I'm disappointed . I was kind of waiting for the part when men dressed in white uniforms would appear and start chasing the "professor" with a big butterfly net..
I wouldn't have been able to remain civil with this idiot. He wouldn't answer her questions, then began insulting her. Interviews are simple, the host asks a question and the guest answers. The guest instead goes on a tiraid and keeps with his talking points and has no evidence to support them along with changing the subject would drive me insane. Props to Rachael Maddow, Fox News acts like Art Robinson when interviewing someone who has different political ideals.
For all of those people who are defending Rachel in this clip, can you find even one 10 second time period where he is allowed to speak without interruption? How about 20 seconds?
.
Maddow behaves like a child here. Real journalists let the interviewee speak, allowing the viewer to determine if he or she is "crazy".
.
And sarcasm, are you fucking kidding me Rachel? Hey Rachel, when you call someone "patronizing and charming" you're being sarcastic, or maybe just stupid. Fucking retard.
Maddow is fed up with Robinson in this clip. She tried to ask questions of this wingnut in part 1, to no avail, so by now she's had with him and his idiocy. If anyone is interrupting, it is Robinson. SHE can't get her questions out before HE starts spouting his unique brand of stupidity.
@schulwitz Oh, I apologize. The interview that Robinson did w/ Maddow (you know, the one we're commenting on?) is ample evidence for anybody with even a smidgen of common sense to see that he is a complete idiot.
Apparently, you do not fall into the category of having "common sense" and so you did not realize that there was a vast body of evidence right in front of you.
And those of us who ARE intellectuals don't need ACT as such, because we simply ARE.
Walk into a formal debate, take a critical thinking course, or study formal logic. Then tell the experts that you are an "intellectual" who is "right" simply BECAUSE you claim to "have common sense". You will get laughed out of the room.
.
Occupied academic circles all my life. Those who have to "fake it" always act like they have a position, but in my experience, they rarely attempt to integrate the evidence honestly or even articulate the reasoning warranting their claim.
@schulwitz If you look at my post history you'll see that I've integrated evidence and reason in my argument. I invited you to examine the first half of this interview, which makes it abundantly clear that Maddow is the one being interrupted. You tell me to bring evidence supporting my claim that Robinson is "stupid" and a "wingnut" but fail to do the same when you call Maddow "stupid" and a "fucking retard." If I am an idiot then, by your own logic, you too are an idiot. I can do this all day.
@tygre . "I invited you to examine the first half of this interview, which makes it abundantly clear that Maddow is the one being interrupted." . Ok, I've watched the first 3 minutes again, here's my analysis: . Maddow's questions (all uninterrupted): -- No idea of $150,000 funding source? -- -- Essentially an in-kind illegal donation? -- -- Anonymous donor could come from criminals, does that bother you? -- . Maddow's interruptions: 2:21, 2:31, 2:33, 2:51, 2:56, 2:58, 3:03, 3:11, 3:12
@schulwitz First 3 minutes eh? You watched only 20%? Rather convenient, since it nicely "supports" your claim. I'll concede that it appears she is interrupting him where you say she is, but it's because he ignored her question. Wouldn't any interviewer do the same to keep their guest on topic? Try 4:43, 5:37, and 7:00 where he interrupts questions in progress to again go off topic and avoid the issues she brings up. 11:00 where he talks over her question to slam his opponent and ramble.
Um...really? OK, I'll bite, but in return, I expect to hear why you think her question is a legitimate journalistic question:
"if you find out [this anonymous donation] is from criminals, or foreign interests, or communists, or something, wouldn't that bother you?"
.
Usually liberals don't defend this sort of McCarthy-like questioning, but since you're defending Maddow's question as legitimate journalism, let's hear your defense.
@schulwitz Are you saying that questioning the source of funds for a political ad campaign is not a legitimate question? Why is it illegal to donate more than $X to a candidate's campaign fund? (To avoid special interests from "buying" a politician.) Why, then shouldn't the provenance of ad (which costs more than the max donation amount) be questioned? Do you honestly believe that there is a difference between campaign donations and an ad buy? *I* wouldn't want to be elected like that. You?
@tygre . "Are you saying that questioning the source of funds for a political ad campaign is not a legitimate question?" - No, I am merely asking you to defend Maddow's McCarthyist question as a legitimate journalism question. - Definition of McCarthyism - The practice of publicizing accusations of political disloyalty or subversion with insufficient regard to evidence. - It's McCarthyism because she alludes to "criminals" and "communists" with NO EVIDENCE. - So, please, defend McCarthyism.
Bad job on trying to connect to Maddow's question. For this to be McCarthyism (per the definition YOU supplied), she would have to actually ACCUSE him of taking money from criminals/commies/etc.
Watch the clip again. She merely asks whether an anonymous donation bothers him. Start at 2:00. The question is, "If you get elected in part because of this spending and then you find out it's from [list] wouldn't that bother you?" A legit question.
LOL, I see, so you side with FOX NEWS, in that, as long as you ask a question with a "cavuto" (see Urban Dictionary), you are not "actually ACCUSING" someone of anything.
.
Fair enough, just recognize that you are using FOX NEWS logic here.
@schulwitz Firstly, as an Oregonian, I don't think it's unreasonable to want to know whether my elected officials would be bothered if they found out they were anonymously funded by criminals/terrorists/etc. As for your "cavuto" comment, you can call it what you want (because I doubt I'll ever change your mind), but I don't think that label applies here. She asked him a hypothetical question about his personal ethics, not "Are you funded by criminals" as you seem to be interpreting it.
Oh give me a break, right before she asks the terrorist/communist question, she says "IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL for somebody to try and give you a donation that size. Isn't this essentially an IN KIND donation of that size?"
.
Let me just ask you one question: if Bill O'Reilly had asked Obama the exact same question about one of his anonymous contributions, would you defend Bill O'Reilly?
.
Also, please answer my yes-or-no "charming" question.
@schulwitz Does I think she thinks he's "charming" in the strictest dictionary sense of the word? No. I imagine she probably used "charming" when she meant to say "quaint."
As for O'Reilly & Obama, I would absolutely defend O'Reilly on the same question, provided the circumstances were the same, i.e., the anonymous donation in question exceeds the maximum size allowed. Had the anonymous ad buy fallen within established donation limits, I seriously doubt she would have even brought it up.
OK, fair enough, but recognize that most people would consider such words to be sarcastic.
.
It still amazes me that you think her questions were relevant though. It's not just that she focused on an anonymous contribution, it's that she refused to focus on the political issues (despite protests from Robinson) and chose to focus on Robinson's personal life and science. Furthermore, she is disingenuous in her questioning. Continued...
For instance, in this video, at 0:11, she says she wants to understand hormesis, but throws in lies about him supporting nuclear testing, confusing the subject. Then, when Robinson starts to explain hormesis in detail at 1:17, he's not even allowed to talk for 6 seconds before she interrupts him at 1:23. Then, when he calls her out on it, she claims it's due to the delay due to the satellites. Total bullshit and she knows it, SATELLITE DELAYS ARE NOT 6 SECONDS LONG!
@schulwitz I don't know Robinson's position on nuclear testing, so I can't say whether her comments about it are lies. On 1:17-1:23, I'd say it looks like he made a statement, and she asked a followup question. Unfortunately, he did what so many of us from the NW do, and paused between sentences, so when he continued talking about 1.5 seconds later, it appeared (to him, because of the delay) that she interrupted mid-response, not in the gap. Had it been in-person, I think it would have been ok.
Actually he doesn't. Plus, she interrupted him, so she should have just apologized and said "it's the medium" instead of banging her head on her desk like a child.
.
Then, at 2:46, when he asks if she wants an answer TO HER FUCKING QUESTION, SHE SAYS NO! Then changes the topics to AIDS!
.
She doesn't care about his answers, she just brought up hormesis to slam him on radiation and lie about his position on nuclear testing. BULLSHIT AND YOU KNOW IT!
Her "job" is to interview this guy, and yet when he asks her "can I please answer YOUR question?", she says she won't allow it (2:46).
.
In addition, she makes up lies regarding Robinson's position on nuclear testing. Then, when she is confronted on the matter, she doesn't defend her position, provide a source, or apologize, she merely changes the subject.
.
Do you understand why such behavior is absolutely disingenuous and unethical journalism?
@schulwitz "Do you understand why such behavior is absolutely disingenuous and unethical journalism?"
Yes, it's why I don't watch these horrible shows. I've never seen the Maddow show before; I landed on this page by following a link from another website. I personally dislike any/all dramatic/sensationalistic "journalism" despite which side of the aisle it comes from.
Now what's the difference between what I just did and what you have done?
-
You have provided words, but again, NO SPECIFIC EXAMPLES. That is not evidence.
-
I have provided paraphrasing and time points, taken directly from the video, to aid my argument. That is evidence.
-
For you, I would recommend attending some criminal court trials. They're totally free, can be a lot of fun to watch, and they are excellent examples of how evidence and reason can be applied in making an argument.
@schulwitz Oh please, if you presented any of your "evidence" in a court, it would be rejected out of hand as specious and incomplete. You'll probably want an example, so here: You say that calling someone patronizing and charming is "...being sarcastic, or maybe just stupid." That may be true in another setting, but you fail to acknowledge the context of her statement, in which she tried to ask him about hormesis and he dismissed her as unable to understand, so her retort is contextually true.
Again, you tell me to how to apply reason and evidence in an argument, yet fail to do so in an effective fashion yourself. I can see that trying to reason with you is useless because, as I surmised earlier, you lack the common sense needed for a logical appeal to be at all effective. Instead, you resort to presenting evidence that is specious (at best), yet lacks substance and credibility when scrutinized as part of the whole picture.
I cannot stand Rachel (like really, really don't like her), so for me to defend her causes me actual physical pain. However, Art is such a moronic twat that he makes her seem like a decent human being.
She lost this one..its not even close..only hardcore liberals who believe every time Maddow takes someone on in an interview she comes out on top..she ate shit on this one..I don't even know the guy but he tore her up in this interview.
Art Robinson is total idiot. He let his dead horse die and sit next to his compound/ranch fence decomposing where children in a school bus viewed twice daily. Not thinking as usual................
The stupid slanderous media types who have no idea how to do proper journalism or how to think. Robinson is a brilliant guy. Seriously, he is. I've read his work! Listen to that tiny minded Maddow rant on with left wing dogma claiming she's not smearing all the while she does it! It's amusing. She'd slander Thomas Jefferson, who was a radical!! What she is doing is cherry picking out of context quotes. That is highly irrational and dishonest.
This guy has not shown integrity. He just drones on and on interrupting while claiming Maddow is the one interrupting. What a piece-of-work this guy is.
Get em Rachel. Oh how I love her...even when she's not entirely fair to her guests I just can't fault her for attacking the damn near completely hypocritical and profiteering republican/conservative position. It's about time we have a liberal pundit with some teeth.
With regard to this buffoon, he was simply in over his head and consequently got exactly what he deserved both here and in the election results.
man what a unfortunate event would be to paid for three or four credict class and the first day finding out that the proffesor is a wackjob of the calliber of Art Robinson.
@CHEETAH69 Intelligent woman, LOLOLOLOL Hardly. Its even questionable that she is even a woman period. Look at her adams apple. He/She is a liar and a munipulator. She part of the MSM who serves to dumb down the zombies like you.
@vilhelmcasp The cunt is a liar who happens to be a lesbian. Why dont you ask her how well the continued occupation in Afghanistan is going now? You know the one she is supporting now that Obama has continued to keep troops there/
@truthout911 Except she's not supportive of the war in Afghanistan and everything she quoted was from his newsletter. Also, calling her a "cunt" and naming yourself truthout911 is the best way to convince people that you're a rude, sexist, conspiracy theorist that doesn't want to be nor should be taken seriously.
@erdanidi No she does support Obama on Afghan and is not critical of Obama on the wars. Me calling Richard a cunt is called telling the truth. We you have outed yourself as a fake phony two faced liberal who will complain about wars and tyranny will republicans are in , but when Dems take over, Oh its neuanced positions or war is peace crap.. Phoney liberals, you got to love em/
@erdanidi In all probabilty she tooks quotes from different sections of his news letter and strung it together as if it were one single quote. She got caught doing that with Rand Paul.
Watching this video actually makes me glad and proud I voted for Robinson and reaffirms my belief that Maddow is too snarky to be taken seriously. Why doesn't she ask any questions about issues that matter to Oregonians? How about jobs and protecting the natural resources of the state that used to drive the economy?
@walnerj so you're proud you voted for a man who thinks we should be exposed to RADIATION? and a man who thinks aids was a government conspiracy? or that globla warming isn't caused by people?
@RuthDebris Yes, yes, and most definitely yes. Read about hormesis and toxicology. Art has already responded to AIDs as a government conspiracy. That article was taken out of context. Finally, yes I'm proud of someone who will stand up for science and refute the claim of human caused global warming.
@walnerj Maybe if Art would have calmed down, she could have.
How is education not relevant to Oregon. I to am a district 4 voter. I was shocked by his homeschooling curriculum. And yes, I did more research on it after watching this interview.
@ 1:51 - she's going to blame her rude interupting on the delay???? Rachel needs to stick to her "monologues." MSNBC = fair and unbiased new source as Microsoft = cutting-edge technology company... Gotta go, there's a sale on Zunes at Walmart!!!
Art did not want to answer any questions that might put him in a negative light. He may well believe these things, but seems to understand that some voters might not agree with these extreme views. So he is attacking rather than answering. I understand that he has written a lot, but these were not academic papers, this was his newsletter. And if he really can't remember what he wrote, he could state his current position, but instead, I get the idea he does know, he just says"15 years ago!"
Sorry folks, but Maddow just got a dose of her own medicine. She just got OWNED! That was AWESOME! I wish I could vote for this guy! All you suckas who still buy the garbage the controlled media feeds you..... enjoy your slavery! That made my day!
@hula4483 How many times does BECK , Hannity , O'Rielly let ANYONE TALK ? They NEVER show what the OTHER SIDE (DEMS) really think , FOX tells you what is being said without showing a click of what really happened . And its just AMAZING that YOU think that FOX will SAY something TRUE, that is NOT on THEIR SCRIPT,ALSO gives MILLIONS of DOLLARS to the REPS . How is that a REAL NEWS STATION ?!?!?!? They JUST SAY what the REPUBS want them to say , AND also what MURDOCK WANTS ! YOU are OWNED by FOX !!
@toybb04 You're an idiot who doesn't know how to read. Where did I ever say that I liked or even watched FAUX NEWS?! I suppose since you are still trapped in the FALSE Left/Right Paradigm, you think that anyone who opposes MSNBC must be a FAUX NEWS Cheerleader. LOL! Seriously, brake the chains with which you are bound! Anyone who gets their news from Mainstream Media is a FOOL! They are all owned by the same group of Elite control freaks. Wake Up and Smell Your Slavery!
Madow got pimp slapped like the chump she is! That was awesome to watch her get drilled by Dr. Art Robinson. Madow needed extended doses of her medication after that drubbing she took.
@Rustybke By an IDIOT who could NOT REMEMBER what was in HIS OWN NEWSLETTER !!!!! He was RUDE and kept RAMBLING ON, without saying ANYTHING ! Talking OVER RACHEL , ON AND ON !!!! When Rachel tried to ask another question , he was still on the FIRST QUESTION he DID NOT answer ! I feel REAL sorry for HIS kids who had to learn from HIS RACIST TEXT BOOK !!!!!!!!
@toybb04 You are the dumbest CUNT ever to bang on a key board! Please go punch your mother and father (if you even know him) in the mouth for having such an obtuse fuckstick as a child!
Lindy, Radio waves do travel through free space at very close to the speed of light. A geostationary satellite is approximately 35,700 Kms (22,300 miles) above the equator. So the delay of 1.5secs is realistic.
Apart from that, Mr Robinson didn't answer a single question, he deflected every question about his campaign funds by questioning his opponents campaign funds, he defected every question about his previously published theories by claiming them to be lies, or out of context.
wow... that guy is an idiot claiming that radio waves or sattelite signals travel at the speed of light... and he's supposed to be "a very good scientist"
@whatiswrongwithus BECAUSE HE WOULD NOT ANSWER ANYTHING !!!!! No matter HOW HARD she tried , He just kept trying to answer the 1st Question , WITHOUT SAYING ANYTHING !!! So if you vote for this IDIOT , you will get exactly what you DID NOT WANT ! He has NO Idea what he has in his NEWSLETTER , or Previous Writings !!!! And YOU dont think he is PATHETIC ?!?!?!????
Obviously you have no clue about a science or scientists for that matter, but if you did then you would understand that science is about questioning the unquestionable and doing what some consider the impossible. Scientist write hundreds if not thousands of papers pertaining to their work, so one could easily argue that it is simple for a scientist to forget word for word what he wrote in a newspaper over 15 years ago. What puzzles me is why Maddow did adress a single current issue.
@toybb04 This is exactly why Robinson left the classroom for many years and only taught sporadically after the early 80's!
I looked up the newsletters Maddow quoted. She wasn't taking materials out of context. And she had to use older sources because you have to subscribe an pay a large fee to obtain any of the newsletters from the past 12 years.
Rachel Maddow had no interest in learning what Art Robinson thinks about current political issues, she was only interested in trying to make him look like a nut, by cherry-picking through hundreds of pages of research. A fair interview would have had Ms. Maddow present Peter DeFazio's accomplishments and view of the future and let Art Robinson defend himself on the issues.
As somebody who used to sit a little more to the right than the left but never as extreme as this classy piece of work. I have come to the conclusion that most extreme right wingers are just high functioning schizophrenics.
This guy is completely crazy. I hope he does not get into office. He is down in the polls against DeFazio, so that is good. I believe he is nuts. He can't even answer a question.
Rachel Madcow is a sick fisting lesbian. I really don't care what she does, but I just though the facts should be known. I think Perez Hilton needs to out the Obama ho. Typical hetrophobe fister, loves to dis on old hetro people and twist facts to fit up the other fisters asses who watch her BS. If she wanted to get to know him, all the ho had to do was go to: independentscientist com.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. - Harold Lewis Professor of Physics UCSB resignation letter to head of APS ;)
@SmashTheRight38 Excellent point. I looked at Art's website. He says nothing of substance on his site. He simply parrots RW talking points and doesn't explain what he thinks on ANY of them.
@lamwhutl What strawman argument? She quoted him. He was the one who refused to answer any question. He got all pissed that she brought up his writing on HIV. She switched to radiation and he was pissed that she brought that up.
Watch clip 2. Rachel gets Art to settle down to answer one question. She asks him to clairfy his HIV/AIDS belief. Minutes earlier he had told her that she was too stupid to understand his radiation theory. When asked that last question, he asked to return to radiation!
@lamwhutlam . She said repeatedly she was trying to "get to know him", thus the absence of a discussion on the issues. Both of them interrupted quite a bit, hence her statement of explanation of a satellite interview. That was in evidence at the beginning of Part 1 during the introduction. As one that is seeking a future in public speaking, I was disappointed in the way he handled himself and certainly, in such unprofessional attire. Not professional or courteous, at all.
@lamwhutlam . She said repeatedly she was trying to "get to know him", thus the absence of a discussion on the issues. Both of them interrupted quite a bit, hence her statement of explanation of a satellite interview. That was in evidence at the beginning of Part 1 during the introduction. As one that is seeking a future in public speaking, I was disappointed in the way he handled himself and certainly, in such unprofessional attire. Not professional or courteous, at all.
@lamwhut No, his business sells racist material, which I feel is a reflection of his beliefs. As a voter in his district that matters to me.
Seriously, Robinson wouldn't let her ask a question. He was trying to bully her. I do think that at times he didn't remember to account for the time delay; the energy waves carrying the message may move at the speed of light, but that doesn't mean the tech that sends and receives those messages does.
@funnyhaha71 You sound like someone who failed every science and math course you've ever taken. Keep working on it! Someday you'll learn that 2 + 2 = 4.
"It doesn't help that Robinson told Maddow that she was to stupid to understand his science. He refused to answer questions because of that? Nonsense."
and how many scientists do we know have broken it down into "laymans terms" at press conferences, interviews, lectures, etc.? Carl Sagan was on TV all the time.
@hipstermi That is vastly different from refusing to answer the question at all. Robinson wouldn't "break it down" because he believed Rachel and everyone else to be too stupid to understand that much.
Robinson was embarrassed by his beliefs, so, instead of discussing them, he deflected. He knows that if the electorate learned of his beliefs, they wouldn't vote for him. He was right; they didn't!
Just because so-and-so did something doesn't mean it is right for someone else to do the same.
@funnyhaha71 Have you read anything he has published? Go to Google Scholar - he is not only highly published, but highly cited. (Do you know what that means even?) Maddcow is too stupid to understand his science and I bet you are too. I rolled on the floor laughing at her when I saw the interview.
@toybb04 I don't know how she managed to refrain from cutting his mike. Glenn Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity and other conservatives would have booted any opposing guest who behaved in such a manner. Rachel stuck with it.
hmm, Guess Maddow shouldn't really interview anyone, weak, poor, pick a term. She is a bit less than sharp, "I have a Satellite" but gets her butt kicked. Guess Maddow thought she was debating another "Word" Document.
@hipstermi "...Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
I hope this allows for you to understand the character of David Rockefeller, if you feel so inclined to stand in his defense
@hipstermi Here's a copy-and-paste quote for your liking (sorry I couldn't think for myself in making this quote--Rockefeller had to do it for me). This from his Memoirs: "For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions...
@hipstermi ...And did you watch this Aaron Russo film? You certainly should--you'll firstly find out that most Americans cannot be taxed by the federal income tax, as it is an excise tax, and not permitted under the U.S. constitution.
@hipstermi The David Rockefeller quote I posted earlier I found before I'd seen Aaron Russo's film, but you're right, it was in there--though I don't know why you would back someone like David Rockefeller or any Rockefeller for the matter, for if you knew their history you wouldn't be proud in sticking up for his defense, unless you're a sort of incumbent for Rachel and the rabbit hole to hell of the New World Order (I doubt that you are). I'm curious as to how you approach 9/11, if I may ask...
@hipstermi -- A little fisting bitch with his fist up his ass. Maybe you can go back to public school and get some more fisting condoms for your closet of fun.
I don't believe in magical beings or magical powers.
Conservative Christians though...you have the levitating vampire like savior, the mage who can part seas, them claiming they have Holy Ghost magical powers...
don't you eel foolish for this childish belief in magic on the right?
LOLLLLLL! I love this guy! He wasn't politically correct at all and he did an excellent job of reflecting how most of US feel! He totally refused to let ms maddow set the agenda and she couldn't handle it! After all the corruption we've seen in washington she had the audacity to try to smear Mr Robinson? Yet Mr Robinson's opponent is an intricate part of the washington corruption and loves to govern against the American people.
umm he doesn't represent most americans, even if you are a tea party nut, most americans don't agree with, like or think your movement will be around.
one thing most americans wanted though was a single payer healthcare in the healthcare bill. but the conservatives(obama) wouldn't have that as it may hurt his medical company buddies profit margins, so we got this shit corporate welfare bill.
@hipstermi Not that it should matter, but I am no Christian, and I believe in no God other than that "God" is the force and laws that allow everthing to work and develop. You seem to have a hate for me and sounds as though you think I'm Republican as well. Well I am not. I am a constitutionalist, and there really aren't too many. Republicans and Democrats are the same snake. It's a sytem, like a mafia, as I stated earlier. They put on the illusion of combating, though work towards the same means
Then why be conservative? You are allying yourself with people who believe in invisible beings with magical powers...and talk to said invisible being. doesn't sound very mentally healthy. not to mention the history of opposing science and progress the church has.
@hipstermi -- Yo! Why don't you STFU you unicorn riding little bitch. What's wrong, did your boy Obama not deliver on all your unicorn Marxist dreams? Before you start talking about people who believe in a God in an ancient book, maybe should think about how the god of state has failed you. Unicorn riding mufka!
@hipstermi -- AHAHAHAHA!!! I must of hit one your little progressive nerves, huh, you ho ass bitch of the state. Mmmmm... Hmmm... get on your mukfkn unicorn bitch and ride that power of the state right back to your little "progressive" Marxist hole you came from. All you little bitches can do is run around and try shame and name call the very people that make up the majority of America. Do you really think that's going to get your sorry asses somewhere?
@hipstermi "...our birthright for what we take to be the security of the hive until we have destroyed ourselves and it."
The constitution is all that we have to protect ourselves from a government of individual interests bent on control of the world. Why is anything that's deemed conspiracy by the media considered taboo. It only makes me want to research the subject more and figure out why it's being demonized.
I love what this country was founded on--unalienable rights, not gov intervention.
I grew up in Eugene, and this breaks my heart. I'm SO ashamed that someone like this could even win a primary. What is going on that a state that once had intelligent thoughtful conservatives like Mark Hatfield (with whom I disagreed on many issues) now has only certified loons in the Republican party? I don't want to be a partisan shill, but when the Republicans nominate sexist, crackpots, we have no choice but to do everything we can from people like this having access to power.
@alisar Dearest Alisar, has this video really got you believing this man is a "crackpot" and "sextist"? Why can't this man simply be experienced and ornery? What part of this begs the question of: is he sextist? He's only standing on his principles, and he knows what this show will do to tea party candidates like himself, that is, pick them apart and persuade masses of believers. She's tried demonizing people like Rand Paul as well, and he's had to endure the barrage of scrutiny. Pick pique..
"as this video really got you believing this man is a "crackpot"
His published work took care of most of that...his angry replys cutting off an interviewer...AND denying the newsletter he wrote took care of the rest.
@hipstermi Another great passage, from Louis J. Halle, Jr. says: "The purpose of education in a free society of men is to gain knowledge of the universe in which they live and their relation to it...But the worker who has retreated into the hive can dispense with knowledge of it; all he needs is to master one of the technical skills required by the society. In return for performing one operation, the hive will feed him and shelter him for the duration of his life...We shall continue to sell..."
how can you support the Republicans with the belief and/or ass kissing of christianity?
I mean come on...belief in invisible beings with magical powers? The whole tell you what to do/think/vote via indoctrination? can't argue it cause "god" said it.
@hipstermi ...the way it does seem to the public. I would beg you to do such research of AIDS being government engineered. He's a scientist remember--not a media-fed sheep, so he's verily researched the subject.
Your bantering will get you and I nowhere. The two-party system is mafia and both my rights and your rights are being heavily stripped away daily. George Washington said: "Government is not reason; is not eloquent, it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and fearful master."
@hipstermi I wrote that George Washington quote down and keep it in my small journal at all times. Where does your fear stem from? I've nothing better to do than help my fellow man. Have I hurt or upset you in some way? Or perhaps have I embaressed you (and are you becoming embaressed now? Don't be)? Please don't belittle me for trying to reveal the things that I have found to be evident. I think for myself, but I do owe my knowledge to greater men than I. What's wrong with reading books?
@petstep "Where does your fear stem from" There was no "fear" in my reply...who would fear the intellectually lazy GOP? "'ve nothing better to do than help my fellow man" Gosh how noble! "Have I hurt or upset you in some way" no "embaressed you" "you becoming embaressed now?" not at all
@hipstermi ...cont. "The supranatural sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries." *The meetings are meetings of The Council on Foreign Relations. The mega-corperations that own the indidual news stations will suprise you, and all of which attend these meetings.
As far as the AIDS issue goes, it's a shame that Art can't talk about what he probably does feel is Government engineered, because of...
@hipstermi David Rockefeller in 1991: "We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government..."cont.
This "quote" is from an asshole conspiracy theorist Russo who died from his own fatass lifestyle. Directing "Trading Places" hardly makes him a credible source.
Challenge- show me proof he said this quote. Russo's movie was second hand info....designed to scare you and make a lot of money.
@debunkingdebunkers Perhaps I don't, but if I did, would it matter? I'm not sure that he knows where the money came from, but again, I don't see that it matters considering that (like he stated) special interest groups are donating loads of IMF Federal Reserve notes to career politicians--perhaps openly--in order to get them elected. Surely you agree that the sheep masses are more easily swayed by the greatest bombardment of commercials and roadside signs than actual ethics and liberty. Go Art!
There sure is a lot of hateful comments here. It's all directed to the right. Democrats are compassionate? I guess compassionate only if you think like them... Else crush em! And you advocate freedom of speech and expression? Hypocrites stand for nothing! The constitution and judeo-Christian beliefs are the basis of your freedoms you useful idiots! Wake the F*%#}***^ up!
@vilhelmcasp I don't think so. He may not have handled himself correctly but he is not an idiot. Do you really think this SCIENTIST doesn't have anything to back up what he is saying? BTW I don't belong to any idiot political party. I just do something called research instead of calling everyone that disagrees with american conventional thing, an idiot. Have you researched AIDs or climate change?
@debunkingdebunkers well you have to keep in mind he has said things that are quite obviously not true and that I personally find quite disturbing. its just that the idea of a man in political office who thinks that satellite interviews happen at the speed of light is quite scary. then again, i should probably worry more about Christine O'Donnel :)
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Since the govt. committed 9/11, why arent truthers demanding the release of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who is on trial for his life for a crime truthers claim he did not commit?
If there was no flight 93, please explain how 95% of the plane debris was recovered?
If there was no flight 77, please explain how 130+ witnesses reported seeing a plane?
@ctcole77 There were both of those flights--as there were passengers that clearly died in those plans--excuse me, ~planes~, so yes, the debris was there. Now explain the nano thermite found in the debris, or the sheer anomaly of the collapse of both towers dropping at free-fall speed (was there NO resistance whatsoever in a building comprised of steel with many, many levels of resistance abounding in each floor of the buildings. There are physics to be accounted for. What say you of building 7?
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm disappointed . I was kind of waiting for the part when men dressed in white uniforms would appear and start chasing the "professor" with a big butterfly net..
quenuca 7 months ago
Comment removed
quenuca 7 months ago
madcow probably can't shut herself up due to her menses.
firesidechet 10 months ago
I wouldn't have been able to remain civil with this idiot. He wouldn't answer her questions, then began insulting her. Interviews are simple, the host asks a question and the guest answers. The guest instead goes on a tiraid and keeps with his talking points and has no evidence to support them along with changing the subject would drive me insane. Props to Rachael Maddow, Fox News acts like Art Robinson when interviewing someone who has different political ideals.
Jay16900 11 months ago 2
For all of those people who are defending Rachel in this clip, can you find even one 10 second time period where he is allowed to speak without interruption? How about 20 seconds?
.
Maddow behaves like a child here. Real journalists let the interviewee speak, allowing the viewer to determine if he or she is "crazy".
.
And sarcasm, are you fucking kidding me Rachel? Hey Rachel, when you call someone "patronizing and charming" you're being sarcastic, or maybe just stupid. Fucking retard.
schulwitz 11 months ago
@schulwitz
Maddow is fed up with Robinson in this clip. She tried to ask questions of this wingnut in part 1, to no avail, so by now she's had with him and his idiocy. If anyone is interrupting, it is Robinson. SHE can't get her questions out before HE starts spouting his unique brand of stupidity.
Get the whole picture before casting aspersions.
tygre 8 months ago
@tygre
.
So... no?
.
Calling someone "stupid" or a "wingnut" without giving a single example to support your claims... now that that's idiocy.
.
Try acting like an intellectual and you just might get treated like one.
schulwitz 8 months ago
@schulwitz Oh, I apologize. The interview that Robinson did w/ Maddow (you know, the one we're commenting on?) is ample evidence for anybody with even a smidgen of common sense to see that he is a complete idiot.
Apparently, you do not fall into the category of having "common sense" and so you did not realize that there was a vast body of evidence right in front of you.
And those of us who ARE intellectuals don't need ACT as such, because we simply ARE.
tygre 8 months ago
@tygre
.
Walk into a formal debate, take a critical thinking course, or study formal logic. Then tell the experts that you are an "intellectual" who is "right" simply BECAUSE you claim to "have common sense". You will get laughed out of the room.
.
Occupied academic circles all my life. Those who have to "fake it" always act like they have a position, but in my experience, they rarely attempt to integrate the evidence honestly or even articulate the reasoning warranting their claim.
schulwitz 8 months ago
@schulwitz If you look at my post history you'll see that I've integrated evidence and reason in my argument. I invited you to examine the first half of this interview, which makes it abundantly clear that Maddow is the one being interrupted. You tell me to bring evidence supporting my claim that Robinson is "stupid" and a "wingnut" but fail to do the same when you call Maddow "stupid" and a "fucking retard." If I am an idiot then, by your own logic, you too are an idiot. I can do this all day.
tygre 8 months ago
schulwitz 8 months ago
@schulwitz First 3 minutes eh? You watched only 20%? Rather convenient, since it nicely "supports" your claim. I'll concede that it appears she is interrupting him where you say she is, but it's because he ignored her question. Wouldn't any interviewer do the same to keep their guest on topic? Try 4:43, 5:37, and 7:00 where he interrupts questions in progress to again go off topic and avoid the issues she brings up. 11:00 where he talks over her question to slam his opponent and ramble.
tygre 8 months ago
@tygre
.
"but it's because he ignored her question."
.
Um...really? OK, I'll bite, but in return, I expect to hear why you think her question is a legitimate journalistic question:
"if you find out [this anonymous donation] is from criminals, or foreign interests, or communists, or something, wouldn't that bother you?"
.
Usually liberals don't defend this sort of McCarthy-like questioning, but since you're defending Maddow's question as legitimate journalism, let's hear your defense.
schulwitz 8 months ago
@schulwitz Are you saying that questioning the source of funds for a political ad campaign is not a legitimate question? Why is it illegal to donate more than $X to a candidate's campaign fund? (To avoid special interests from "buying" a politician.) Why, then shouldn't the provenance of ad (which costs more than the max donation amount) be questioned? Do you honestly believe that there is a difference between campaign donations and an ad buy? *I* wouldn't want to be elected like that. You?
tygre 8 months ago
schulwitz 8 months ago
@schulwitz
Good job on defining McCarthyism.
Bad job on trying to connect to Maddow's question. For this to be McCarthyism (per the definition YOU supplied), she would have to actually ACCUSE him of taking money from criminals/commies/etc.
Watch the clip again. She merely asks whether an anonymous donation bothers him. Start at 2:00. The question is, "If you get elected in part because of this spending and then you find out it's from [list] wouldn't that bother you?" A legit question.
tygre 8 months ago
@tygre
.
LOL, I see, so you side with FOX NEWS, in that, as long as you ask a question with a "cavuto" (see Urban Dictionary), you are not "actually ACCUSING" someone of anything.
.
Fair enough, just recognize that you are using FOX NEWS logic here.
.
See Daily Show clip "The Question Mark".
schulwitz 8 months ago
@schulwitz Firstly, as an Oregonian, I don't think it's unreasonable to want to know whether my elected officials would be bothered if they found out they were anonymously funded by criminals/terrorists/etc. As for your "cavuto" comment, you can call it what you want (because I doubt I'll ever change your mind), but I don't think that label applies here. She asked him a hypothetical question about his personal ethics, not "Are you funded by criminals" as you seem to be interpreting it.
tygre 8 months ago
@tygre
.
"as you seem to be interpreting it."
.
Oh give me a break, right before she asks the terrorist/communist question, she says "IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL for somebody to try and give you a donation that size. Isn't this essentially an IN KIND donation of that size?"
.
Let me just ask you one question: if Bill O'Reilly had asked Obama the exact same question about one of his anonymous contributions, would you defend Bill O'Reilly?
.
Also, please answer my yes-or-no "charming" question.
schulwitz 8 months ago
@schulwitz Does I think she thinks he's "charming" in the strictest dictionary sense of the word? No. I imagine she probably used "charming" when she meant to say "quaint."
As for O'Reilly & Obama, I would absolutely defend O'Reilly on the same question, provided the circumstances were the same, i.e., the anonymous donation in question exceeds the maximum size allowed. Had the anonymous ad buy fallen within established donation limits, I seriously doubt she would have even brought it up.
tygre 8 months ago
@tygre
.
OK, fair enough, but recognize that most people would consider such words to be sarcastic.
.
It still amazes me that you think her questions were relevant though. It's not just that she focused on an anonymous contribution, it's that she refused to focus on the political issues (despite protests from Robinson) and chose to focus on Robinson's personal life and science. Furthermore, she is disingenuous in her questioning. Continued...
schulwitz 8 months ago
For instance, in this video, at 0:11, she says she wants to understand hormesis, but throws in lies about him supporting nuclear testing, confusing the subject. Then, when Robinson starts to explain hormesis in detail at 1:17, he's not even allowed to talk for 6 seconds before she interrupts him at 1:23. Then, when he calls her out on it, she claims it's due to the delay due to the satellites. Total bullshit and she knows it, SATELLITE DELAYS ARE NOT 6 SECONDS LONG!
.
Obvious lies, no?
schulwitz 8 months ago
@schulwitz I don't know Robinson's position on nuclear testing, so I can't say whether her comments about it are lies. On 1:17-1:23, I'd say it looks like he made a statement, and she asked a followup question. Unfortunately, he did what so many of us from the NW do, and paused between sentences, so when he continued talking about 1.5 seconds later, it appeared (to him, because of the delay) that she interrupted mid-response, not in the gap. Had it been in-person, I think it would have been ok.
tygre 8 months ago
@tygre
.
"[he] paused between sentences."
.
Actually he doesn't. Plus, she interrupted him, so she should have just apologized and said "it's the medium" instead of banging her head on her desk like a child.
.
Then, at 2:46, when he asks if she wants an answer TO HER FUCKING QUESTION, SHE SAYS NO! Then changes the topics to AIDS!
.
She doesn't care about his answers, she just brought up hormesis to slam him on radiation and lie about his position on nuclear testing. BULLSHIT AND YOU KNOW IT!
schulwitz 8 months ago
@tygre
.
Her "job" is to interview this guy, and yet when he asks her "can I please answer YOUR question?", she says she won't allow it (2:46).
.
In addition, she makes up lies regarding Robinson's position on nuclear testing. Then, when she is confronted on the matter, she doesn't defend her position, provide a source, or apologize, she merely changes the subject.
.
Do you understand why such behavior is absolutely disingenuous and unethical journalism?
schulwitz 8 months ago
@schulwitz "Do you understand why such behavior is absolutely disingenuous and unethical journalism?"
Yes, it's why I don't watch these horrible shows. I've never seen the Maddow show before; I landed on this page by following a link from another website. I personally dislike any/all dramatic/sensationalistic "journalism" despite which side of the aisle it comes from.
tygre 8 months ago
@tygre
.
Now what's the difference between what I just did and what you have done?
-
You have provided words, but again, NO SPECIFIC EXAMPLES. That is not evidence.
-
I have provided paraphrasing and time points, taken directly from the video, to aid my argument. That is evidence.
-
For you, I would recommend attending some criminal court trials. They're totally free, can be a lot of fun to watch, and they are excellent examples of how evidence and reason can be applied in making an argument.
schulwitz 8 months ago
@schulwitz Oh please, if you presented any of your "evidence" in a court, it would be rejected out of hand as specious and incomplete. You'll probably want an example, so here: You say that calling someone patronizing and charming is "...being sarcastic, or maybe just stupid." That may be true in another setting, but you fail to acknowledge the context of her statement, in which she tried to ask him about hormesis and he dismissed her as unable to understand, so her retort is contextually true.
tygre 8 months ago
@tygre
.
"so her retort is contextually true."
.
You're ignoring the issue, which is:
.
Was her comment sarcastic? Or more specifically, do you believe Rachel Maddow actually believes Art Robinson is "charming"?
.
Simple yes-or-no question. Would love to hear an actual answer.
schulwitz 8 months ago
Again, you tell me to how to apply reason and evidence in an argument, yet fail to do so in an effective fashion yourself. I can see that trying to reason with you is useless because, as I surmised earlier, you lack the common sense needed for a logical appeal to be at all effective. Instead, you resort to presenting evidence that is specious (at best), yet lacks substance and credibility when scrutinized as part of the whole picture.
tygre 8 months ago
@tygre
"as I surmised earlier, you lack the common sense needed for a logical appeal to be at all effective."
.
I merely asked you to provide a defense of Maddow's question. What's wrong with that?
schulwitz 8 months ago
I cannot stand Rachel (like really, really don't like her), so for me to defend her causes me actual physical pain. However, Art is such a moronic twat that he makes her seem like a decent human being.
IDawgedYou 11 months ago
Wow, Maddow is an idiot, she should read up on hormesis before trying to throw mud on a guy for talking about radiation hormesis.
thegoodlocust 11 months ago
She lost this one..its not even close..only hardcore liberals who believe every time Maddow takes someone on in an interview she comes out on top..she ate shit on this one..I don't even know the guy but he tore her up in this interview.
SRVClapton1990 1 year ago
I don't know how she was able to have the patience to last 20 damn minutes with this douche.
bubblinbrownsugar616 1 year ago
Example of a blatant attempt to smear = 'How do you know the money didn't come from criminals?'
Example of fair reporting without smear attempt = 'How do you know the money didn't come from pastry chefs?'
Media bias is that simple folks!
CeltoSaxonKnight 1 year ago
Art Robinson is total idiot. He let his dead horse die and sit next to his compound/ranch fence decomposing where children in a school bus viewed twice daily. Not thinking as usual................
sfaster 1 year ago
Anyone who thinks Maddow won that debate has the brain power of a chimp.
ORagnar 1 year ago
@ORagnar
teabagger
wthstudios 1 year ago
The stupid slanderous media types who have no idea how to do proper journalism or how to think. Robinson is a brilliant guy. Seriously, he is. I've read his work! Listen to that tiny minded Maddow rant on with left wing dogma claiming she's not smearing all the while she does it! It's amusing. She'd slander Thomas Jefferson, who was a radical!! What she is doing is cherry picking out of context quotes. That is highly irrational and dishonest.
ORagnar 1 year ago
Sheesh. Can you imagine being married to this guy?! What an insufferable little punk!
shaynapunim1 1 year ago
This guy has not shown integrity. He just drones on and on interrupting while claiming Maddow is the one interrupting. What a piece-of-work this guy is.
eVVVVV 1 year ago
Get em Rachel. Oh how I love her...even when she's not entirely fair to her guests I just can't fault her for attacking the damn near completely hypocritical and profiteering republican/conservative position. It's about time we have a liberal pundit with some teeth.
With regard to this buffoon, he was simply in over his head and consequently got exactly what he deserved both here and in the election results.
lowenklee 1 year ago
Most awesome journalist today - period.
CHEETAH69 1 year ago 7
man what a unfortunate event would be to paid for three or four credict class and the first day finding out that the proffesor is a wackjob of the calliber of Art Robinson.
I want my money and time back.
JerezJulio 1 year ago
He's taught thousands of students? Who'd take a class with this crackpot?
petele345 1 year ago 7
@petele345 right. since when does satellite use light? pretty sure it's radio waves...
WowUrFcknHxC 8 months ago
Richard Maddow is an arrogant CUNT!
truthout911 1 year ago
@truthout911 take this sexist shit off the internet.
Davemanz 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Davemanz Truth hurts doesnt it.
truthout911 1 year ago
@truthout911 Only ignorant inbred neanderthals would look at an obviously intelligent woman is arrogant.
(the richard and cunt jab were just signs that you're immature)
CHEETAH69 1 year ago 2
@CHEETAH69 Intelligent woman, LOLOLOLOL Hardly. Its even questionable that she is even a woman period. Look at her adams apple. He/She is a liar and a munipulator. She part of the MSM who serves to dumb down the zombies like you.
truthout911 1 year ago
@truthout911 so you're judging her because shes a lesbian?
vilhelmcasp 1 year ago
@vilhelmcasp The cunt is a liar who happens to be a lesbian. Why dont you ask her how well the continued occupation in Afghanistan is going now? You know the one she is supporting now that Obama has continued to keep troops there/
truthout911 1 year ago
@truthout911 Except she's not supportive of the war in Afghanistan and everything she quoted was from his newsletter. Also, calling her a "cunt" and naming yourself truthout911 is the best way to convince people that you're a rude, sexist, conspiracy theorist that doesn't want to be nor should be taken seriously.
erdanidi 1 year ago
@erdanidi No she does support Obama on Afghan and is not critical of Obama on the wars. Me calling Richard a cunt is called telling the truth. We you have outed yourself as a fake phony two faced liberal who will complain about wars and tyranny will republicans are in , but when Dems take over, Oh its neuanced positions or war is peace crap.. Phoney liberals, you got to love em/
truthout911 1 year ago
@erdanidi In all probabilty she tooks quotes from different sections of his news letter and strung it together as if it were one single quote. She got caught doing that with Rand Paul.
truthout911 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He lives a couple miles away from my house and this interview verified every horrific rumor i have heard about him.
AddictoEnvy 1 year ago
Wow. I mean, WOW.
jamielen68 1 year ago
Watching this video actually makes me glad and proud I voted for Robinson and reaffirms my belief that Maddow is too snarky to be taken seriously. Why doesn't she ask any questions about issues that matter to Oregonians? How about jobs and protecting the natural resources of the state that used to drive the economy?
walnerj 1 year ago
@walnerj so you're proud you voted for a man who thinks we should be exposed to RADIATION? and a man who thinks aids was a government conspiracy? or that globla warming isn't caused by people?
RuthDebris 1 year ago
@RuthDebris Yes, yes, and most definitely yes. Read about hormesis and toxicology. Art has already responded to AIDs as a government conspiracy. That article was taken out of context. Finally, yes I'm proud of someone who will stand up for science and refute the claim of human caused global warming.
walnerj 1 year ago
@walnerj A guy who thinks there's nothing wrong with a little radiation for the people of Oregon deserves to have the issue brought up to him.
Davemanz 1 year ago
@walnerj Maybe if Art would have calmed down, she could have.
How is education not relevant to Oregon. I to am a district 4 voter. I was shocked by his homeschooling curriculum. And yes, I did more research on it after watching this interview.
How is HIV/AIDs not relevant?
funnyhaha71 1 year ago
Senile old grump for sure...........
sfaster 1 year ago 2
@ 1:51 - she's going to blame her rude interupting on the delay???? Rachel needs to stick to her "monologues." MSNBC = fair and unbiased new source as Microsoft = cutting-edge technology company... Gotta go, there's a sale on Zunes at Walmart!!!
coupconnection 1 year ago
Maddow is to MSNBC as O'Reilly is to Fox News.
strych97 1 year ago
Art did not want to answer any questions that might put him in a negative light. He may well believe these things, but seems to understand that some voters might not agree with these extreme views. So he is attacking rather than answering. I understand that he has written a lot, but these were not academic papers, this was his newsletter. And if he really can't remember what he wrote, he could state his current position, but instead, I get the idea he does know, he just says"15 years ago!"
darvus2000 1 year ago
That's the just the speed of light maddam;, it's much faster than that
MachineSociety 1 year ago
This guy is nuts besides stealing my Carhart Jacket.
It's just the speed of light....................
sfaster 1 year ago
Sorry folks, but Maddow just got a dose of her own medicine. She just got OWNED! That was AWESOME! I wish I could vote for this guy! All you suckas who still buy the garbage the controlled media feeds you..... enjoy your slavery! That made my day!
hula4483 1 year ago
@hula4483 How many times does BECK , Hannity , O'Rielly let ANYONE TALK ? They NEVER show what the OTHER SIDE (DEMS) really think , FOX tells you what is being said without showing a click of what really happened . And its just AMAZING that YOU think that FOX will SAY something TRUE, that is NOT on THEIR SCRIPT,ALSO gives MILLIONS of DOLLARS to the REPS . How is that a REAL NEWS STATION ?!?!?!? They JUST SAY what the REPUBS want them to say , AND also what MURDOCK WANTS ! YOU are OWNED by FOX !!
toybb04 1 year ago
@toybb04 You're an idiot who doesn't know how to read. Where did I ever say that I liked or even watched FAUX NEWS?! I suppose since you are still trapped in the FALSE Left/Right Paradigm, you think that anyone who opposes MSNBC must be a FAUX NEWS Cheerleader. LOL! Seriously, brake the chains with which you are bound! Anyone who gets their news from Mainstream Media is a FOOL! They are all owned by the same group of Elite control freaks. Wake Up and Smell Your Slavery!
hula4483 1 year ago
Sigh. I feel sad being from that area of Oregon.
metaknight1285 1 year ago
@metaknight1285 Oh man, I know right? D:
HaveAnEmotasticDay 1 year ago
Madow got pimp slapped like the chump she is! That was awesome to watch her get drilled by Dr. Art Robinson. Madow needed extended doses of her medication after that drubbing she took.
Rustybke 1 year ago
@Rustybke By an IDIOT who could NOT REMEMBER what was in HIS OWN NEWSLETTER !!!!! He was RUDE and kept RAMBLING ON, without saying ANYTHING ! Talking OVER RACHEL , ON AND ON !!!! When Rachel tried to ask another question , he was still on the FIRST QUESTION he DID NOT answer ! I feel REAL sorry for HIS kids who had to learn from HIS RACIST TEXT BOOK !!!!!!!!
toybb04 1 year ago
@toybb04 You are the dumbest CUNT ever to bang on a key board! Please go punch your mother and father (if you even know him) in the mouth for having such an obtuse fuckstick as a child!
Rustybke 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@toybb04 And PLEASE don't reproduce!
Rustybke 1 year ago
Lindy, Radio waves do travel through free space at very close to the speed of light. A geostationary satellite is approximately 35,700 Kms (22,300 miles) above the equator. So the delay of 1.5secs is realistic.
Apart from that, Mr Robinson didn't answer a single question, he deflected every question about his campaign funds by questioning his opponents campaign funds, he defected every question about his previously published theories by claiming them to be lies, or out of context.
Chuck41a 1 year ago
@Chuck41a THANK YOU !!! You got this right !!!!!!!!! STOP the REP and FOX HYPOCRACY, NOW !!!!!!!!
toybb04 1 year ago
wow... that guy is an idiot claiming that radio waves or sattelite signals travel at the speed of light... and he's supposed to be "a very good scientist"
*BULL*
Lindylooization 1 year ago
Rachel is more level headed than this dumbass!
padude64 1 year ago
@btdt300 asshat: you're wearing one.
daftnomad 1 year ago
Maddow is pathetic, 10 minute interview and I could not find one question about the current political race in his district, are we sure this is news?
whatiswrongwithus 1 year ago
@whatiswrongwithus BECAUSE HE WOULD NOT ANSWER ANYTHING !!!!! No matter HOW HARD she tried , He just kept trying to answer the 1st Question , WITHOUT SAYING ANYTHING !!! So if you vote for this IDIOT , you will get exactly what you DID NOT WANT ! He has NO Idea what he has in his NEWSLETTER , or Previous Writings !!!! And YOU dont think he is PATHETIC ?!?!?!????
toybb04 1 year ago
@toybb04
Obviously you have no clue about a science or scientists for that matter, but if you did then you would understand that science is about questioning the unquestionable and doing what some consider the impossible. Scientist write hundreds if not thousands of papers pertaining to their work, so one could easily argue that it is simple for a scientist to forget word for word what he wrote in a newspaper over 15 years ago. What puzzles me is why Maddow did adress a single current issue.
whatiswrongwithus 1 year ago
wow she is just a hack.
nobhiker 1 year ago
@JayTristanYo You are correct. I looked at a bunch of his newsletters on his website and they are outrageous.
funnyhaha71 1 year ago
@toybb04 This is exactly why Robinson left the classroom for many years and only taught sporadically after the early 80's!
I looked up the newsletters Maddow quoted. She wasn't taking materials out of context. And she had to use older sources because you have to subscribe an pay a large fee to obtain any of the newsletters from the past 12 years.
I am voting for DeFazio.
funnyhaha71 1 year ago
Rachel Maddow had no interest in learning what Art Robinson thinks about current political issues, she was only interested in trying to make him look like a nut, by cherry-picking through hundreds of pages of research. A fair interview would have had Ms. Maddow present Peter DeFazio's accomplishments and view of the future and let Art Robinson defend himself on the issues.
lizright 1 year ago
This guy is so crazy that my FLASH plug-in quit and turned off the video.
singularxxx 1 year ago 2
As somebody who used to sit a little more to the right than the left but never as extreme as this classy piece of work. I have come to the conclusion that most extreme right wingers are just high functioning schizophrenics.
evonsparrow 1 year ago
This guy is completely crazy. I hope he does not get into office. He is down in the polls against DeFazio, so that is good. I believe he is nuts. He can't even answer a question.
pinotfilmnoir 1 year ago
art robinson's grasp of reality is tenuous at best.....just like glenn beck's grasp.
listening to art robinson prattle about global warming is comparable to listening to tiger woods on the topic of marital fidelity,
what art robinson knows about meteorology and physics could fit into the reservoir tip of a condom.
rebjiii 1 year ago
Rachel Madcow is a sick fisting lesbian. I really don't care what she does, but I just though the facts should be known. I think Perez Hilton needs to out the Obama ho. Typical hetrophobe fister, loves to dis on old hetro people and twist facts to fit up the other fisters asses who watch her BS. If she wanted to get to know him, all the ho had to do was go to: independentscientist com.
FastingOnClowns 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. - Harold Lewis Professor of Physics UCSB resignation letter to head of APS ;)
tpreitzel 1 year ago
@SmashTheRight38 Excellent point. I looked at Art's website. He says nothing of substance on his site. He simply parrots RW talking points and doesn't explain what he thinks on ANY of them.
funnyhaha71 1 year ago
@lamwhutl What strawman argument? She quoted him. He was the one who refused to answer any question. He got all pissed that she brought up his writing on HIV. She switched to radiation and he was pissed that she brought that up.
Watch clip 2. Rachel gets Art to settle down to answer one question. She asks him to clairfy his HIV/AIDS belief. Minutes earlier he had told her that she was too stupid to understand his radiation theory. When asked that last question, he asked to return to radiation!
funnyhaha71 1 year ago
@funnyhaha71 what do any of the questions she asks have to do with any of the issues in the race?
she is playing the MSM game of asking questions that make you look bad, then interrupting the guest before he can defend himself.
she interrupts him over and over. quite a typical left wing media outlet interviewing a right wing candidate.
works on the right side too
lamwhutlam 1 year ago
@lamwhutlam . She said repeatedly she was trying to "get to know him", thus the absence of a discussion on the issues. Both of them interrupted quite a bit, hence her statement of explanation of a satellite interview. That was in evidence at the beginning of Part 1 during the introduction. As one that is seeking a future in public speaking, I was disappointed in the way he handled himself and certainly, in such unprofessional attire. Not professional or courteous, at all.
cljamhnl 1 year ago
@cljamhnl LOL!! I guess you'd rather be lied to by someone who wares a proper shirt & tie or proper skirt.
Why are there so many dumbass Americans listening to this show?
jibbi4one 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lamwhutlam . She said repeatedly she was trying to "get to know him", thus the absence of a discussion on the issues. Both of them interrupted quite a bit, hence her statement of explanation of a satellite interview. That was in evidence at the beginning of Part 1 during the introduction. As one that is seeking a future in public speaking, I was disappointed in the way he handled himself and certainly, in such unprofessional attire. Not professional or courteous, at all.
cljamhnl 1 year ago
@lamwhut No, his business sells racist material, which I feel is a reflection of his beliefs. As a voter in his district that matters to me.
Seriously, Robinson wouldn't let her ask a question. He was trying to bully her. I do think that at times he didn't remember to account for the time delay; the energy waves carrying the message may move at the speed of light, but that doesn't mean the tech that sends and receives those messages does.
They talked over each other the entire interview.
funnyhaha71 1 year ago
@funnyhaha71 You sound like someone who failed every science and math course you've ever taken. Keep working on it! Someday you'll learn that 2 + 2 = 4.
savemyplaylist 1 year ago
It doesn't help that Robinson told Maddow that she was to stupid to understand his science. He refused to answer questions because of that? Nonsense.
funnyhaha71 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@funnyhaha71
"It doesn't help that Robinson told Maddow that she was to stupid to understand his science. He refused to answer questions because of that? Nonsense."
and how many scientists do we know have broken it down into "laymans terms" at press conferences, interviews, lectures, etc.? Carl Sagan was on TV all the time.
hipstermi 1 year ago
@hipstermi That is vastly different from refusing to answer the question at all. Robinson wouldn't "break it down" because he believed Rachel and everyone else to be too stupid to understand that much.
Robinson was embarrassed by his beliefs, so, instead of discussing them, he deflected. He knows that if the electorate learned of his beliefs, they wouldn't vote for him. He was right; they didn't!
Just because so-and-so did something doesn't mean it is right for someone else to do the same.
funnyhaha71 1 year ago
@funnyhaha71 Have you read anything he has published? Go to Google Scholar - he is not only highly published, but highly cited. (Do you know what that means even?) Maddcow is too stupid to understand his science and I bet you are too. I rolled on the floor laughing at her when I saw the interview.
btdt300 1 year ago
@btdt300 You should read some of those articles that Art was cited in. Almost all of them disagree with Art.
Have you read a single science article?
And you do know that Art published his paper in a very academically fraudulent way. Right? You have read all about his academic fraud, right?
Google hits don't equal good science.
funnyhaha71 1 year ago
@toybb04 I don't know how she managed to refrain from cutting his mike. Glenn Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity and other conservatives would have booted any opposing guest who behaved in such a manner. Rachel stuck with it.
funnyhaha71 1 year ago
hmm, Guess Maddow shouldn't really interview anyone, weak, poor, pick a term. She is a bit less than sharp, "I have a Satellite" but gets her butt kicked. Guess Maddow thought she was debating another "Word" Document.
fmckadoo 1 year ago
@hipstermi "...Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
I hope this allows for you to understand the character of David Rockefeller, if you feel so inclined to stand in his defense
petstep 1 year ago
@hipstermi Here's a copy-and-paste quote for your liking (sorry I couldn't think for myself in making this quote--Rockefeller had to do it for me). This from his Memoirs: "For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions...
petstep 1 year ago
@hipstermi ...And did you watch this Aaron Russo film? You certainly should--you'll firstly find out that most Americans cannot be taxed by the federal income tax, as it is an excise tax, and not permitted under the U.S. constitution.
petstep 1 year ago
@hipstermi The David Rockefeller quote I posted earlier I found before I'd seen Aaron Russo's film, but you're right, it was in there--though I don't know why you would back someone like David Rockefeller or any Rockefeller for the matter, for if you knew their history you wouldn't be proud in sticking up for his defense, unless you're a sort of incumbent for Rachel and the rabbit hole to hell of the New World Order (I doubt that you are). I'm curious as to how you approach 9/11, if I may ask...
petstep 1 year ago
Madcow is a useful idiot of the Marxist left!
FastingOnClowns 1 year ago
Ahahaha!!! Madcow is a nasty ho useful idiot for the Marxist left.
FastingOnClowns 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FastingOnClowns
"Madcow is a nasty ho useful idiot for the Marxist left."
Yeah...we need more middle age conservative fatasses who drop out of college on talk shows! Hannity, Rush, and Beck just aren't enough!
and come on...Hannity and Beck studied Theology...aka magical powers, so who gives a shit what they think.
hipstermi 1 year ago
@FastingOnClowns
Oh yeah...read your profile. You write like an 8th grader.
Would it help you to read a book that doesn't involve magical Jee-buz powers?
hipstermi 1 year ago
@hipstermi -- A little fisting bitch with his fist up his ass. Maybe you can go back to public school and get some more fisting condoms for your closet of fun.
Get on your unicorn bitch!
FastingOnClowns 1 year ago
@FastingOnClowns
"go back to public school"
Ah yes...the conservative rant against education! Which explains the writing on your profile I suppose.
Really man, you not having an education is hardly my problem...just your failings.
Kind of like famous conservatives:
- Rush, flunked classes, dropped out, fatass
- Hannity- studied theology/ magical powers, drop out, fatass
- Beck- studied theology/ Mormon magi, drop out, fat ass
- Zo PJTV- druggie, high school drop out, religious nut/magic
hipstermi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FastingOnClowns
"Get on your unicorn bitch!"
I don't believe in magical beings or magical powers.
Conservative Christians though...you have the levitating vampire like savior, the mage who can part seas, them claiming they have Holy Ghost magical powers...
don't you eel foolish for this childish belief in magic on the right?
hipstermi 1 year ago
LOLLLLLL! I love this guy! He wasn't politically correct at all and he did an excellent job of reflecting how most of US feel! He totally refused to let ms maddow set the agenda and she couldn't handle it! After all the corruption we've seen in washington she had the audacity to try to smear Mr Robinson? Yet Mr Robinson's opponent is an intricate part of the washington corruption and loves to govern against the American people.
ericjaynelson 1 year ago
@ericjaynelson
umm he doesn't represent most americans, even if you are a tea party nut, most americans don't agree with, like or think your movement will be around.
one thing most americans wanted though was a single payer healthcare in the healthcare bill. but the conservatives(obama) wouldn't have that as it may hurt his medical company buddies profit margins, so we got this shit corporate welfare bill.
Drmofothegreat 1 year ago
@hipstermi Not that it should matter, but I am no Christian, and I believe in no God other than that "God" is the force and laws that allow everthing to work and develop. You seem to have a hate for me and sounds as though you think I'm Republican as well. Well I am not. I am a constitutionalist, and there really aren't too many. Republicans and Democrats are the same snake. It's a sytem, like a mafia, as I stated earlier. They put on the illusion of combating, though work towards the same means
petstep 1 year ago
@petstep
"but I am no Christian,"
That's good news.
Then why be conservative? You are allying yourself with people who believe in invisible beings with magical powers...and talk to said invisible being. doesn't sound very mentally healthy. not to mention the history of opposing science and progress the church has.
hipstermi 1 year ago
@hipstermi -- Yo! Why don't you STFU you unicorn riding little bitch. What's wrong, did your boy Obama not deliver on all your unicorn Marxist dreams? Before you start talking about people who believe in a God in an ancient book, maybe should think about how the god of state has failed you. Unicorn riding mufka!
FastingOnClowns 1 year ago
@FastingOnClowns
"Yo! Why don't you STFU you unicorn riding little bitch"
Wow...what a keen intellect!
Unicorns? Sorry dumbass...it's conservatives who believe in the magical fairy tales...you call that bullshit the Bible.
"unicorn Marxist dreams"
Neither of us are "Marxists" and you seem to be ignorant of what that means.
Really...it's embarrassing to see how uneducated and stupid modern conservatives are about this stuff.
Hey...hows Jesus and his magical powers?
hipstermi 1 year ago
@FastingOnClowns
"Before you start talking about people who believe in a God in an ancient book, maybe should think about how the god of state has failed you"
Dont have a God of state, ass wipe.
"Unicorn riding mufka!"
Where did you even get "unicorn"? You guys are the one with the vampire like levitating savior with the magical powers.
seriously...magical fucking powers? do you realize how immature you guys sound and intellectually lazy you are?
hipstermi 1 year ago
@hipstermi -- AHAHAHAHA!!! I must of hit one your little progressive nerves, huh, you ho ass bitch of the state. Mmmmm... Hmmm... get on your mukfkn unicorn bitch and ride that power of the state right back to your little "progressive" Marxist hole you came from. All you little bitches can do is run around and try shame and name call the very people that make up the majority of America. Do you really think that's going to get your sorry asses somewhere?
Here, you want some more rope?
FastingOnClowns 1 year ago
@FastingOnClowns
Wow...you sure do say "bitch" a lot!
anyway...what does the "unicorn" comment mean? it makes no sense
Conservatives are the ones who hand with the magical powers gang. Seriously...this Christian magic makes you guys look like children playing pretend.
must be fun to ass kiss a vampire like savior, huh?
hipstermi 1 year ago
@FastingOnClowns
"All you little bitches can do is run around and try shame and name call the very people that make up the majority of America"
Name call? my my...someone is crying.
what's a matter little boy, can dish it out and not take it?
Just address how you can worship invisible beings with magical powers is all I am asking. Come on...magical powers? seems childish!
hipstermi 1 year ago
@hipstermi
What kind of no-life loser has as much time as you do to defend an MSNBC corporate shill?
ashane77 1 year ago
@hipstermi "...our birthright for what we take to be the security of the hive until we have destroyed ourselves and it."
The constitution is all that we have to protect ourselves from a government of individual interests bent on control of the world. Why is anything that's deemed conspiracy by the media considered taboo. It only makes me want to research the subject more and figure out why it's being demonized.
I love what this country was founded on--unalienable rights, not gov intervention.
petstep 1 year ago
I grew up in Eugene, and this breaks my heart. I'm SO ashamed that someone like this could even win a primary. What is going on that a state that once had intelligent thoughtful conservatives like Mark Hatfield (with whom I disagreed on many issues) now has only certified loons in the Republican party? I don't want to be a partisan shill, but when the Republicans nominate sexist, crackpots, we have no choice but to do everything we can from people like this having access to power.
alisar 1 year ago
@alisar Dearest Alisar, has this video really got you believing this man is a "crackpot" and "sextist"? Why can't this man simply be experienced and ornery? What part of this begs the question of: is he sextist? He's only standing on his principles, and he knows what this show will do to tea party candidates like himself, that is, pick them apart and persuade masses of believers. She's tried demonizing people like Rand Paul as well, and he's had to endure the barrage of scrutiny. Pick pique..
petstep 1 year ago
@petstep
"as this video really got you believing this man is a "crackpot"
His published work took care of most of that...his angry replys cutting off an interviewer...AND denying the newsletter he wrote took care of the rest.
hipstermi 1 year ago
@hipstermi Another great passage, from Louis J. Halle, Jr. says: "The purpose of education in a free society of men is to gain knowledge of the universe in which they live and their relation to it...But the worker who has retreated into the hive can dispense with knowledge of it; all he needs is to master one of the technical skills required by the society. In return for performing one operation, the hive will feed him and shelter him for the duration of his life...We shall continue to sell..."
petstep 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@petstep
"Louis J. Halle, Jr. says: "The purpose of education"
Golly gosh! This proves we should live as ignorant conservatives!
or better yet...study only the Bible and theology! Cause that's oh so logical.
Question- are you a Christian?
I'd like you to talk about the inDOCTRINEation there...cause they teach...ya know...doctrine! with magical powers!
hipstermi 1 year ago
@petstep
You seem bent on tearing down education...
how can you support the Republicans with the belief and/or ass kissing of christianity?
I mean come on...belief in invisible beings with magical powers? The whole tell you what to do/think/vote via indoctrination? can't argue it cause "god" said it.
please address the magical powers part.
hipstermi 1 year ago
@petstep
Still waiting on you to prove this second hand account of Rockfeller was a valid quote...
you should admit you copied from Russo's bullshit conspiracy theory movie...
hipstermi 1 year ago
@hipstermi ...the way it does seem to the public. I would beg you to do such research of AIDS being government engineered. He's a scientist remember--not a media-fed sheep, so he's verily researched the subject.
Your bantering will get you and I nowhere. The two-party system is mafia and both my rights and your rights are being heavily stripped away daily. George Washington said: "Government is not reason; is not eloquent, it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and fearful master."
petstep 1 year ago
@petstep
"He's a scientist remember--not"
Oh...so "scientist" means he's automatically right?
a mess of them from Charles Darwin to Richard Dawkins vs. Bible bangers get an automatic win according to your rules!
And yes, guys who study biology know more about origin of life than Christians who only study tales of magical powers!
hipstermi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@petstep
"he's a scientist remember"
So that means he's automatically right?
Cool- tell all the conservative Christians to shut up because scores of scientists from Charles Darwin to Richard Dawkins said they are wrong.
and yes guys who study science and biology know way more than conservative Christians who study only tales of magical powers!
hipstermi 1 year ago
@petstep
"George Washington said"
wow...you sure do know how to copy and paste quotes!
it speaks volumes to how you can't think for yourself. off to magical jesus group with you...
hipstermi 1 year ago
@hipstermi I wrote that George Washington quote down and keep it in my small journal at all times. Where does your fear stem from? I've nothing better to do than help my fellow man. Have I hurt or upset you in some way? Or perhaps have I embaressed you (and are you becoming embaressed now? Don't be)? Please don't belittle me for trying to reveal the things that I have found to be evident. I think for myself, but I do owe my knowledge to greater men than I. What's wrong with reading books?
petstep 1 year ago
hipstermi 1 year ago
@hipstermi ...cont. "The supranatural sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries." *The meetings are meetings of The Council on Foreign Relations. The mega-corperations that own the indidual news stations will suprise you, and all of which attend these meetings.
As far as the AIDS issue goes, it's a shame that Art can't talk about what he probably does feel is Government engineered, because of...
petstep 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@petstep
"As far as the AIDS issue goes, it's a shame that Art can't talk about what he probably does feel is Government engineered, because of..."
He's a laughing stock in the scientific community.
"The meetings are meetings of The Council on Foreign Relations. The mega-corperations"
Are you going to tell me about the Devil next?
hipstermi 1 year ago
@hipstermi David Rockefeller in 1991: "We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government..."cont.
petstep 1 year ago
@petstep
"David Rockefeller in 1991: "We are grateful"
This "quote" is from an asshole conspiracy theorist Russo who died from his own fatass lifestyle. Directing "Trading Places" hardly makes him a credible source.
Challenge- show me proof he said this quote. Russo's movie was second hand info....designed to scare you and make a lot of money.
hipstermi 1 year ago
@debunkingdebunkers Perhaps I don't, but if I did, would it matter? I'm not sure that he knows where the money came from, but again, I don't see that it matters considering that (like he stated) special interest groups are donating loads of IMF Federal Reserve notes to career politicians--perhaps openly--in order to get them elected. Surely you agree that the sheep masses are more easily swayed by the greatest bombardment of commercials and roadside signs than actual ethics and liberty. Go Art!
petstep 1 year ago
There sure is a lot of hateful comments here. It's all directed to the right. Democrats are compassionate? I guess compassionate only if you think like them... Else crush em! And you advocate freedom of speech and expression? Hypocrites stand for nothing! The constitution and judeo-Christian beliefs are the basis of your freedoms you useful idiots! Wake the F*%#}***^ up!
PoorFolkz 1 year ago
I can't believe people are defending... either of them.
She's glib and sardonic (not sarcastic) and he's a complete f**king loon.
Watching this makes my head hurt.
aceg81 1 year ago
the dudes an idiot
vilhelmcasp 1 year ago
@vilhelmcasp I don't think so. He may not have handled himself correctly but he is not an idiot. Do you really think this SCIENTIST doesn't have anything to back up what he is saying? BTW I don't belong to any idiot political party. I just do something called research instead of calling everyone that disagrees with american conventional thing, an idiot. Have you researched AIDs or climate change?
debunkingdebunkers 1 year ago
@debunkingdebunkers well you have to keep in mind he has said things that are quite obviously not true and that I personally find quite disturbing. its just that the idea of a man in political office who thinks that satellite interviews happen at the speed of light is quite scary. then again, i should probably worry more about Christine O'Donnel :)
vilhelmcasp 1 year ago
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Since the govt. committed 9/11, why arent truthers demanding the release of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who is on trial for his life for a crime truthers claim he did not commit?
If there was no flight 93, please explain how 95% of the plane debris was recovered?
If there was no flight 77, please explain how 130+ witnesses reported seeing a plane?
ctcole77 1 year ago
@ctcole77 There were both of those flights--as there were passengers that clearly died in those plans--excuse me, ~planes~, so yes, the debris was there. Now explain the nano thermite found in the debris, or the sheer anomaly of the collapse of both towers dropping at free-fall speed (was there NO resistance whatsoever in a building comprised of steel with many, many levels of resistance abounding in each floor of the buildings. There are physics to be accounted for. What say you of building 7?
petstep 1 year ago