User Controls
Repurcussions If The Republicans Acquit Trump Without Witnesses And Documents
-
2020-02-01 at 6:15 PM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker I am sure you can. I don't need a study to determine facts and fictions printed by the media. Tell me what you think real news sources are and we can proceed from there.
This is a circular conversation. I already provided multiple reputable sources showing that I’m right and you’re wrong, then you posted 1 extremely dubious source (with an obvious political agenda to spread misinformation) saying the opposite, then when I asked for more of these “dozens” of other studies you supposedly read, you told me to “google it”. And now you ask me what I think a real source is, bringing us right back to square one. I’ve already shown you a real source.
And by the way not once did I say anything about the media, but you’ve brought it up multiple times now. I’ve only been referring to peer-reviewed scientific studies, not the media organizations that report on those studies. I don’t even watch the news lmao. You realize they’re ALL biased one way or another right.
This is not even a political issue, but politicians want to make it political because they answer to corporate interests that have a stake in the matter. You mentioned how a lot of politicians on the left are biased because they invest in renewable energy, well who the fuck do you think has a vested interest in the oil companies? Again, they’re ALL biased, that’s why I’m not discussing politics with you, because that would only serve to obfuscate the FACT of man-made climate change.
Feckin boomersThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-02-01 at 6:20 PM UTC
-
2020-02-01 at 6:29 PM UTCI'm with Fox, cause I trust Rattox cucks 4 Mal
-
2020-02-01 at 6:44 PM UTC
-
2020-02-01 at 6:48 PM UTC
Originally posted by Fox https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
consensuses are nothing but group think.
group thinks arent necessarily facts. -
2020-02-01 at 7:25 PM UTC
-
2020-02-01 at 7:56 PM UTC
Originally posted by stl1 Will there be a price for the Republicans if they vote today to acquit Trump without hearing any witnesses or seeing any documents? Polls show 2/3 to 3/4 of people want witnesses and documents.
I think that people might vote for a clean sweep for Democrats of both Houses of Congress as well as the Presidency because of the games being played by the Republicans and their "Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak Only Obfuscation" act.
NOPE, we are laughing all the way to the BANK!! -
2020-02-01 at 11:57 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny consensuses are nothing but group think.
group thinks arent necessarily facts.
No it’s actually the opposite of groupthink. Each scientific study is done independently of one another and reviewed by peers. After enough individual studies show the same result, that’s what we call consensus. The scientific method encourages independence.
Groupthink is what the mass of idiots in this country do when they actually believe a politician saying literally baseless nonsense like climate change is a hoax by China. They all rush to the polls and elect these morons without any independent thought whatsoeverThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-02-02 at 12 AM UTCI really wish a cactus would sprout up here someday except the climate doesn't support it. I have been told for 50 years that this is going to happen in 10! What's the hold up?
-
2020-02-02 at 12:10 AM UTC
Originally posted by Erekshun I really wish a cactus would sprout up here someday except the climate doesn't support it. I have been told for 50 years that this is going to happen in 10! What's the hold up?
I also disagree with alarmist morons like Ocasio-Cortez coming out and telling everyone the apocalypse is gonna happen in 12 years or whatever. Again, politics only serves to obfuscate the issue. Doesn’t change the fact that climate change is real, and it is caused primarily by human actions.
Eventually, maybe sometime within the next hundred years, when coastal cities are under a foot or two of water and widespread droughts cause massive crop failures, some egghead will come up with some shit like putting a bunch of mirrors in orbit to reflect sunlight away, counteracting the warming effect.
Obviously that’s just an example I pulled out of my ass just now, but my point is I really doubt the world is just gonna descend into chaos and we’re all gonna get cooked alive. Someone will think of something to fix it (probably), that won’t involve banning air travel or whatever the idiots in the government are saying to do.
BUT there is no disputing that climate change is happening, and the results of that change remain to be seen -
2020-02-02 at 12:10 AM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-02-02 at 12:13 AM UTC
Originally posted by Fox I also disagree with alarmist morons like Ocasio-Cortez coming out and telling everyone the apocalypse is gonna happen in 12 years or whatever. Again, politics only serves to obfuscate the issue. Doesn’t change the fact that climate change is real, and it is caused primarily by human actions.
Eventually, maybe sometime within the next hundred years, when coastal cities are under a foot or two of water and widespread droughts cause massive crop failures, some egghead will come up with some shit like putting a bunch of mirrors in orbit to reflect sunlight away, counteracting the warming effect.
Obviously that’s just an example I pulled out of my ass just now, but my point is I really doubt the world is just gonna descend into chaos and we’re all gonna get cooked alive. Someone will think of something to fix it (probably), that won’t involve banning air travel.
BUT there is no disputing that climate change is happening, and the results of that change remain to be seen
I don't think that there is any feasible technological solution to climate change, and I also don't believe that these fucking idiots will give up fossil fuels any time soon.
So I believe that we are in fact fucked.
I was looking at old maps of Europe and the world earlier. For instance Doggerland was the old heartland of Europe, where our ancestors evolved, now it's under the North Sea.
-
2020-02-02 at 12:16 AM UTCWell even if they don’t solve it, and the world is fucked, I’ll be ready to start murdering everyone around me and stealing all their shit with my arsenal of weapons. Livin dat Mad Max lyfe
-
2020-02-02 at 12:59 AM UTC
Originally posted by Fox This is a circular conversation. I already provided multiple reputable sources showing that I’m right and you’re wrong, then you posted 1 extremely dubious source (with an obvious political agenda to spread misinformation) saying the opposite, then when I asked for more of these “dozens” of other studies you supposedly read, you told me to “google it”. And now you ask me what I think a real source is, bringing us right back to square one. I’ve already shown you a real source.
And by the way not once did I say anything about the media, but you’ve brought it up multiple times now. I’ve only been referring to peer-reviewed scientific studies, not the media organizations that report on those studies. I don’t even watch the news lmao. You realize they’re ALL biased one way or another right.
This is not even a political issue, but politicians want to make it political because they answer to corporate interests that have a stake in the matter. You mentioned how a lot of politicians on the left are biased because they invest in renewable energy, well who the fuck do you think has a vested interest in the oil companies? Again, they’re ALL biased, that’s why I’m not discussing politics with you, because that would only serve to obfuscate the FACT of man-made climate change.
Feckin boomers
You haven't proven shit sparky. You have called my source dubious and claimed victory. Move along... -
2020-02-02 at 1 AM UTCYou said nothing to refute my source except blabbering some non-sequitur about “the mainstream media”
Keep up old timer -
2020-02-02 at 1:01 AM UTC
-
2020-02-02 at 1:02 AM UTC
-
2020-02-02 at 1:02 AM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-02-02 at 1:03 AM UTC
-
2020-02-02 at 1:07 AM UTC
