This idiot really is pretending to base his views on global warming on what @davidallen drives.
I don't want you hear another word about Gundy until you personally do something about it.
Boy the trees budding out sure are pretty.
- Thread starter anon_xl72qcu5isp39
- Start date
I don't want you hear another word about Gundy until you personally do something about it.
It is actually hypocrisy to want the government to fill in potholes unless you have also dedicated your life to filling potholes.
It is hypocrisy to advocate for Trump's wall unless you have exhausted your personal fortune building the first segment of the wall.
You really are a simpleton I didn't say anything about specifics. I just said do something. He doesn't, nobody here does, Gore doesn't. You just want somebody to hear you bitch. Just like a woman.
You are unencumbered by testosterone
You are unencumbered by testosterone
If someone wants to get preachy about global cooling/warming/climate change, they should be a leader by doing what they are preaching, no? Isn't that what good leaders do? Al Gore made a point to let folks know that he flew to his speaking engagements via commercial carriers. He never mentioned that he always left town on a private jet that transported just him and his aide. I wonder why he was public about one part of his travel and not the other?
Pilt it's an impending global catastrophe not a pothole. Even if I thought hundreds of terrorists a month were coming across the border it does no compare to is being in museums next to dinosaurs in a few million years.
I notice you haven't attacked my argument about obama and pelosi flying unnecessarily. You don't see anything the least bit suspicious about the Copenhagen airport being full of private jets and the town running out of limos at the climate change conference? Nothing?
I notice you haven't attacked my argument about obama and pelosi flying unnecessarily. You don't see anything the least bit suspicious about the Copenhagen airport being full of private jets and the town running out of limos at the climate change conference? Nothing?
Are potholes or Gundy threatening the future of life as we know it TM ?
This idiot really is pretending to base his views on global warming on what @davidallen drives and what Al Gore does.
This is hilarious coming from you.
Seems unwise to base your opinion on a topic that threatens to put the human race next to dinosaurs on the behavior of Obama and Pelosi.
It only counts as hypocrisy if it is an existential threat. In fact, counter-intuitively, collective action problems that threaten life as we know it are the only ones that we aren't allowed to do anything about unless everyone who has ever mentioned has their shit completely in order.
The existence of a climate fact is not contingent on whether a guy in Oregon drives a prius, or whether he's for or against it. You know that, too. You pretending it does shows your lack of intellectual honesty.
I see you're back. Care to tell us what level of proof would satisfy you? If the evidence isn't good enough now, what would be?
You don't get basic shit. You prove it every day.
You have the worst case of unintentional irony since sys. It's becoming a pandemic among libs.
I will as soon as you tell me how much evidence of NON-science in the name of "doing something" and shutting down debate, doctoring of results to promote the agenda, years of climate models being way wrong (always in the same direction) will it take for you to acknowledge that those trying to drive the agenda really have no idea what they are talking about in terms of the future, have no idea what they are doing in terms of actually trying to fix the alleged problem and that they don't even really care for the most part.
There are plenty of world-class scientists in atmospheric fields who are skeptical of some/several/many aspects of the AGW global warming thesis.
There is quite a bit of circumstantial evidence (e.g. in ice cores) that warming of the planet produces (or at least did in the past) an increase in carbon dioxide, rather than the other way around.
I have never, at any time, stated that there hasn't been any global warming, in any specific timeframe. The reporting that 2016 was "the hottest year ever" was just silly n the face of it. And the methodology they used in creating that measurement and conclusion is incredibly flawed, shot full of holes, and the data was and has been doctored.
Likewise, the idea that global temperatures have moved inexorably and methodically upward is also wrong and silly. There is no evidence to support the idea extreme that weather events are becoming more common.
Have you every actually fought a pandemic? Truly worked to prevent one? That's what i thought -- there's no such thing as a pandemic.
You're sounding more and more like a mad tea partier. If I hear you're waving a "Keep govornment out of my medicare" sign we're having an intervention.
Your "answer" is not an answer and there's no way to prove or disprove what you wrote if I took days. What would it take to convince you? You seem to pretty on top of it. I get that every data model is wrong, incompetent, fraudulent, etc. and all those scientists are liars or just not smart enough to satisfy you. What data would you look at? And who would have to develop it? More ice cores? So the ice core/carbon deal has some merit to you?
You do realize the skeptics' arguments are the same employed against tobacco and the ozone issue in the 80's and 90's?
I have a major case of the using using language that normally signifies the opposite, but not for effect.
I also specialize in accidental sarcasm.
I believe I explicitly said I wasn't going to answer you.
You do realize that many of those now promoting AGW global warming were pushing the next ice age about 10-15 years before they started pushing catastrophic global warming?
You do realize that the same tactics being attempted here were used to promote governmental nutritional standards that have played a significant role in promoting obesity and diabetes in the general population.
The preponderance of the evidence suggests to me that it is, in fact, not an existential threat, if any threat at all. And on top of that, if it were, the steps that have been proposed to eradicate it would have no statistically relevant impact for many decades (at least).
Oh, I know. I knew your answer the second I typed the question. I also know the real answer: When you're convinced it won't negatively affect your financial statement, the science will start to make more sense.
Your true medium is hysterical concern.
You care more about telling the same twenty people how they should care rather than doing anything.
You care more about telling the same twenty people how they should care rather than doing anything.
Man with no understanding of politics presumes to know about what I do.
I mean what good could come out of convincing twenty people of something?
If you did anything you would've cranked off the list. Or one thing. You didn't because you don't.
Texas is deregulated so it is simple as picking the right electricity provider. I use Green Mountain.
