Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Climate Denier-in-Chief
Quote | Reply
Unbelievable. Actually, so believable.

Lesley Stahl: Do you still think that climate change is a hoax?
President Donald Trump: I think something's happening. Something's changing and it'll change back again. I don't think it's a hoax, I think there's probably a difference. But I don't know that it's manmade.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
Unbelievable. Actually, so believable.

Lesley Stahl: Do you still think that climate change is a hoax?
President Donald Trump: I think something's happening. Something's changing and it'll change back again. I don't think it's a hoax, I think there's probably a difference. But I don't know that it's manmade.

We all know his stance on this already.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
orphious wrote:
klehner wrote:
Unbelievable. Actually, so believable.

Lesley Stahl: Do you still think that climate change is a hoax?
President Donald Trump: I think something's happening. Something's changing and it'll change back again. I don't think it's a hoax, I think there's probably a difference. But I don't know that it's manmade.


We all know his stance on this already.

So there's no point in reminding people what an ignorant ass he is? And to remind those in Florida and the Carolinas of where his policies are leading?

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't know how any supporters of Trump can't be anything but embarrassed after that interview. He's such an idiot on so many levels.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So, give this some pause, I have to actually give him more credit on that response than I'd typically give him (which is none).

Why? He actually said that something is happening. He even gave a logical and to the point answer of why: he doesn't want to spend billions or trillions on something he isn't sure about. And spending money on anything is against the views of his base.

Now, that is 100x better than a large portion of his base. Parts of his base think dinosaur oil and coal is God's gift for us to plunder. Or go around and intentionally modify their truck to "stick it to the man" and shoot soot at folks.

I've heard members of the base say "well good, I don't like cold winters". And, be totally serious.

So, for once, he actually gave a somewhat measured reason for something. Cost. I don't agree with the cost assertion, but it's a 1000x better than "God's providence of oil".

On the cost:
I believe renewables could be a good source of jobs for the future. Also, if you're a "small government" or a type that "lives off the land"..........moving to localized solar/wind/renewables has the potential to take you FURTHER from big government and corporate power providers. It makes you more independent.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
orphious wrote:
klehner wrote:
Unbelievable. Actually, so believable.

Lesley Stahl: Do you still think that climate change is a hoax?
President Donald Trump: I think something's happening. Something's changing and it'll change back again. I don't think it's a hoax, I think there's probably a difference. But I don't know that it's manmade.


We all know his stance on this already.


So there's no point in reminding people what an ignorant ass he is? And to remind those in Florida and the Carolinas of where his policies are leading?

You can do what you want obviously. I view it as nothing more than a daily piss and moan about Trump thread. It's quite entertaining. Carry on.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The rest of this part of the interview is even crazier. He goes on to say that scientist can’t be trusted. Stahl ask him to provide one report that backs up his position. He falls back to the”many people are saying” routine. And stahl asks for a name of one of these people, then another word salad.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [patentattorney] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patentattorney wrote:
The rest of this part of the interview is even crazier. He goes on to say that scientist can’t be trusted. Stahl ask him to provide one report that backs up his position. He falls back to the”many people are saying” routine. And stahl asks for a name of one of these people, then another word salad.

Doesn’t science tell us there are two sexes?

Pick and choose much?
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [nc452010] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You’re conflating sex and gender. It’s not picking and choosing to recognize gender identity vs biological sex.

nc452010 wrote:
patentattorney wrote:
The rest of this part of the interview is even crazier. He goes on to say that scientist can’t be trusted. Stahl ask him to provide one report that backs up his position. He falls back to the”many people are saying” routine. And stahl asks for a name of one of these people, then another word salad.

Doesn’t science tell us there are two sexes?

Pick and choose much?
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [MidwestRoadie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Doesn’t science tell us there are two sexes?


Pick and choose much?


Oh the irony...

Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [MidwestRoadie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
“You’re conflating sex and gender. It’s not picking and choosing to recognize gender identity vs biological sex. “

Whatever you need to tell yourself.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [nc452010] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
nc452010 wrote:
“You’re conflating sex and gender. It’s not picking and choosing to recognize gender identity vs biological sex. “

Whatever you need to tell yourself.
Thank you for posting this. I know it's not a popular stance. There is no scientific or genetic evidence for gender identity as a construct. In fact gender used to be a synonym for sex (the noun).

Just because a group of loudmouths shout something louder than everyone else doesn't make it true. And that applies to a lot of stuff, ideology notwithstanding.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [ripple] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well, it’s not a case of “a bunch of loudmouths shouting.” The leading psychiatric associations recognize gender dysphoria as an actual issue; recent brain scans have indicated biological links between identified gender and biological brain markers. While studies are still in their infancy — not surprising in a country that just legalized gay marriage two years ago and still has a sizeable population resisting against that — to say it’s just a purely manufactured issue is wholly inaccurate.

While I don’t get it personally, I’m not about to write off people’s experiences and arguments for it when it’s an issue that literally doesn’t negatively impact my life one bit nor that of anyone I know and it’s not harming anyone, particularly when actual research may indicate the assumptions of the loudmouth fundamentalist culture I grew up in may be incorrect. It’s not my place or anyone else’s to judge, though there are those using an unclear 5000 year old collection of books to loudly argue their case.


ripple wrote:
nc452010 wrote:
“You’re conflating sex and gender. It’s not picking and choosing to recognize gender identity vs biological sex. “

Whatever you need to tell yourself.
Thank you for posting this. I know it's not a popular stance. There is no scientific or genetic evidence for gender identity as a construct. In fact gender used to be a synonym for sex (the noun).

Just because a group of loudmouths shout something louder than everyone else doesn't make it true. And that applies to a lot of stuff, ideology notwithstanding.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
burnthesheep wrote:
On the cost:
I believe renewables could be a good source of jobs for the future. Also, if you're a "small government" or a type that "lives off the land"..........moving to localized solar/wind/renewables has the potential to take you FURTHER from big government and corporate power providers. It makes you more independent.

If I were King I'd start up a whole host of major efforts to make us energy independent with renewables. Bring the oil companies into it. Not to mention they'll just have more of a highly valuable commodity when levels get depleted around the globe. Then we could get out the Middle East.

It's not splitting the fucking atom or anything. Surely it could be done if there was a will and probably cost effective in the long run.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply


Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What's the point of denying it.

Saying you don't want to do anything about it... THAT I can get behind.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
Unbelievable. Actually, so believable.

Lesley Stahl: Do you still think that climate change is a hoax?
President Donald Trump: I think something's happening. Something's changing and it'll change back again. I don't think it's a hoax, I think there's probably a difference. But I don't know that it's manmade.

So you've elected a moron as president. But everybody already knew that.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [knewbike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
knewbike wrote:
What's the point of denying it.

Saying you don't want to do anything about it... THAT I can get behind.

Yeah just be intellectually honest and then deal with it or not for whatever reasons you care to justify, but don't deny it just because you don't like the possible implications.
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Scientists told us in the 1970s that the world was cooling.

If they were wrong once, why not again?



Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [Jim @ LOTO, MO] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Jim @ LOTO, MO wrote:
Scientists told us in the 1970s that the world was cooling.

If they were wrong once, why not again?



The "stupid" runs deep in this one.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [Jim @ LOTO, MO] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Scientists told us in the 1970s that the world was cooling.

If they were wrong once, why not again? "


They weren't wrong. They were right then, and they are very likely to be right now.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dumb fuk trump said he knew more about NATO than Mattis to boot. Yikes
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [tyrod1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tyrod1 wrote:
Dumb fuk trump said he knew more about NATO than Mattis to boot. Yikes

I wonder if his fans believe his bullshit or if it's just that they know he bullshits but he's their bullshitter?
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I wonder if his fans believe his bullshit or if it's just that they know he bullshits but he's their bullshitter?

About 60% actually believe him (that's the scary part) and the other 40% don't care because Obama/Clinton bullshitted too and/or because the stock market is up.
Last edited by: Sanuk: Oct 15, 18 16:01
Quote Reply
Re: Climate Denier-in-Chief [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"bout 60% actually believe him (that's the scary part) and the other 40% don't care because Obama/Clinton bullshitted too and/or because the stock market is up. "

Correction: and the stock market is up while someone that liberals hate is President.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply

Prev Next