James O'qweef is a liar and a manipulator. He edited the film to make it seem that acorn was supporting prostitution. Here's a question. Why didn't James O'qweef release the unedited film? Oh, yes, that's because he's a liar. An investigation cleared acorn.
84% of ALL scientists believe in man made climate change. nearly all climatologists. There is plenty of money out there for reputable scientists to sell out and give the oil companies what they want. Plus a well done campaign of propaganda
I don't watch Fox. I get my news from many sources. As for the Hitler comment. He lead the National Socialists Workers Party. Sounds like the current Occupy group who wants socialism. Also, why is there such a double standard? Rush used the "S" word to describe a woman and gets attacked. (rightly so) but Bill Maher calls Palin the "S" word or Ed Schultz calls Laura Ingram the "S" word, all you hear are the crickets chirping. Why a double standard? Why?
@MrWilliam8004 Pstss. I wasn't serious ;) I agree with you about the issues in the media. You have to understand that James O'keefe is a part of it, too. Bill Maher, Ed Schultz, and Rush Limbaugh, amongst others, are a huge part of what's wrong with our political media. All of them encourage people to be more emotional rather than taking an objective approach to the issues and ACTUALLY trying to understand the other sides' (yes, plural sides) point of view. It's all propaganda.
Your position on climate change is antediluvian and one wonders why. In the pocket of someone, are you? You, or the NY Times? Easy choice, generally, especially when you, a scientific illiterate, mixes politics and science.
Funny thing about those scientists is that they aren't climatologists. There are many that think its a good thing, but there aren't a significant number that doubt it exists. But you probably haven't accepted evolution, geology or cosmology either, so your lack of belief in global warming is but a drop in the bucket.
@Keeban3- Did you seriously just compare not believing in global warming to not believing in evolution geology or cosmology? I can't believe some people. For one global warming isn't backed up by any quantifiable data, and I challenge you to give me a credible source that shows it to be from a scientific stand point. Secondly evolution is still just a theory, and the only observable form of evolution that we have EVER been able to see is micro-evolution.
cont-MOST scientists describe micro-evolution as nothing more than adaptation, and therefore not true evolution. Evolution happens over a longer period of time, and is as of yet UNOBSERVABLE. When it comes to geology, and cosmology well......I guess you can't be wrong all the time. But to be honest the only thing that you can truly believe about cosmology are the cosmological constants, as cosmology itself is largely still based on many theories.
cont-But hey take all that out of the picture and what you said makes perfect sense. OF COURSE anyone who believes in something that is a proven hoax for the most part is obviously so easily duped that they could make such absurd claims as you just have. I welcome your response to this. All I ask is that you back up your claims with evidence. If you reply and want to carry on the conversation then I will back up mine as well.
I'll come up with sources where we disagree, and since this gets long, respond in PM. CO2 absorbs Infared of a certain wavelength. We monitor light coming in and going out. Same light in less light out, in particular CO2 wavelength being absorbed. We know temp has risen. We know CO2 has risen. We know more energy is being absorbed by CO2. We know most of the CO2 change is due to us. This is all scientifically shown.
@Keeban3- I have to say that you make a compelling but fallacal argument. We also know from ice cores, and other data, that the earth constantly goes through warming and cooling periods. This is completely natural. There is no solid evidence to support the whole "global warming" trend that many people believe to be true. There are several scientists who have already debunked this as well. Gordon Fulks is just one.
cont- The rising temperature that you speak of is almost uneventful at only 1.3 degrees farenheit over the past 100 years. This also only shows that the earth COULD be going through a warming trend at the moment. During other periods in Earth's history when we have had major global changes in climate the average temperature rose/dropped much faster than it has now. This again does not constitute an immediate threat of global warming/climate change. It is again a clear hoax.
This doesn't address that we can actually see the light reflected back from the Earth and we know which frequencies are being absorbed, how much energy that is, and how much energy that should be putting into the atmosphere. Regardless of the large error bars on climate models, this should be true.
I think the key word here is "should." IF climate change/global warming were indeed true and not a hoax like many physicists and other scientists claim, then this would so evident that no one could deny it. If they did deny it then they would of course be idiots and laughed out of their particular fields. Light reflection/refraction does not prove anything either by the way, as during certain time periods Earth's atmosphere has been more dense or less dense.
Because of the more/less dense nature of the atmosphere itself more or less solar radiation will be able to make it through. This again is a completely natural process that the Earth does without the aid of any of us humans. The O-Zone layer has at times been "thicker" and "thinner" as well. This also demonstrates the sporadic nature of the Sun as well. This again is a natural process that has been going on since before us humans were even here on earth.
I don't deny either, what I deny is that the production of co2 by humans is contributing to climate change. Let's look at this for a minute. Cow flatulence produces methane. Methane is a green house gas itself. Methane is also way more hazardous to the environment than co2. We breath out co2 remember, and it is converted into breathable oxygen naturally by plants and trees. This is a semi-symbiotic relationship that has worked for years.
Carbon MONOXIDE should be what is being looked into. Carbon Monoxide is produced by car engines, and other machinery. This would be what would cause climate change/global warming if ANYTHING was truly doing it.
The problem is that throughout the years after the industrial revolution cleaner fuels have started to be used. Cleaner versions of coal, and unleaded gasoline runs the equipment in many factories, and even produce electricity. IF global warming/climate change was true and not a hoax and was affected by carbon monoxide/carbon dioxide then during the industrial revolution we should have had a significant increase in temperature worldwide. But according to the data collected we did not.
No, we can tell which wavelengths are being absorbed. We can tell how much solar radiance we are getting. We know why the Earth is heating. Its not methane, its not carbon monoxide. We know its due to CO2. We also know how much of the CO2 comes from fossil fuels. We don't know whether global warming is a bad thing. But we know it is due to humans.
Honestly I don't what to say to this, other than you couldn't be further from the truth. Once again IF CO2 were the culprit for the supposed global warming then temperatures throughout the industrial revolution would've climbed higher and higher in modernized and industrialized areas. However this did not happen. Once again, since the industrial revolution we have started using cleaner versions of the same fossil fuels that were used during the industrial revolution.
cont-And once again the global temperature has only risen by 1.3 degrees farenheit. This miniscule temperature rise for one does not constitute "global warming" as every other time we have had incidences of "global warming" the temperatures sky rocketed over shorter periods of time. And for two this miniscule temperature variation is completely natural as has been noted during previous eras of Earth's history. This we know to be true. Global warming is nothing more than a hoax.
There are natural temperature changes more extreme than what we have created no doubt. But we know the reasons -- continental shift, volcanoes, rotational procession, solar output, etc. We know those aren't responsible for the temperature change we are seeing. And we know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that has increased in recent years.
Perhaps is unclear what you think is meant by global warming. You admit that it has warmed 1.3 degrees yet seem to think this isn't warmer...
@Keeban3- I clearly stated that it has indeed gotten warmer, by 1.3 degrees farenheit. There is nothing unclear about this. However as I stated before the CO2 level was actually higher in certain places during the industrial revolution, and yet there was no clear temperature rise. Since this point we have started using cleaner versions of those same fossil fuels, and the only thing we have seen is a natural temperature rise that happens ALL the time throughout Earth's history.
I don't believe you that it was higher during the industrial revolution. Give me citations.
The 'cleanliness' doesn't matter. 'Clean' burning still means you create the same (or actually slightly more) CO2. CO2 levels have been higher in the past but that is way distant past when the sun was actually cooler.
What would make it 'natural' is if the change could have been caused by solar irradiance or procession or some other variable. It isn't so far as we know.
Could you explain to me how you burn more of a green house gas with CLEANER fuel than you do with dirtier fuel? During the 19th century industrial revolution, which is known as the "Second Revolution" the earth was actually coming off of a mini-ice age, and therefore of course the Earth would've been cooler than it is now. During this time period however no one noticed any changes in temperature. It wasn't until 100 years ago that this happened.
The fact that we are warming is once again a natural process. As this always happens after an ice age of any kind and can go on for as long as 20,000 years without any ill affects. The reason why this is is because the earth will constantly get warmer over a gradual period of time just as it always has, and then get colder again during certain periods just like it always has. The CO2 that humans produce increased by 35% during the industrial revolution, and still only miniscule changes.
It would seem that global warming/climate change is nothing more than the typical doom sayes trying to get everyone all riled up for some reason. Yes humans produce CO2 from our factories and other things, but CO2 is also naturally produced from our exhaling, and is actually needed by trees and other plants in order for photosynthesis to occur. And ONCE AGAIN the over all temperature has only risen 1.3 degrees F over the past 100 years. Which AGAIN is natural after an ice age.
@bloodrunsclear Do you know that Christianity is correct? The world around us reveals that G-d DOES exist, and the historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth and there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ really did physically rise from the dead. Jesus is coming again and the signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are coming to pass.
@GermanConquistador08 Alaska is not America. Huge difference. So your comment is kind of pointless. But I would be willing to consider the possibility that the majority of people in the usa aren't serious.
Well let's be honest: Sara Palin was not exactly the best choice for a vice-president. I may be a crazy 'elitist', but somehow I believe that only the best of the best should run the country. And that excludes people who can'r ptonounce 'nuclear'. I know it's been said so many times, and notably by all kinds of assholes who would do anything to discredit the woman, but the fact remains that I ca't believe any serious person would want her running things. Seriously.
@topperheartramada You DO realize that the vice president doesn't actually "run the country," right? I also believe that the best of the best should run the country, and I hope one of them will run for president some day.
@drewdane40 YOU do realise that vice president does work with the president, and that should anything happen to the president, the vice president becomes the president? I don't want illiterate morons running anything. It's not me being 'elitist', it's common sense.
@topperheartramada So presumably, since you have such an aversion to someone "who can'r ptonounce 'nuclear'" in a position to MAYBE take over the presidency, you thought it preferable to give the first shot at the job to the guy who thinks there are 57 states? Sound reasoning, if that was your position.
@topperheartramada Which is why I added multiple qualifiers. Didn't you notice the "presumably... if that was your position?" I don't know what "intellectually qualified" means, but if it means that he had never run so much as a lemonade stand in his entire life, I'd agree with that. Personally, I'd have voted for anyone but Obama, even if their running mate had been Hervé Villechaize. But we all have our own criteria, I guess.
@drewdane40 i refuse to vote for amyone who has the nerve to even suggest that palin would be qualified to be in any way involved with running the country. the problem is not the democrats or obama. the problem is the republicans. they have to come up with someone worth voting for.
@topperheartramada Well, hold on to your seat. They're getting ready to give us another spectacular choice. I had a problem with McCain because of his own shortcomings, not because of any problem with Palin. Now it looks like they're going to nominate yet another moderate, in hopes that liberals will look past their partisanship, and cross the aisle. I don't know why the GOP hasn't figured the pattern out yet.
@topperheartramada "I ca't believe any serious person would want her running things. Seriously." - So the majority of the population of Alaska arent serious people?
ANDREW KLAVAN is a college drop-out. He is an uneducated BUM. Andrew is just mad because no one watches his movies or buys his books. He thinks no one likes him because he is racist. NOPE. No one likes you because you are a talentless hack. Like all miserable people you strive to 'bring down' the world around you.
@Kingphilosophy I know you posted this before Steve Jobs passed, but Mr. Jobs dropped out of college after his first semester. Bill Gates also dropped out of college. Yup, a couple of uneducated bums. Contribution to society is hardly dependant on levels of education. I would guess that you are an academic based on your screen name and elitist attitude towards anyone that achieves any success without an incredibly expensive piece of paper.
In Peru do not investigate anything about the kidnapping, aggravated robbery, criminal attacks with firearms, extortion, violations, fraud, crimes against public administration, corruption, fraud, death, terrorism, prosecutors are not investigating anything or police against the stadium facilities Amauta much Calle 8 S Campoy Mz 3 second stage lotizacion San Juan de Lurigancho n: 11373891 Victor I. Conopuma Genebroso
Is the ny times really that left-wing? I mean I know their editorial stuff is very left-wing but all papers have biased editorial sections. I'm talking about their actual news.
@lauraleesmithagain Did you listen to the video? Plenty of examples of what the Timesdoes to news all the time. They ignore news to bury it when it does not fit their agenda. They also focus on silly news or create news that obscures real news concerns (ala "Wag the Dog"). They put liberals in a good light, conservatives in a bad light by the stories they chose to report on, the words they choose to use in their reports, and the headlines selected.
Global Warming is a hoax. Want proof? The answer is simple. Study Geomorphology - the study of the earth's surface. It explains that there are periods where the earth goes from a glacial period (cold) to an inter glacial period (warm). The cycle repeats ever 10,000 years. We are currently in the warm phase, and it ain't from car pollution.
@tothatextent Or take graduate-level Physical Oceanography. You'll learn how the long derivations of calculus equations give modelers the power to make predictions which never fit actual data. And how the OCEANS control the climate (which, by the way, cover 70% of the earth's surface) and not volcanoes or anything else on land.
@tothatextent Yes, I agree. For instance more polutants get thrown into the earths atmosphere during a volcanic eruption than during the nearly 150 years of the industrial revolution.
@LordMalice6d9 To take your point even further, the pollution that was produced by the volcanic activity is what created the earth's atmosphere to begin with. Everyone thinks that atmosphere is a clean substance, when in fact it is essentially just a film of dirt. This film acts as a blanket, and that is what enables the earth to retain heat. The Sun actually burns the atmosphere away, which would lead to the earth becoming cooler.
@tothatextent In 1903 the NY Times exposed the danger of Cocaine to the general public and caused Coca-Cola to remove Cocaine from its drink with a different formula. Back then the NY Times did what the public wanted and provided the truth and held the gov accountable by being its watch dog. Now it provides yellow journalism w/half-truths & BS and acts as a lapdog to the gov. That's why the public is now firing them by going elsewhere for news. That's the free market. Public is the employer.
@Aegius I agree with you 100%. But, what makes it really funny is how we will all watch it burn before our eyes. The New York Times is an institution. And, like all institutions it is a Liberal indoctrination center. There will people people in upper management who will make suggestions that the Times should shift its agenda away from Liberal myths like Global Warming and the acceptance of gay marriage and that 9/11 was an inside job. Those upper manager will be fired, thenit will fall.
"But did you know that every time someone denies the existence of man-made Global Warming, a handicapped person dies? You didn't, did you? And now some poor cripple lies dead because of you -- that's sad..." ROTFL
@FailBlob No, no one can tell you, right? (because unless you're open to alternate realities besides Algore's, we would be wasting our breath, or our typing.)
@greengringo2003 I seriously want to know why you believe that man made global warming is bullshit. I have an open mind, I want to know the truth. What evidence shows that manmade global warming isn't a serious issue?
Assuming it's real, the most aggregious element at play is how backward the statist solution is. Indeed, people like myself know that the state is simply pretending to care about any given issue at any given time (healthcare, environment, etc.) to expand power and control. They couldn't care less about an actual solution. If they did, they would take stock of the history of their control over
various areas of our lives and realize they are a damaging force. The real solution to pollution is further privatization. Watch this series of videos for clarification: watch?v=DrTsaSUFfpo
There's a way to deal with newspapers that do not report the "whole" truth-- just CANCEL SUBSCRIPTIONS! I did this with another ultra liberal paper & then rec'd a "special offer" from them, complete with a postage-paid envelope. I wrote back telling them that would not take their paper even if free, because I did not want them counting my subscription to their advertisers, hence reap profits from me. I told them where they could shove it & others should do the same.Go to the library for news.
Is PJTV supposed to be reliable source for facts and information that support conservative ideals, or just a place to hear good jokes about the left? I swear these videos are all the same. It was funny and all but monologue such as this just doesn't work in the real world. I know, you don't have to remind me that liberals do this WAY worse, but how about an edge over them as opposed to an eye for an eye?
The New York Times is a complete joke now...they have finally been exposed, but they don't know it because they don't hear anything but their own lies!
Andrew, I mostly agree with you, but why do you bother to cover up for the catholic assholes? They would have raped you had they gotten their hands on you when you were young.
Open you eyes and be objective!!!
And yeah, I hope NYT will go bankrupt. It's just a matter of time, despite support from asshole Slim.
@AlanCom1 Yes, because all Catholic priests are pedophiles. What bigotry will you espouse tomorrow, I wonder? Klavan was pointing out a fact. He's taking the cover off the lies, not covering anything up, fool.
pjtv go on about how no-one cares what hollywood says, so why is this guy any different? i don't want to listen to a load of ultra-right bitching from a fiction writer lol
wake up Jews the ObaMao regime is anti-semetic as is the Slavery (dem) party....start reading the Israeli ObaMao approval ratings @ 4% and follow the homeland......
Good points, and I liked it. Could've used more switcheroos with the pictures, clocks, and desk stuff like in your Department of Homeland Security vid, though.
You people stuck on the Israel subject seems to forget. Arabs are Semitic. So they can't be Ati-semitic unless they are suicidal. Oh, wait, they are.
Also, Israel put up with attacks for YEARS between retaliatory strikes against people who think that just by existing, Israel has earned the right to be destroyed.
Not to mention that Israel has brought to the desert a great oasis.
"1. Climategate was a made up issue (Hint: read the emails!)"
I did, you obviously didn't. You obviously read the revised summaries your overlords gave you. Basically, the proxy data used to determine temperatures previous to 1850 were no longer valid once they figured out the same proxy (Ice cores, tree rings) did NOT match(even within statistically acceptable ranges) recorded temperatures for modern data, meaning we have no clue what the temperatures were actually like.
@aggiefitz No they didnt cover it up. They didnt report on it because it wasnt a story - the entire controversy was fabricated by people opposed to climate change legislation and the climate change meeting on Copenhagen.
Keep telling yourself that. The fact remains that a major part of their conclusion was based on junk numbers, and they convinced you that it doesn't matter. Re read the emails, do some more research, and you will un cover their cover up. The numbers prior to 1850 are not valid, so cannot know for sure if any "warming" (all noted temperature changes are also statistically insignificant, but you won't listen to that fact either) since 1850 is really happening
@aggiefitz IF they were conspiring to commit fraud, why did both Penn State and East Anglia exonerate both Michael Mann and the scientists at East Anglia of any wrongdoing?
@ThePenWolf So i'm a liar and a fraud of a person because i have political positions that lean towards the left, but i'm not a total liar and a fraud, just part liar and fraud, because i believe in the right's interpretation of the second amendment?
@Mookusness This sounds like you have no solid principled foundations. You may be for 2nd Amendment rights, but not for the general principle involved. Since leftist philosophy defends evil over good, and condones behavior that leads to misery and failure over happiness and success, you've basically admitted that you are not to be trusted.
@ThePenWolf Absurd. No philosophy developed by any group is designed to be evil. Nazism and Arianism was designed because those people thought those things were good. What you should say is "Since leftist philosophy defends what it perceives as good but is actually good over what it percieves is evil is actually good. By suggesting that leftists defend evil over good, you are assuming that they don;t think that their philosophy does any good. That's a bad place to start a discussion.
@Mookusness The Truth is always a good place to start a discussion. Just because you can't handle it means that you have to analyze precisely what you believe. Look up Evan Sayet at the Heritage Foundation on YouTube and he'll explain what I'm talking about.
@ThePenWolf Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, " (Hint: read the part after the dash)
@Mookusness But understand the purpose of that statement. Men may be endowed with UNALIENABLE rights by our Creator (unalienable means no government can take them away), but we institute government because we know that Men are not Angels. We have the free-will to violate God's Law, and we all do so frequently. We establish the rule of law to constrain Man's sinful nature.
@ThePenWolf I've got documents to prove my case, and you haven't got any. Maybe you're the one who's ignorant. The part right after that part (the part that i told you do focus on) says that our government is created to secure those freedoms given to us by a Creator (but not specifically God), not to "constrain man's sinful nature." Notice that there is no appeal to divine providence or help - the people make the government to secure their own rights, not because they want to follow god's law.
@ThePenWolf Also, you seem to have ignored my quote from the Treaty of Triploi that says EXPLICITLY that we are not a christian nation, and that our war against the Barbary pirates was not of a religious nature. It was an act undertaken by secular government to protect it's own people, and this treaty was ratified unanimously by congress. I dont know what else i can give you that can prove my point any better.
@Mookusness Perfect liberal point. It doesn't matter the outcome in liberal land. Only the "intent" is important, so kill millions of people like Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Lennin, because it's all good. They didn't "mean" it and their hearts were in the right place. Ovomit doesn't mean to destroy our county and take away our freedoms, so just sit back and enjoy the ride.
@poundsand Mao and Hitler and Stalin wanted to kill millions, so they did. Your average liberal (and socialist too!) doesn't want millions of people to die.
@Mookusness Not the average liberal on the street, but the leaders of those movements don't give a damn about who gets hurt as a result of their power grabs. The healthcare plan will eventually start taking people's lives based on rationing care to those that are no longer "productive." Think someone like Obama or Pelosi will give a crap when that begins to happen?
@Mookusness But bear in mind that you might very well be a good person. Lots of people are good people, even though they're not to be trusted. I can believe that a person may be pro-choice and pro-property and gun rights, but since that doesn't jive with Judeo-Christian ethics that formed the basis for the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, I'd have to say I couldn't say that person is principled.
@ThePenWolf What you need to realize is that people are pro-choice because they percieve that position to be a moral position, for various reasons. If you're strong in your anti-abortion convictions maybe you can convince them, but assuming that their position is evil without hearing them out is just dishonest. You're not God, your reason isnt perfect, so if you assume you have everything figured out and that "leftists" cant change your mind you are being dishonest.
James O'qweef is a liar and a manipulator. He edited the film to make it seem that acorn was supporting prostitution. Here's a question. Why didn't James O'qweef release the unedited film? Oh, yes, that's because he's a liar. An investigation cleared acorn.
84% of ALL scientists believe in man made climate change. nearly all climatologists. There is plenty of money out there for reputable scientists to sell out and give the oil companies what they want. Plus a well done campaign of propaganda
ev1ls0da 3 days ago
@ev1ls0da
All the tapes were released unedited for Acorn. You've gotto quit believing the MSM.
MrWilliam8004 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrWilliam8004- Yep in fact before a lot of them were taken down you could watch the unedited ones right here on YouTube.
xSamWaynex 2 days ago
@MrWilliam8004 yes because of the investigation. I don't follow msmbc. You need to stop watching Fox and worshiping Hitler.
ev1ls0da 2 days ago
@ev1ls0da
I don't watch Fox. I get my news from many sources. As for the Hitler comment. He lead the National Socialists Workers Party. Sounds like the current Occupy group who wants socialism. Also, why is there such a double standard? Rush used the "S" word to describe a woman and gets attacked. (rightly so) but Bill Maher calls Palin the "S" word or Ed Schultz calls Laura Ingram the "S" word, all you hear are the crickets chirping. Why a double standard? Why?
MrWilliam8004 1 day ago
@MrWilliam8004 Pstss. I wasn't serious ;) I agree with you about the issues in the media. You have to understand that James O'keefe is a part of it, too. Bill Maher, Ed Schultz, and Rush Limbaugh, amongst others, are a huge part of what's wrong with our political media. All of them encourage people to be more emotional rather than taking an objective approach to the issues and ACTUALLY trying to understand the other sides' (yes, plural sides) point of view. It's all propaganda.
ev1ls0da 1 day ago
Your position on climate change is antediluvian and one wonders why. In the pocket of someone, are you? You, or the NY Times? Easy choice, generally, especially when you, a scientific illiterate, mixes politics and science.
MrNeodarwinian 2 weeks ago
Funny thing about those scientists is that they aren't climatologists. There are many that think its a good thing, but there aren't a significant number that doubt it exists. But you probably haven't accepted evolution, geology or cosmology either, so your lack of belief in global warming is but a drop in the bucket.
Keeban3 2 weeks ago
@Keeban3- Did you seriously just compare not believing in global warming to not believing in evolution geology or cosmology? I can't believe some people. For one global warming isn't backed up by any quantifiable data, and I challenge you to give me a credible source that shows it to be from a scientific stand point. Secondly evolution is still just a theory, and the only observable form of evolution that we have EVER been able to see is micro-evolution.
xSamWaynex 6 days ago
cont-MOST scientists describe micro-evolution as nothing more than adaptation, and therefore not true evolution. Evolution happens over a longer period of time, and is as of yet UNOBSERVABLE. When it comes to geology, and cosmology well......I guess you can't be wrong all the time. But to be honest the only thing that you can truly believe about cosmology are the cosmological constants, as cosmology itself is largely still based on many theories.
xSamWaynex 6 days ago
cont-But hey take all that out of the picture and what you said makes perfect sense. OF COURSE anyone who believes in something that is a proven hoax for the most part is obviously so easily duped that they could make such absurd claims as you just have. I welcome your response to this. All I ask is that you back up your claims with evidence. If you reply and want to carry on the conversation then I will back up mine as well.
xSamWaynex 6 days ago
@xSamWaynex
I'll come up with sources where we disagree, and since this gets long, respond in PM. CO2 absorbs Infared of a certain wavelength. We monitor light coming in and going out. Same light in less light out, in particular CO2 wavelength being absorbed. We know temp has risen. We know CO2 has risen. We know more energy is being absorbed by CO2. We know most of the CO2 change is due to us. This is all scientifically shown.
Keeban3 6 days ago
@Keeban3- I have to say that you make a compelling but fallacal argument. We also know from ice cores, and other data, that the earth constantly goes through warming and cooling periods. This is completely natural. There is no solid evidence to support the whole "global warming" trend that many people believe to be true. There are several scientists who have already debunked this as well. Gordon Fulks is just one.
xSamWaynex 6 days ago
cont- The rising temperature that you speak of is almost uneventful at only 1.3 degrees farenheit over the past 100 years. This also only shows that the earth COULD be going through a warming trend at the moment. During other periods in Earth's history when we have had major global changes in climate the average temperature rose/dropped much faster than it has now. This again does not constitute an immediate threat of global warming/climate change. It is again a clear hoax.
xSamWaynex 6 days ago
@xSamWaynex
This doesn't address that we can actually see the light reflected back from the Earth and we know which frequencies are being absorbed, how much energy that is, and how much energy that should be putting into the atmosphere. Regardless of the large error bars on climate models, this should be true.
Keeban3 6 days ago
I think the key word here is "should." IF climate change/global warming were indeed true and not a hoax like many physicists and other scientists claim, then this would so evident that no one could deny it. If they did deny it then they would of course be idiots and laughed out of their particular fields. Light reflection/refraction does not prove anything either by the way, as during certain time periods Earth's atmosphere has been more dense or less dense.
xSamWaynex 5 days ago
Because of the more/less dense nature of the atmosphere itself more or less solar radiation will be able to make it through. This again is a completely natural process that the Earth does without the aid of any of us humans. The O-Zone layer has at times been "thicker" and "thinner" as well. This also demonstrates the sporadic nature of the Sun as well. This again is a natural process that has been going on since before us humans were even here on earth.
xSamWaynex 5 days ago
@xSamWaynex
So which part do you deny? That CO2 is a greenhouse gas or that people produce a significant amount of CO2?
Keeban3 5 days ago
I don't deny either, what I deny is that the production of co2 by humans is contributing to climate change. Let's look at this for a minute. Cow flatulence produces methane. Methane is a green house gas itself. Methane is also way more hazardous to the environment than co2. We breath out co2 remember, and it is converted into breathable oxygen naturally by plants and trees. This is a semi-symbiotic relationship that has worked for years.
xSamWaynex 5 days ago
Carbon MONOXIDE should be what is being looked into. Carbon Monoxide is produced by car engines, and other machinery. This would be what would cause climate change/global warming if ANYTHING was truly doing it.
xSamWaynex 5 days ago
The problem is that throughout the years after the industrial revolution cleaner fuels have started to be used. Cleaner versions of coal, and unleaded gasoline runs the equipment in many factories, and even produce electricity. IF global warming/climate change was true and not a hoax and was affected by carbon monoxide/carbon dioxide then during the industrial revolution we should have had a significant increase in temperature worldwide. But according to the data collected we did not.
xSamWaynex 5 days ago
@xSamWaynex
No, we can tell which wavelengths are being absorbed. We can tell how much solar radiance we are getting. We know why the Earth is heating. Its not methane, its not carbon monoxide. We know its due to CO2. We also know how much of the CO2 comes from fossil fuels. We don't know whether global warming is a bad thing. But we know it is due to humans.
Keeban3 5 days ago
Honestly I don't what to say to this, other than you couldn't be further from the truth. Once again IF CO2 were the culprit for the supposed global warming then temperatures throughout the industrial revolution would've climbed higher and higher in modernized and industrialized areas. However this did not happen. Once again, since the industrial revolution we have started using cleaner versions of the same fossil fuels that were used during the industrial revolution.
xSamWaynex 5 days ago
cont-And once again the global temperature has only risen by 1.3 degrees farenheit. This miniscule temperature rise for one does not constitute "global warming" as every other time we have had incidences of "global warming" the temperatures sky rocketed over shorter periods of time. And for two this miniscule temperature variation is completely natural as has been noted during previous eras of Earth's history. This we know to be true. Global warming is nothing more than a hoax.
xSamWaynex 5 days ago
@xSamWaynex
There are natural temperature changes more extreme than what we have created no doubt. But we know the reasons -- continental shift, volcanoes, rotational procession, solar output, etc. We know those aren't responsible for the temperature change we are seeing. And we know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that has increased in recent years.
Perhaps is unclear what you think is meant by global warming. You admit that it has warmed 1.3 degrees yet seem to think this isn't warmer...
Keeban3 5 days ago
@Keeban3- I clearly stated that it has indeed gotten warmer, by 1.3 degrees farenheit. There is nothing unclear about this. However as I stated before the CO2 level was actually higher in certain places during the industrial revolution, and yet there was no clear temperature rise. Since this point we have started using cleaner versions of those same fossil fuels, and the only thing we have seen is a natural temperature rise that happens ALL the time throughout Earth's history.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex
I don't believe you that it was higher during the industrial revolution. Give me citations.
The 'cleanliness' doesn't matter. 'Clean' burning still means you create the same (or actually slightly more) CO2. CO2 levels have been higher in the past but that is way distant past when the sun was actually cooler.
What would make it 'natural' is if the change could have been caused by solar irradiance or procession or some other variable. It isn't so far as we know.
Keeban3 3 days ago
Could you explain to me how you burn more of a green house gas with CLEANER fuel than you do with dirtier fuel? During the 19th century industrial revolution, which is known as the "Second Revolution" the earth was actually coming off of a mini-ice age, and therefore of course the Earth would've been cooler than it is now. During this time period however no one noticed any changes in temperature. It wasn't until 100 years ago that this happened.
xSamWaynex 3 days ago
The fact that we are warming is once again a natural process. As this always happens after an ice age of any kind and can go on for as long as 20,000 years without any ill affects. The reason why this is is because the earth will constantly get warmer over a gradual period of time just as it always has, and then get colder again during certain periods just like it always has. The CO2 that humans produce increased by 35% during the industrial revolution, and still only miniscule changes.
xSamWaynex 3 days ago
It would seem that global warming/climate change is nothing more than the typical doom sayes trying to get everyone all riled up for some reason. Yes humans produce CO2 from our factories and other things, but CO2 is also naturally produced from our exhaling, and is actually needed by trees and other plants in order for photosynthesis to occur. And ONCE AGAIN the over all temperature has only risen 1.3 degrees F over the past 100 years. Which AGAIN is natural after an ice age.
xSamWaynex 3 days ago
Unfortunately this video doesn't exist because the New York times denies it does
bloodrunsclear 4 weeks ago
and fox news isn't bias at all......
ulula97 1 month ago
@ulula97
Did anyone argue different?
The problem is that the stacking is like this...
Fox = Conservative opinion
NBC, CBS. MSNBC, ABC...ETC = Liberal opinion
bloodrunsclear 4 weeks ago
@bloodrunsclear well i would expect fox to live up to it's motto 'fair and balanced'
ulula97 3 weeks ago
@ulula97
The fact that it exists is fairness and balance in a media environment wholly opposed to its point of view.
bloodrunsclear 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bloodrunsclear Do you know that Christianity is correct? The world around us reveals that G-d DOES exist, and the historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth and there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ really did physically rise from the dead. Jesus is coming again and the signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are coming to pass.
marionetemanJ 3 weeks ago
@GermanConquistador08 Alaska is not America. Huge difference. So your comment is kind of pointless. But I would be willing to consider the possibility that the majority of people in the usa aren't serious.
topperheartramada 1 month ago
Well let's be honest: Sara Palin was not exactly the best choice for a vice-president. I may be a crazy 'elitist', but somehow I believe that only the best of the best should run the country. And that excludes people who can'r ptonounce 'nuclear'. I know it's been said so many times, and notably by all kinds of assholes who would do anything to discredit the woman, but the fact remains that I ca't believe any serious person would want her running things. Seriously.
topperheartramada 1 month ago
@topperheartramada You DO realize that the vice president doesn't actually "run the country," right? I also believe that the best of the best should run the country, and I hope one of them will run for president some day.
drewdane40 1 month ago in playlist Andrew Klavan
@drewdane40 YOU do realise that vice president does work with the president, and that should anything happen to the president, the vice president becomes the president? I don't want illiterate morons running anything. It's not me being 'elitist', it's common sense.
topperheartramada 1 month ago
@topperheartramada So presumably, since you have such an aversion to someone "who can'r ptonounce 'nuclear'" in a position to MAYBE take over the presidency, you thought it preferable to give the first shot at the job to the guy who thinks there are 57 states? Sound reasoning, if that was your position.
drewdane40 1 month ago
@drewdane40 i never said i supported obama. he is nonetheless intellectually qualified. the problem with him is his ideology.
topperheartramada 1 month ago
@topperheartramada Which is why I added multiple qualifiers. Didn't you notice the "presumably... if that was your position?" I don't know what "intellectually qualified" means, but if it means that he had never run so much as a lemonade stand in his entire life, I'd agree with that. Personally, I'd have voted for anyone but Obama, even if their running mate had been Hervé Villechaize. But we all have our own criteria, I guess.
drewdane40 1 month ago
@drewdane40 i refuse to vote for amyone who has the nerve to even suggest that palin would be qualified to be in any way involved with running the country. the problem is not the democrats or obama. the problem is the republicans. they have to come up with someone worth voting for.
topperheartramada 1 month ago
@topperheartramada Well, hold on to your seat. They're getting ready to give us another spectacular choice. I had a problem with McCain because of his own shortcomings, not because of any problem with Palin. Now it looks like they're going to nominate yet another moderate, in hopes that liberals will look past their partisanship, and cross the aisle. I don't know why the GOP hasn't figured the pattern out yet.
drewdane40 1 month ago
@topperheartramada "I ca't believe any serious person would want her running things. Seriously." - So the majority of the population of Alaska arent serious people?
GermanConquistador08 1 month ago
@topperheartramada The best and brightest. You know, Lenin was brilliant.
Tacotruck1166 4 weeks ago
@Tacotruck1166 Pardon?
topperheartramada 4 weeks ago
somebody really reads the NYT ?
Hoschi0913 1 month ago
Dear diary,
Today, OP was a faggot.
AutoTunedSoul 1 month ago
@AutoTunedSoul 4chan called, they want their meme back.
ToxinMortalis 1 month ago
"if I don't mention these clocks they simply disappear... watch... I know, it's amazing isn't it? And it works with Islamofacists too!" HAHAHAHAHA!
Will6719 2 months ago
ANDREW KLAVAN is a college drop-out. He is an uneducated BUM. Andrew is just mad because no one watches his movies or buys his books. He thinks no one likes him because he is racist. NOPE. No one likes you because you are a talentless hack. Like all miserable people you strive to 'bring down' the world around you.
Kingphilosophy 5 months ago
@Kingphilosophy what have you done with your life,besides attack people?
SaintLiam78 5 months ago
@Kingphilosophy I know you posted this before Steve Jobs passed, but Mr. Jobs dropped out of college after his first semester. Bill Gates also dropped out of college. Yup, a couple of uneducated bums. Contribution to society is hardly dependant on levels of education. I would guess that you are an academic based on your screen name and elitist attitude towards anyone that achieves any success without an incredibly expensive piece of paper.
Liv2xplore 5 months ago
@Kingphilosophy And what have you managed?
hooplablahblahblah 4 months ago
In Peru do not investigate anything about the kidnapping, aggravated robbery, criminal attacks with firearms, extortion, violations, fraud, crimes against public administration, corruption, fraud, death, terrorism, prosecutors are not investigating anything or police against the stadium facilities Amauta much Calle 8 S Campoy Mz 3 second stage lotizacion San Juan de Lurigancho n: 11373891 Victor I. Conopuma Genebroso
GENEBROSO 5 months ago
This isn't satire. This is an accurate depiction.
1517CalvinMartin 6 months ago 23
@kristopheraugust I'd need some coffee to stay awake during it.
trottheblackdog 6 months ago
@kristopheraugust You need to read Marx, then come back and say that again. You are so wrong it hurts.
trottheblackdog 7 months ago
"and now you have ceased to exist". Isn't that what Obama and the liberal Dem's are wishing on the Tea Party? :)
iceviper6215 7 months ago 2
"hundreds of readers" ...lol
chriskieninger 7 months ago 2
Socialism - great idea until you run out of other peoples money
mediaanchorman 9 months ago 2
Is the ny times really that left-wing? I mean I know their editorial stuff is very left-wing but all papers have biased editorial sections. I'm talking about their actual news.
lauraleesmithagain 9 months ago
@lauraleesmithagain Did you listen to the video? Plenty of examples of what the Timesdoes to news all the time. They ignore news to bury it when it does not fit their agenda. They also focus on silly news or create news that obscures real news concerns (ala "Wag the Dog"). They put liberals in a good light, conservatives in a bad light by the stories they chose to report on, the words they choose to use in their reports, and the headlines selected.
TheBruceGday 7 months ago
Hurray for Andrew Klavan. As clever as the Times is predictable.
BruceDeitrickPrice 10 months ago 2
@kristopheraugust WTF?
bitterroad 11 months ago
our hundres of readers . . . hahahahaha
Protege385 1 year ago 7
hilarious
thepokkanome 1 year ago
The New York Times?
Doesn't he mean the JEW York times? Most media is owned by Jews.
LordMalice6d9 1 year ago
@LordMalice6d9 Mr. Klavan has a video for you: watch?v=oCtjjNFokTw
canofsand 1 year ago
ROTFL! brilliant analysis of how the NYT really works.
kataisa3 1 year ago
NYT...makes for excellent bird cage lining.
igotta9 1 year ago 24
@igotta9
and replacement toilet paper
DraughtOfPeace 4 months ago
@igotta9 NYT all the news that's fit to WIPE!
AntiZionistCIAShill 1 month ago
Global Warming is a hoax. Want proof? The answer is simple. Study Geomorphology - the study of the earth's surface. It explains that there are periods where the earth goes from a glacial period (cold) to an inter glacial period (warm). The cycle repeats ever 10,000 years. We are currently in the warm phase, and it ain't from car pollution.
tothatextent 1 year ago
@tothatextent Or take graduate-level Physical Oceanography. You'll learn how the long derivations of calculus equations give modelers the power to make predictions which never fit actual data. And how the OCEANS control the climate (which, by the way, cover 70% of the earth's surface) and not volcanoes or anything else on land.
marinebiobry 1 year ago
@tothatextent Yes, I agree. For instance more polutants get thrown into the earths atmosphere during a volcanic eruption than during the nearly 150 years of the industrial revolution.
LordMalice6d9 1 year ago
@LordMalice6d9 To take your point even further, the pollution that was produced by the volcanic activity is what created the earth's atmosphere to begin with. Everyone thinks that atmosphere is a clean substance, when in fact it is essentially just a film of dirt. This film acts as a blanket, and that is what enables the earth to retain heat. The Sun actually burns the atmosphere away, which would lead to the earth becoming cooler.
tothatextent 1 year ago
The New York Times is losing readership at an alarming rate - thank God. What a shitty and bullshit publication.
tothatextent 1 year ago 3
@tothatextent In 1903 the NY Times exposed the danger of Cocaine to the general public and caused Coca-Cola to remove Cocaine from its drink with a different formula. Back then the NY Times did what the public wanted and provided the truth and held the gov accountable by being its watch dog. Now it provides yellow journalism w/half-truths & BS and acts as a lapdog to the gov. That's why the public is now firing them by going elsewhere for news. That's the free market. Public is the employer.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius I agree with you 100%. But, what makes it really funny is how we will all watch it burn before our eyes. The New York Times is an institution. And, like all institutions it is a Liberal indoctrination center. There will people people in upper management who will make suggestions that the Times should shift its agenda away from Liberal myths like Global Warming and the acceptance of gay marriage and that 9/11 was an inside job. Those upper manager will be fired, thenit will fall.
tothatextent 1 year ago
That joke about the clocks was good on so many levels.
SimulacrumMaster 1 year ago 3
The Gray Old Lady has become a cheap two dollar hooker and her John is the DNC.
JGDeRuvo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Grow the Fuck Up Andrew.
kidluna 1 year ago
"But did you know that every time someone denies the existence of man-made Global Warming, a handicapped person dies? You didn't, did you? And now some poor cripple lies dead because of you -- that's sad..." ROTFL
joekiddone 1 year ago 3
Sarah Palin is a Grue? Huh. Who knew?
anthony62490 1 year ago
Can anyone please tell me what evidence shows that man made global warming isn't a serious issue?
FailBlob 1 year ago
@FailBlob You cannot prove a negative, fool.
itachi705 1 year ago
@itachi705 Tell me how you came to the conclusion that man made global warming is not real.
FailBlob 1 year ago
@FailBlob No, no one can tell you, right? (because unless you're open to alternate realities besides Algore's, we would be wasting our breath, or our typing.)
greengringo2003 1 year ago
@greengringo2003 I seriously want to know why you believe that man made global warming is bullshit. I have an open mind, I want to know the truth. What evidence shows that manmade global warming isn't a serious issue?
FailBlob 1 year ago
@FailBlob
Assuming it's real, the most aggregious element at play is how backward the statist solution is. Indeed, people like myself know that the state is simply pretending to care about any given issue at any given time (healthcare, environment, etc.) to expand power and control. They couldn't care less about an actual solution. If they did, they would take stock of the history of their control over
selfrealizedexile 1 year ago
@selfrealizedexile
egregious*
selfrealizedexile 1 year ago
@FailBlob
various areas of our lives and realize they are a damaging force. The real solution to pollution is further privatization. Watch this series of videos for clarification: watch?v=DrTsaSUFfpo
selfrealizedexile 1 year ago
What's a newspaper?
hamedelic 1 year ago
haha. Sad video where the right tries to take down the Times, which is STILL the paper of record and will always be the paper of record.
Here's an idea, dumbasses, start your own newspaper and market it. Aren't you all about free markets? So go for it! No one is stopping you.
Since the New York Times is so horrible, it should be easy for you to beat them.
Or do you just prefer crying like babies? WAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! The New York Times has real journalists and they don't watch Fox! Waah
jensen1901 1 year ago
@jensen1901 You mean that same "real" journalist Jayson Blair who filed false reports on the Virgina sniper oh ho ho.
abarzilai664 1 year ago
@jensen1901 Are you a fucking moron? Leftards...
itachi705 1 year ago
@jensen1901 Wow. That was one of the stupidest comments I have ever read.
YourHeadaSplode414 11 months ago
good lord this guy is insufferable, his videos are more black&white than a michael moore film.
The1CamBo 1 year ago
@The1CamBo Yea, no shades of Red here.
DecimusIuvenalis 1 year ago
The Times, the official media outlet for the Marxist Obama administration. Bang on, Mr. Klavan.
DecimusIuvenalis 1 year ago
great satire
superjam18 1 year ago
@superjam18
if you think this is great satire, you must think carrot top is amazing comedy. this is a s flat as it gets.
CheeezMaster 1 year ago
All this is actually extremely ironic.
fxcknaruto 1 year ago
LOL my hero!
cldump 1 year ago
Wasn't the NYT bought up buy some Mexican billionaire?.
iron1215 1 year ago
Andrew Klavan is the man!
alexbeardmusic 1 year ago
There's a way to deal with newspapers that do not report the "whole" truth-- just CANCEL SUBSCRIPTIONS! I did this with another ultra liberal paper & then rec'd a "special offer" from them, complete with a postage-paid envelope. I wrote back telling them that would not take their paper even if free, because I did not want them counting my subscription to their advertisers, hence reap profits from me. I told them where they could shove it & others should do the same.Go to the library for news.
jethess 1 year ago 4
@jethess Going to the library for news isn't such a bad idea. (I don't care if your comment is 1 year old, it was worth replying)
augustc4 8 months ago
LOL! That was a good one!
archemedes314 1 year ago
More like these!!!
Great vid, Andrew. Nicely done, exposing the Liberal Machine's hypocrisy.
If only these dishonest scoundrels had an Ounce of moral fiber. Ah, well.
satirewriter07 1 year ago
Best one yet, Andrew!
KidRisky 1 year ago
Another great video Andrew.
Drake3209 1 year ago
DUDE YOU ARE TOO FUNNY!!!
Tallshipdreamer 1 year ago
Klavan, I want to subscribe to the NYTimes just to have the satisfaction of canceling my subscription.
Mooja12 1 year ago
A little socialism can be a dangerous thing.
A lot of socialism is Communism.
XCritonX 1 year ago 46
For all those who dont know, I used to be "CONFUSED", and now i dont exsist...dang my big mouth..
JDBW 1 year ago
LOL " all the way from far off 95th st" Yup Okeefe was "Front Page News" then.. not the real scam of a-con-r group. Great vid thanks
carlindelco 1 year ago
Nanook is a racist terrorist from the right... oh wait!
terryweb 1 year ago
Is PJTV supposed to be reliable source for facts and information that support conservative ideals, or just a place to hear good jokes about the left? I swear these videos are all the same. It was funny and all but monologue such as this just doesn't work in the real world. I know, you don't have to remind me that liberals do this WAY worse, but how about an edge over them as opposed to an eye for an eye?
el3m3ntsk8s 1 year ago
The New York Times is a complete joke now...they have finally been exposed, but they don't know it because they don't hear anything but their own lies!
Mcfunmom 1 year ago 60
Andrew, I mostly agree with you, but why do you bother to cover up for the catholic assholes? They would have raped you had they gotten their hands on you when you were young.
Open you eyes and be objective!!!
And yeah, I hope NYT will go bankrupt. It's just a matter of time, despite support from asshole Slim.
AlanCom1 1 year ago
@AlanCom1 Yes, because all Catholic priests are pedophiles. What bigotry will you espouse tomorrow, I wonder? Klavan was pointing out a fact. He's taking the cover off the lies, not covering anything up, fool.
itachi705 1 year ago
The TImes is merely a fish wrap now.
clayp72 1 year ago 4
@clayp72 and also a bird cage liner...lol
carlindelco 1 year ago
pjtv go on about how no-one cares what hollywood says, so why is this guy any different? i don't want to listen to a load of ultra-right bitching from a fiction writer lol
prafty 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
wow really boring!!
Andrew is a old fart with no life!! sorry andrew your FIRED!! lol
Vesturbyggd2 1 year ago
That was pretty awesome *sends to Olbermann* :')
ipwnallnubscuzirock 1 year ago
wake up Jews the ObaMao regime is anti-semetic as is the Slavery (dem) party....start reading the Israeli ObaMao approval ratings @ 4% and follow the homeland......
Hellpig 1 year ago
A man after my own heart. Sarcasm, sarcasm, and more sarcasm :) Andrew Klavan is the man :)
ilikenoodles1 1 year ago
Love you, Klavan. XD
fatalrob0t 1 year ago
Good points, and I liked it. Could've used more switcheroos with the pictures, clocks, and desk stuff like in your Department of Homeland Security vid, though.
1manwalkingfreakshow 1 year ago
Love those of you that show your foaming mouth hate of other points of view.
Fucking hypocrites.
schizrade 1 year ago
Excellent.
Jerricho68 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Go read your bible Klavan.
qtronman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What a pompous, phony mud=slinging manipulator.
qtronman 1 year ago
Klavan is clever as usual. I like his views.
Jewishfan 1 year ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
unbelievable. klavan is the epitomy of false choices.
CheeezMaster 1 year ago
You people stuck on the Israel subject seems to forget. Arabs are Semitic. So they can't be Ati-semitic unless they are suicidal. Oh, wait, they are.
Also, Israel put up with attacks for YEARS between retaliatory strikes against people who think that just by existing, Israel has earned the right to be destroyed.
Not to mention that Israel has brought to the desert a great oasis.
P.s. Great Video...
bwjohnson69 1 year ago 27
Comment removed
aggiefitz 1 year ago
Not quite as good as "Talking Crap", but still solid.
Nokomisclub 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I'll answer for you Andrew!
1. Climategate was a made up issue (Hint: read the emails!)
2. Because Pope Benidict covered up sex abuse in Germany when he wasnt Pope
3. She will if you're a Muslim! She wants a theocracy.
4. Your only valid concern.
Mookusness 1 year ago
@Mookusness
"1. Climategate was a made up issue (Hint: read the emails!)"
I did, you obviously didn't. You obviously read the revised summaries your overlords gave you. Basically, the proxy data used to determine temperatures previous to 1850 were no longer valid once they figured out the same proxy (Ice cores, tree rings) did NOT match(even within statistically acceptable ranges) recorded temperatures for modern data, meaning we have no clue what the temperatures were actually like.
aggiefitz 1 year ago
@Mookusness
Cont. So they simply covered it up
aggiefitz 1 year ago
@aggiefitz No they didnt cover it up. They didnt report on it because it wasnt a story - the entire controversy was fabricated by people opposed to climate change legislation and the climate change meeting on Copenhagen.
Mookusness 1 year ago
@Mookusness
Keep telling yourself that. The fact remains that a major part of their conclusion was based on junk numbers, and they convinced you that it doesn't matter. Re read the emails, do some more research, and you will un cover their cover up. The numbers prior to 1850 are not valid, so cannot know for sure if any "warming" (all noted temperature changes are also statistically insignificant, but you won't listen to that fact either) since 1850 is really happening
aggiefitz 1 year ago
@aggiefitz IF they were conspiring to commit fraud, why did both Penn State and East Anglia exonerate both Michael Mann and the scientists at East Anglia of any wrongdoing?
Mookusness 1 year ago
@Mookusness
That's easy, the left protect themselves whether they are morally right or not.
BoyKagome 1 year ago
@BoyKagome So a person's political positions decide how honest they are?
Mookusness 1 year ago
@Mookusness Yes.
ThePenWolf 1 year ago
@ThePenWolf So i'm a liar and a fraud of a person because i have political positions that lean towards the left, but i'm not a total liar and a fraud, just part liar and fraud, because i believe in the right's interpretation of the second amendment?
Mookusness 1 year ago
@Mookusness This sounds like you have no solid principled foundations. You may be for 2nd Amendment rights, but not for the general principle involved. Since leftist philosophy defends evil over good, and condones behavior that leads to misery and failure over happiness and success, you've basically admitted that you are not to be trusted.
ThePenWolf 1 year ago
@ThePenWolf Absurd. No philosophy developed by any group is designed to be evil. Nazism and Arianism was designed because those people thought those things were good. What you should say is "Since leftist philosophy defends what it perceives as good but is actually good over what it percieves is evil is actually good. By suggesting that leftists defend evil over good, you are assuming that they don;t think that their philosophy does any good. That's a bad place to start a discussion.
Mookusness 1 year ago
@Mookusness The Truth is always a good place to start a discussion. Just because you can't handle it means that you have to analyze precisely what you believe. Look up Evan Sayet at the Heritage Foundation on YouTube and he'll explain what I'm talking about.
ThePenWolf 1 year ago
@ThePenWolf Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, " (Hint: read the part after the dash)
Mookusness 1 year ago
@Mookusness But understand the purpose of that statement. Men may be endowed with UNALIENABLE rights by our Creator (unalienable means no government can take them away), but we institute government because we know that Men are not Angels. We have the free-will to violate God's Law, and we all do so frequently. We establish the rule of law to constrain Man's sinful nature.
ThePenWolf 1 year ago
@ThePenWolf I've got documents to prove my case, and you haven't got any. Maybe you're the one who's ignorant. The part right after that part (the part that i told you do focus on) says that our government is created to secure those freedoms given to us by a Creator (but not specifically God), not to "constrain man's sinful nature." Notice that there is no appeal to divine providence or help - the people make the government to secure their own rights, not because they want to follow god's law.
Mookusness 1 year ago
@ThePenWolf Also, you seem to have ignored my quote from the Treaty of Triploi that says EXPLICITLY that we are not a christian nation, and that our war against the Barbary pirates was not of a religious nature. It was an act undertaken by secular government to protect it's own people, and this treaty was ratified unanimously by congress. I dont know what else i can give you that can prove my point any better.
Mookusness 1 year ago
@Mookusness Perfect liberal point. It doesn't matter the outcome in liberal land. Only the "intent" is important, so kill millions of people like Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Lennin, because it's all good. They didn't "mean" it and their hearts were in the right place. Ovomit doesn't mean to destroy our county and take away our freedoms, so just sit back and enjoy the ride.
poundsand 1 year ago
@poundsand Mao and Hitler and Stalin wanted to kill millions, so they did. Your average liberal (and socialist too!) doesn't want millions of people to die.
Mookusness 1 year ago
@Mookusness Not the average liberal on the street, but the leaders of those movements don't give a damn about who gets hurt as a result of their power grabs. The healthcare plan will eventually start taking people's lives based on rationing care to those that are no longer "productive." Think someone like Obama or Pelosi will give a crap when that begins to happen?
poundsand 1 year ago
@Mookusness No, you're just standing up a little straighter.
GBS990 1 year ago
@Mookusness But bear in mind that you might very well be a good person. Lots of people are good people, even though they're not to be trusted. I can believe that a person may be pro-choice and pro-property and gun rights, but since that doesn't jive with Judeo-Christian ethics that formed the basis for the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, I'd have to say I couldn't say that person is principled.
ThePenWolf 1 year ago
@ThePenWolf What you need to realize is that people are pro-choice because they percieve that position to be a moral position, for various reasons. If you're strong in your anti-abortion convictions maybe you can convince them, but assuming that their position is evil without hearing them out is just dishonest. You're not God, your reason isnt perfect, so if you assume you have everything figured out and that "leftists" cant change your mind you are being dishonest.
Mookusness 1 year ago