible for?

Which brings the next important question... Is climate change a naturally occurring cycle of events in Earth's history that would happen regardless of man?

Two pretty important questions to ask. And just more food for thought. Who stands to gain from the scientists that clamor on about climate change? And don't tell me scientists are just looking out for the planet. They have budgets, grants and funds to watch over as well.

 

[Burger]

I saw your link and perused it. Same links Bart used to toss in the other thread.

Now, I will give you the climate is changing. Mankind very likely has a part in that. But the most important question to ask yourself...

How much of an impact is mankind purely responsible for?

Which brings the next important question... Is climate change a naturally occurring cycle of events in Earth's history that would happen regardless of man?

Two pretty important questions to ask. And just more food for thought. Who stands to gain from the scientists that clamor on about climate change? And don't tell me scientists are just looking out for the planet. They have budgets, grants and funds to watch over as well.

Your last paragraph is why natural climate change isn't researched.

 

[Carl Pickens]

Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge says this is one of the biggest headlines out of the hearing today with the FBI director, pointing out that the FBI had found an email was obtained by Russian hackers that indicated that former DOJ hack Loretta Lynch would do everything she could to protect Hillary from prosecution:

http://therightscoop.com/revealed-f...uld-to-protect-hillary-from-criminal-charges/

Where's Volpuss on this issue? Where's the unstable poonery?

 

[Carl Pickens]

Your condescension of Velo, a man who runs laps around you in terms of objective analysis, is duly noted.

When Donny falls flat on his head, as is inevitable, you will be held to account.

#hisballsonyourchin

 

[Grand Vol]

Your last paragraph is why natural climate change isn't researched.

I'm doing my part to help combat global warming this evening. I'm having a burger and an all beef hot dog for supper.

It's environmentally friendly because the wheat used to make the buns must be replanted and allowed to grow. And during that growth cycle will scrub CO2 from the atmosphere until it reaches maturity and is harvested. Thus, they cycle begins again. And the cows are not releasing methane any longer, so that's a plus.

And it's being cooked over environmentally friendly natural gas. I'm really helping the environment tonight.

 

[1972 Grad]

I'm doing my part to help combat global warming this evening. I'm having a burger and an all beef hot dog for supper.

It's environmentally friendly because the wheat used to make the buns must be replanted and allowed to grow. And during that growth cycle will scrub CO2 from the atmosphere until it reaches maturity and is harvested. Thus, they cycle begins again. And the cows are not releasing methane any longer, so that's a plus.

And it's being cooked over environmentally friendly natural gas. I'm really helping the environment tonight.

That brings a tear to my eye, knowing that you put the environment first.

 

[DancingOutlaw]

It's a 3 year appointment. There must be a reason they chose 3 years. Lots of professional boards have term limits. After it's up you're out. No conspiracy, no politics. Politics is assuming a 3 year appointment is a lifetime appointment served three years at a time. CNN made it sound as if Trump removed scientists from a board and replaced them with wrestlers or moonshiners.

 

[luthervol]

So, it's a lifetime appointment then? Because if said scientists continue to get appointed until they:

A: Die
B: Move on

That makes them? Lifetime appointments if they want it. And that's what's wrong with the Federal Government today.



Would you stop trying to divert this away from the fact the headline is a lie, your post contained misconstruing language and you got called out on it?

New Admin, new choices, get over it.

We seem to be caught in one of those never ending continuous loops. You say you called me out on a misleading article. I say I provided an article that shows Trump's expected attack on the EPA coming to life.

 

[luthervol]

That brings a tear to my eye, knowing that you put the environment first.

Careful, you guys risk suffering the same fate as the Grinch.

 

[DancingOutlaw]

We seem to be caught in one of those never ending continuous loops. You say you called me out on a misleading article. I say I provided an article that shows Trump's expected attack on the EPA coming to life.

How is replacing expired board members an attack? Board is 30 years old, you think it's all charter members still?

 

[Grand Vol]

We seem to be caught in one of those never ending continuous loops. You say you called me out on a misleading article. I say I provided an article that shows Trump's expected attack on the EPA coming to life.

News flash. Most of the rest of us figured this out when he nominated Scott Pruitt.

Welcome to January 2017. A lot has changed in your absence.

 

[PKT_VOL]

#Winning

White House advisors called Ottawa to urge Trudeau to help talk Trump down from scrapping NAFTA

Embarrassing to say the least.

Why would multiple Canadian government sources make that up?

Agreed. Throw in his personality, it's easily believable.

 

[ShowSomePride]

I saw your link and perused it. Same links Bart used to toss in the other thread.

Now, I will give you the climate is changing. Mankind very likely has a part in that. But the most important question to ask yourself...

How much of an impact is mankind purely responsible for?

Which brings the next important question... Is climate change a naturally occurring cycle of events in Earth's history that would happen regardless of man?

Two pretty important questions to ask. And just more food for thought. Who stands to gain from the scientists that clamor on about climate change? And don't tell me scientists are just looking out for the planet. They have budgets, grants and funds to watch over as well.

I'm sorry, but no. Do you think researchers who spend their careers/lives invested in this have not posed questions like those to set the framework for their research? Both of those questions you have pointed out have been addressed many a time in published literature.

 

[Burger]

I'm sorry, but no. Do you think researchers who spend their careers/lives invested in this have not posed questions like those to set the framework for their research? Both of those questions you have pointed out have been addressed many a time in published literature.

Scientist are paid off just like everyone else.

 

[volprof]

#hisballsonyourchin

You seem to have a lot of pinned up homoerotic energy.

If you're not wanting to beat up someone one second, you're wanting them anally probed the next.

If that isn't enough, you're wanting to discuss penises.

I think you need to sort that out. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but something you need to sort out.

That and your love of treason, the only thing you could possibly love more than a big ole' penis.

 

[Burger]

You seem to have a lot of pinned up homoerotic energy.

If you're not wanting to beat up someone one second, you're wanting them anally probed the next.

If that isn't enough, you're wanting to discuss penises.

I think you need to sort that out. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but something you need to sort out.

That and your love of treason, the only thing you could possibly love more than a big ole' penis.

I just looked up the definition of Nihilism again. And wow, it's dead on for me. I mean, since Kennedy got shot, this nation has been destroying itself.

 

[1972 Grad]

You seem to have a lot of pinned up homoerotic energy.

If you're not wanting to beat up someone one second, you're wanting them anally probed the next.

If that isn't enough, you're wanting to discuss penises.

I think you need to sort that out. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but something you need to sort out.

That and your love of treason, the only thing you could possibly love more than a big ole' penis.

pent up

 

[volprof]

I just looked up the definition of Nihilism again. And wow, it's dead on for me. I mean, since Kennedy got shot, this nation has been destroying itself.

Jesus.

 

[UT_Dutchman]

I would advocate for a panel of the leading scientists in the field, which in no way is what Pruitt is trying to do. If all of the leading scientists have reached the same conclusions, maybe that should tell you something. If all of the leading scientists have not reached the same conclusion, a representative mixture is what you're looking to get. Pruitt is going to select oil/gas friendly "scientist". Kind of like Marlboro trotting out the doctor that said smoking is not linked to cancer.

By the same token the earth warming crowd will trot out the scientists who agree with them. A lot of these scientists don't want to see their funding dry up and that could very well happen if earth warming is debunked.

 

[AirVol]

Jesus.

Since Jesus?

 

[luthervol]

News flash. Most of the rest of us figured this out when he nominated Scott Pruitt.

Welcome to January 2017. A lot has changed in your absence.

News flash....many of us knew the second the election was called for Trump. There is nothing to the story other than confirmation of what most all knew; Trump prioritizes the environment below big money and big business. He will deny the consensus of the scientific community as he is reluctantly dragged along kicking and screaming. (much like some on this board)

Every argument and debate surrounding this issue can be overlaid on the tobacco industry/cancer debate. Like it or not, Trump and his crew look like the soulless idiots of the 50's and 60's railing against the link between smoking and cancer. When cigarette adds were banned from TV you would have thought the federal government was some communist loving free market hating dictatorship if you listened to the right. Science is less scary and painful if you'll just embrace it.

 

[Grand Vol]

News flash....many of us knew the second the election was called for Trump. There is nothing to the story other than confirmation of what most all knew; Trump prioritizes the environment below big money and big business. He will deny the consensus of the scientific community as he is reluctantly dragged along kicking and screaming. (much like some on this board)

Every argument and debate surrounding this issue can be overlaid on the tobacco industry/cancer debate. Like it or not, Trump and his crew look like the soulless idiots of the 50's and 60's railing against the link between smoking and cancer. When cigarette adds were banned from TV you would have thought the federal government was some communist loving free market hating dictatorship if you listened to the right. Science is less scary and painful if you'll just embrace it.

Oh, brother. Another one of the leftists that argue that since I'm conservative, I have a hatred for science.

What an ignorant stereotype. What's next? You going to call me racist?

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Oh, brother. Another one of the leftists that argue that since I'm conservative, I have a hatred for science.

What an ignorant stereotype. What's next? You going to call me racist?

What? He didn't called you a racist in his first post?

 

[luthervol]

Oh, brother. Another one of the leftists that argue that since I'm conservative, I have a hatred for science.

What an ignorant stereotype. What's next? You going to call me racist?

All conservatives hate science to the exact same degree as all liberals are tree huggers.

The funny thing about stereotypes is that they always have their roots in some degree of truth.