Decyferon Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 They are profiting from it in the UK too, they have a sliding scale of car tax dependant on the emissions of your car, I am glad I don't drive as car drivers are taxed more than smokers, Tax on fuel, yearly car tax, car insurance, MOT you name it they will tax it!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 its time for a joke... in order to be a liberal you must believe that global warming has nothing at all to do with cyclical changes but everything to do with soccer moms driving suv's. carry on..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x5v1s Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 i <3 debateing emptysuits vs snake oil salesmen............ if you dont get the healthcare your gonna get a fine or jail time ...i <3 freedom http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/11/interview-with-the-president-jail-time-for-those-without-health-care-insurance.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 haha nice one AOD I dunno what I am I have some liberal views, some right winged views and other left wong views and then some anarchistic tendancies as well, I just think (probably like a lot of us) that I don't subscribe to any single political agenda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Removed Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Frank your arguing for the sake of arguing, and that is all. You've said nothing on the issue that is relevant. Your dismissing research since I didn't do the research, which is idiotic. This is a discussion forum so citing information or indicating all sources of information is not necessary. If you feel the need to discredit these facts then offer something substantial, not just your opinion on fact gathering. Have you watched the film? have you read research on global warming? All of the propaganda that is being feed to use is a lie. The oceans warming in the past 50 years? Ice caps melting? The manipulation of data is egregious. Al Gore, whom is seen as the leader on this issue, fabricated nearly all of the information he put out. The link between carbon and temperature is over 800 year gap. This is a fact, not speculation or my opinion. What I've read is scientific information, reading of graphs and objective research. Even this information that was posted earlier is compelling. http://www.crichton-official.com/spe...talfuture.html How does this relate to Obama or Bush is the question. What are their agendas? Does Obama have a reason to raise taxes on emissions? Is his goal to raise revenue for the IRS or is he concerned about pollution? Gore is certainly profiting from this, and Clinton as well. Now the IRS will gain untold amounts of revenue from putting new taxes out. During the 70's the earth was going to enter an ICE AGE, now were all going to hell in a hand basket. Seems like a lot of bull shit to me. CSIRO is positioned as well to take advantage of this debate and from what I've read they are already profiting from tax money in Australia, endorsing genetically modified food. I am starting to get the impression you are not even reading my responses. Do you understand the meaning of a nuanced argument? The world is not so black and white homeboy, the issue of climate change can be real, AS WELL AS people profiting off its existence for their own purposes. In fact there are probably a lot more factors at play that have not been covered in this convo. If this concept is too difficult for you to understand then there is little reason for me to continue replying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Clearly I've read your responses, and as I've said there is nothing substantial in them that relates to the conversation. What you've said is that my opinions are not credible and that the film in question has been debunked by a supposed credible scientific source. Like I said your arguing for the sake of arguing, dancing around the issue. The source you quoted is not objective or removed from the issue, as a matter of fact they stand to profit from the Global Warming hype. Furthermore, by stating there are those that can profit on something that is real or not is not profound and I think just about everyone realizes this. While your riding the fence and discussing the topic of arguing and the dynamics thereof, my point is much more clear. Global Warming, as it is being proposed by the main stream media and our government in the US, is a lie. Plain and simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainframe Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 ^You're an idiot. Plain and simple. Do you understand the meaning of a nuanced argument? Unfortunately this isn't the thread (or forum) for nuanced argument. Now if you're looking for paranoid conjecture and the regurgitation of ideas from various questionable internet documentaries, you've come to the right place. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 ^You're an idiot. Plain and simple. Unfortunately this isn't the thread (or forum) for nuanced argument. Now if you're looking for paranoid conjecture and the regurgitation of ideas from various questionable internet documentaries, you've come to the right place. Your questioning the ideas or observations people make whether they be from "questionable" online sources or from research reading etc. since they don't align with your political views. What you don't like the morphing of Bush to Obama? Offended maybe to see your liberal idol compared to G. Bush? That is the name of the thread isn't it? Besides the "questionable" documentary in question was aired on the BBC, not the internet, and my first review was in a college geography lecture. Not to mention there are untold credible resources that can be found on the internet, through college research, scholarly sites etc. What exactly is "paranoid" about not agreeing with the main stream media? It seems that anytime some one doesn't agree with the democratic agenda, their some paranoid racist conspiracy right wing nut. Sounds to me like prejudiced views that just allow you to conveniently dismiss anyone who does not agree with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Removed Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 While your riding the fence and discussing the topic of arguing and the dynamics thereof[/color], my point is much more clear. Global Warming, as it is being proposed by the main stream media and our government in the US, is a lie. Plain and simple. Ok so these two statements show me clearly that you do not understand the meaning of a nuanced argument. You have failed to grasp that there is any possible reality between either saying "Climate change is scary, Obama will save us," or "big nasty politicians are all in cahoots to steal our money, its all liezzzz!!!1". Enjoy your misinformed delusional paranoia champ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 You seem to miss the point. No one is trying to have a "nuanced argument" I'm dispelling the myth of global warming, there is nothing else to say. If you wanted to discuss how the global warming agenda is going to disenfranchise third world countries, or how serious environmental crimes are being committed and sidelined by climate change, then we could have a "nuanced argument". Clearly you miss the point of an open forum or discussion, since you don't set the agenda or how the discussion should unfold. The irony with your statement that I'm paranoid and delusional is that those who started the global warming hype were seen as paranoid and delusional, now its the other way around. Besides the point of the discussion is how Bush is like Obama, and I'm suggesting that this issue is some where they disagree, although the reason for this disparity is unclear to me. You have failed to grasp that there is any possible reality between either saying "Climate change is scary, Obama will save us," or "big nasty politicians are all in cahoots to steal our money, its all liezzzz!!!1". Regrettably I don't think you see that these concerns are not unrealistic, considering that there are those in this country that are taxed up to nearly half of their income, and that the general hysteria surrounding Obama and his campaign is that "he will save us". Have you seen the news or the propaganda surrounding climate change. Their saying we as a people and the world will all die. Many people believe this.The problem with your statement is that these two statements are not diametrically opposed therefore negating the possibility of a middle ground. The middle ground is the content of the discussion, which you have not contributed to. You quoted some paper by CISRO, which I revealed was from a BIASED source that receives funding to commit environmental crimes such as the development of GM food, and has a history of silencing scientists and data that is contrary to the ideology behind climate change. Why would they do this? Is there a reason. I'm offering a rebuttal to your address, but you have nothing to say about it? So much for finding some middle ground or having a nuanced argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 YOU ARE = YOU'RE NOT "YOUR" You don't get the right to call people stupid until your posts are free from 4th grade grammar errors. This doesn't mean you aren't right, but it hurts your credibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEVEL 75 PALADIN Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 I'm not surprised that the loudest people in here are also trying to say that global warming is a myth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoonsOfSulkendastron Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 I'm not surprised that the loudest people in here are also trying to say that global warming is a myth. the earth is getting colder bro. Theres more ice formation on the poles than we have seen in recorded history! The earth goes thru cycles. Wisconsin was once a desert. it was also once the bottom of the seafloor, and also covered in ice. The earth warms, the earth cools. thats how it has always been, and the miniscule .00001% "increase" in temperature directly caused by emissions will do nothing to change the cycle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 you are your you're what the fuck ever this isnt grammar class and I didnt call any one stupid...commas or not possessive or hyphens...show me how in any way that the world is warming or how were headed to hell on earth...you can't...its all hype and you bought into it... snap out of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 my job isn't to refute your arguments, I just point out your lack of basic understanding and question how we can believe your regurgitation of anything you read. You can barely spell, how can we trust your math, or by proxy, any math you present.... How can we accept someone's 'informed' opinion when that person can't write like an adult? For all we know you drool a lot too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 you don't have to believe anything...But if your going to be the grammar Nazi why don't you capitalize that m in the beginning of your rant. But if it makes you feel good to be a cynical asshole, which seems to be the only thing that you actually do a as a "moderator" then go ahead. But I don't think misspelling your or youre or wtf ever is somehow indicating a basic lack of understanding. and by the way who is the WE you keep speaking of? You seem to think that for some reason, everyone thinks like you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Oh and just to remind you it's a CHEVY CAPRICE not a chevy bonnevile. Get your facts straight wise guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 well. I didn't capitalize the m for the same reason I didn't capitalize the w at the start of this post, I'm not that impressed with introductions. Why did you include my title in quotes? I assure you I'm a for real Moderator, not a "moderator". I further assure you that the "you're/your" delineation is always apt. I take liberties with the language, speak my mind as it were but I make sure that what I say NEVER clouds the lines of grammar perfection because that is the gold standard on which ideas are measured. Most of the time I'm on point with my capitilization but sometimes I just jump in without the shift key, and that's pretty much ok. See, capitilization doesn't usually change the inherent meaning of the message where as you're/your absolutely changes the intent of the message. When I say I'm "against nazis" it means the same thing as if I was against "Nazis".... with your (you're) argument it's like comparing PETA funding to pita bread, it's all greek to me but at least I get the fundamental disconnect that undermines your argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Oh and just to remind you it's a CHEVY CAPRICE not a chevy bonnevile. Get your facts straight wise guy Aw yeah, , I forgot I even said it until you corrected me but yeah, I meant the Caprice not the Pontiac... see. I can be wrong but I'm willing to just admit it and pass on by. If you think a momentary memory slip about auto history is gonna derail my argument though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Wait, it's all coming back to me, you're still mad because I dissed the K car? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 well. I didn't capitalize the m for the same reason I didn't capitalize the w at the start of this post, I'm not that impressed with introductions. Why did you include my title in quotes? I assure you I'm a for real Moderator, not a "moderator". I further assure you that the "you're/your" delineation is always apt. I take liberties with the language, speak my mind as it were but I make sure that what I say NEVER clouds the lines of grammar perfection because that is the gold standard on which ideas are measured. Most of the time I'm on point with my capitilization but sometimes I just jump in without the shift key, and that's pretty much ok. See, capitilization doesn't usually change the inherent meaning of the message where as you're/your absolutely changes the intent of the message. When I say I'm "against nazis" it means the same thing as if I was against "Nazis".... with your (you're) argument it's like comparing PETA funding to pita bread, it's all greek to me but at least I get the fundamental disconnect that undermines your argument. WTF is a K car...and WTF are you ranting on about...You forgot to cap Greek...so at this point I've found a few problems with your grammar...you get a bronze star. For a moderator you sure do a terrible job. You should change your job description to Annoyingator... and how exactly do you speak your mind as it were...this does not make sense...stop trying to sound so fucking SMART...cause your not. Besides you don't even know what kind of car the fucking police drive...yet somehow not hyphenating words undermines someones position? Get a clue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Look, capitilization is not an argument turning point, it really means nothng in the greater world of language and grammar, capitilization is a matter of formality. Seriously, you've been around since 2004 and you're trying to use my name against me? Really? You think you're gonna be able to prove I'm not actually smart? You think I didn't anticipate a grip of bitches trying to attack my user name when I chose it? So was that AOD, I didn't back check, who actually knows what a K car is? You're the kid who can't see the inherent racism comparing a white American republican in 2009 to a Dachau jew in 1944. It's all coming back now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Suck it up bitch, you got bad grammar, get better or don't, but don't try to portray me as an eliteist because you drool on your plate and hold your spoon backwards. These are the rules of the English language probably established by the Magna Carta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shai Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 I'm not surprised that the loudest people in here are also trying to say that global warming is a myth. It's true that global climate is changing but I have some doubts regarding some of the claims regarding "global warming" and carbon offsets, not to mention the way some of the facts and figures are presented. And that's not me being a right wing weirdo, that's just me being skeptical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.