Jump to content


Photo

Global warming err Climate change HOAX


  • Please log in to reply
2902 replies to this topic

#21 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    See Bufffalo-inspired art at www.inkwellstudios.com

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,429 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:25 PM

Yeah because FOX news,the #1 network in ratings for as long as I can remember is making up stories.They were the ONLY network to cover the Gruber controversy until O'reilly shamed the others into covering it.Like it or not they are rated high because people enjoy hearing the truth.Of course if you are like Gruber you know better and everyone else is just stupid.LOL


They also said there would be Obamacare Death Panels. I must have missed them.

#22 DC Tom

DC Tom

    Also sniping at retards from the balcony

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,757 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:27 PM

\

Are you climate scientist or just repeating what you hear on Fox News?


Not to hijack this thread, but I have to comment on the latest Orwellian twist: Net Neutrality. The narrative now being sold is that Net Neutrality is like the Fairness Doctrine, that is web traffic has to be equally conservative and liberal!!

Now anyone paying attention knows that is 100% NOT what Net Neutrality is. (In case you don't know it's a rule stating that internet companies cannot speed up some parts of the web and slow down others.) But lobbyists figured out if you couch any argument in liberal vs conservative terms you can get people to vote against their own interests. Heck, some people would give up both kidneys if Fox News said Obama wanted Americans to have kidneys.


Net Neutrality is many things to many people, most of them wrong. Applying the fairness doctrine to it, though, is the funniest thing I've heard in a while. That's the equivalent of requiring Comcast to make sure I watch FOX no more and no less than CNN. :lol:

They also said there would be Obamacare Death Panels. I must have missed them.


You're really going to argue with this retard?

#23 Chef Jim

Chef Jim

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,627 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:27 PM

For those of you that think man is responsible (fully or partially, doesn't matter) with climate change I think what's going on in Buffalo is a pretty good indicator is there is **** all any of us can do about it now. Mother nature is a bitch.

#24 Very wide right

Very wide right

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 695 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:29 PM

They also said there would be Obamacare Death Panels. I must have missed them.

Yes you must have missed them,every insurance has a point when they will no longer pay for medical care.Those decisions are made by "death panels".Obama himself responded to a question about care that a womans mother would get if she needed a heart transplant and Obama said that at a certain point that woman would not get a heart but a pain pill would make more sense.

Edited by Very wide right, 19 November 2014 - 09:33 PM.


#25 DC Tom

DC Tom

    Also sniping at retards from the balcony

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,757 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:32 PM

For those of you that think man is responsible (fully or partially, doesn't matter) with climate change I think what's going on in Buffalo is a pretty good indicator is there is **** all any of us can do about it now. Mother nature is a bitch.


That tipping point was passed about 50 years ago.

Yes you must have missed them,every insurance has a point when they will no longer pay for medical care.Those decisions are made by "death panels".


Oh my God. Just shut up already. :lol:

#26 Very wide right

Very wide right

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 695 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:35 PM

Net Neutrality is many things to many people, most of them wrong. Applying the fairness doctrine to it, though, is the funniest thing I've heard in a while. That's the equivalent of requiring Comcast to make sure I watch FOX no more and no less than CNN. :lol:



You're really going to argue with this retard?

Thats really classy .Did you ever stop to think that their might be someone here with a mentally retarded family member? Stop trolling

#27 DC Tom

DC Tom

    Also sniping at retards from the balcony

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,757 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:37 PM

Thats really classy .Did you ever stop to think that their might be someone here with a mentally retarded family member? Stop trolling


I know there's someone here - I have two (one of whom I'm the legal guardian of).

The difference between him and you is: he's not retarded. Functionally brain damaged, from a high fever. But not retarded. You, on the other hand...very retarded.

#28 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    See Bufffalo-inspired art at www.inkwellstudios.com

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,429 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:38 PM

Yes you must have missed them,every insurance has a point when they will no longer pay for medical care.Those decisions are made by "death panels".Obama himself responded to a question about care that a womans mother would get if she needed a heart transplant and Obama said that at a certain point that woman would not get a heart but a pain pill would make more sense.


You are mixing up what health insurance was BEFORE Obamacare.

#29 Chef Jim

Chef Jim

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,627 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:43 PM

Thats really classy .Did you ever stop to think that their might be someone here with a mentally retarded family member? Stop trolling


I have a severely autistic nephew.

Doesn't mean you're not a retard I just wanted to throw that out there.

#30 Very wide right

Very wide right

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 695 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:43 PM

You are mixing up what health insurance was BEFORE Obamacare.

If you read the whole post you will see Obama said the woman would get a pain pill instead of a heart transplant because of her age.Suprised you didnt hear about that.It was brought up when they rammed this law through without reading it.

#31 BillsFan-4-Ever

BillsFan-4-Ever

    All Pro

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,393 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:44 PM

Mods, please ban this poster. He's too stupid for PPP.

make up your mind Tom

#32 DC Tom

DC Tom

    Also sniping at retards from the balcony

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,757 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:45 PM

If you read the whole post you will see Obama said the woman would get a pain pill instead of a heart transplant because of her age.Suprised you didnt hear about that.It was brought up when they rammed this law through without reading it.


You've got to be someone's sock puppet. You can't be a real poster.

#33 BillsFan-4-Ever

BillsFan-4-Ever

    All Pro

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,393 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:45 PM

on and BTW you people are spelling FAUX News incorrectly

#34 Very wide right

Very wide right

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 695 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:46 PM

I have a severely autistic nephew.

Doesn't mean you're not a retard I just wanted to throw that out there.

I'm not suprised you guys throw that word around so freely,it demonstrates a total lack of class that also goes well with the rest of your thinking.I'm all in on this.You are a nasty bunch and I have standards.Goodbye.Like I said before,when you know you lost an argument your frustrated mind can only respond with a juvenile personal attack.

Edited by Very wide right, 19 November 2014 - 09:50 PM.


#35 DC Tom

DC Tom

    Also sniping at retards from the balcony

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,757 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:46 PM

on and BTW you people are spelling FAUX News incorrectly


It's FoxSnooze, sorry...

Although, truth be told, I find Fox News not soporific, but uproariously funny.

#36 frostbitmic

frostbitmic

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 503 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:51 PM

I'm all for global warming .... I'm cold.

#37 DC Tom

DC Tom

    Also sniping at retards from the balcony

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,757 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:51 PM

I'm not suprised you guys throw that word around so freely,it demonstrates a total lack of class that also goes well with the rest of your thinking.


We throw that word around so freely because we wouldn't refer to people like my Down's syndrome uncle, my low-functioning nephew, or Chef's autistic nephew as "retarded," because they're not. They are not retarded, they are people inhibited by diagnosed medical conditions.

We use it in its literal definition of "lack of intellectual development or function." Which describes you perfectly.

#38 Chef Jim

Chef Jim

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,627 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 10:05 PM

We use it in its literal definition of "lack of intellectual development or function." Which describes you perfectly.


Like I was Saturday night? At least Sunday morning I was wasn't retarded anymore.

Edited by Chef Jim, 19 November 2014 - 10:05 PM.


#39 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    See Bufffalo-inspired art at www.inkwellstudios.com

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,429 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 10:28 PM

If you read the whole post you will see Obama said the woman would get a pain pill instead of a heart transplant because of her age.Suprised you didnt hear about that.It was brought up when they rammed this law through without reading it.

You're right. I forgot how wonderful health care was before when no one was denied medical care and prices never went up and unicorns handed out oxycodone like Skittles. Friggin' Obama had to screw up a good thing.

Edited by PromoTheRobot, 19 November 2014 - 10:28 PM.


#40 OCinBuffalo

OCinBuffalo

    Who wants some more "data journalism"? LOL-->Vox

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,702 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 11:31 PM

Are you objecting to my use of the term "last several decades?" I borrowed it from this quote in their report. I didn't need to delve much deeper to make a simple point, especially to an OP that doesn't seem to appreciate the difference between climate and weather.

Dude, the planet hasn't warmed for 18 years, as was predicted by alarmists. If we aren't delving deep? That's as simple as it gets. The "models" upon which the entire theory is based have performed so badly, that they've had to come up with 2 speculations(1. the warming is hiding at the bottom of the ocean, 2. Chinese pollution is both causing and preventing Global Warming, at the same time). If neither of those speculations pans? The entire theory blows up.

That is the reality, delving as shallowly as possible.

And before you go all PPP on me, I have no desire to debate this or any other facet of the climate change argument. Been there, done that. I frankly don't give a crap what anyone else thinks about it at this point.

Ha! Like this wasn't headed here! Too bad. You're in our domain now, like it or not.

For the rest of you: the bolded is basically all that's left of the Global Warming argument. It's funny how I keep hearing "I believe in Global Warming" now. It's become about faith. Faith, from the very people who decry religious faith every chance they get, and talk about science as if they know it well?

Hilarious Irony. That's what Global Warming is now: a continued source of humor for those of us who posses at least an above-average intellect, as I'm sure the rest of this thread shows.

Are you climate scientist or just repeating what you hear on Fox News?

Speaking of hilarity I have a question: it is possible to respond to a point you don't like, without adding the tired, old "Fox News" thing as the mutually eclusive alternative?

Btw, if you've been keeping score on the media lately? Fox News has been dragging the rest of the media into real stories, they should have been on like stink on schit from day 1, for about 2 years now.

In fact, it is the rest of the media, not Fox, that has lost objectivity and therefore, credibility, over the entire Obama "experience". The media is currently contorting like a Twister game now trying to distance themselves from the Gruberish, and what they've said about him/it.

I mean: dude, that's what is actually happening, right now, in reality. Fox isn't our problem. We know them, and they are honest about who they are. Real media corruption, from people pretending/lying about being objective, and who they are, from everybody else? That is our problem.

Not to hijack this thread, but I have to comment on the latest Orwellian twist: Net Neutrality. The narrative now being sold is that Net Neutrality is like the Fairness Doctrine, that is web traffic has to be equally conservative and liberal!!

Now anyone paying attention knows that is 100% NOT what Net Neutrality is. (In case you don't know it's a rule stating that internet companies cannot speed up some parts of the web and slow down others.) But lobbyists figured out if you couch any argument in liberal vs conservative terms you can get people to vote against their own interests. Heck, some people would give up both kidneys if Fox News said Obama wanted Americans to have kidneys.

OMG!

Net Neutrality?

:lol: See? What did I tell you guys? This is the Rasputin of issues. As long as Google and Amazon exist, are led by liberals who remain politically active, this issue will never die. It's hilarious that you are talking about other people not knowing this issue.

You don't know this issue. I love how you brush by the central agument here to make a political point, and accuse others of doing so at the same time! :lol:

This is about Google and Amazon getting bandwidth cheaper because they use more of it, and the ISPs saying "no, you pay for what you use, just like everybody else". I don't care what the latest spin is, this is the central argument. Google wants a volume deal = buy huge chunks of bandwidth for cheaper, and then wants to crowd out other content providers, by buying so much at the package deal rate, that their competitors(and btw, the rest of us) become noticeably slower.

And, as long as D pols will take Google's $, we will see "HR - Infinity: A bill to implement Net Neutrality", be brought up and voted down.

The Democrats are on the side of Big Google, and it's the rest of us that will suffer if Net Neutrality ever passes, because the remaining bandwith Google doesn't buy, will be smaller, and therefore will cost us more.

You have it exactly backwards: it is Google and Amazon et al who have been, and will continue, using whatever means available to them, including turning this into a partisan liberal/conservative thing, when all it really is corporate power move to the hoop, that keeps getting blocked by those of us who do, in fact, know better.