Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Coach is Back! on March 04, 2015, 08:56:15 PM
-
http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/07/ca-imposes-a-global-warming-tax-for-fuel-on-top-of-gas-taxes/
Wadda bunch of horseshit.
-
what the fuck is wrong with these retards?
when gas dropped to $2 a gallon it might have been passable but not now it's back up past $3
although this wont stop all the fuckwits in this state sending these jokers back to the trough come next election
At least I'm rich enough that this wont affect me at all, but LOL at the average dem welfare voter getting hammered on cost of living increases (unless they're giving it back to the scum class come tax time?)
-
No kidding. Last month the minions were celebrating and rubbing in our faces how low gas was. In the last month it's gone back up over a $1. Gee, didn't see that one coming a mile away. lol
-
Its a cult
-
Hi morons.
Do you know the costs of gas are when health concerns, pollution etc are factored in?
Where do you think the economy will be with coast lines disappearing, increasing rates of drought, worse storms causing untold damage.
What solution do you propose to wean the world off of fossil fuels?
Oh ya, I forgot, you don't "believe" the globe is heating up, never mind, go back to your daily activities.
-
Hi morons.
Do you know the costs of gas are when health concerns, pollution etc are factored in?
Where do you think the economy will be with coast lines disappearing, increasing rates of drought, worse storms causing untold damage.
What solution do you propose to wean the world off of fossil fuels?
Oh ya, I forgot, you don't "believe" the globe is heating up, never mind, go back to your daily activities.
More scaremongering just like Jesus Doomsday cults - REPENT NOW SINNER!
-
More scaremongering just like Jesus Doomsday cults - REPENT NOW SINNER!
Oh jesus, you will be on the wrong side of this as all anti-intellectuals will have to face reality.
Since the scaremongering tactic worked so well right? I mean remember that ice tax during the ice age? it always gets the people to cough up the dough. Science isn't exact, it's approximate, sorry your brain abhors complexity.
-
Hi morons.
Do you know the costs of gas are when health concerns, pollution etc are factored in?
Where do you think the economy will be with coast lines disappearing, increasing rates of drought, worse storms causing untold damage.
What solution do you propose to wean the world off of fossil fuels?
Oh ya, I forgot, you don't "believe" the globe is heating up, never mind, go back to your daily activities.
Oh, please tell us how much the cost will be and when the coast lines will be disappearing? Were the coast lines supposed to disappear 2 years age along with all the Arctic ice?
Please tell us, stupid fag.
-
March 5th here in Dallas/Fort Worth and we have school closures galore.
Snow and ice all over the road.
Record snowfall totals in Dallas-Fort Worth area
The overnight snowfall is officially the fourth highest snow total for the month of March in Dallas-Fort Worth area, with 3.4 inches recorded at Dallas-Fort Worth International airport as of 3 a.m.
Another tenth of an inch was recorded early Thursday morning, putting the official total at 3.5 inches.
The most snow recorded in the area came in 1942, when DFW airport saw just over six inches of snow.
The DFW airport's total is used as the official "snow stick" for the metroplex, but several areas saw six or more inches of snowfall overnight. It was the largest snow event in the area since February of 2010.
Grapevine saw as much as seven inches, with North Dallas and McKinney seeing six and 5.3 inches, respectively. Fort Worth saw around four inches of snow.
(http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/f276de5d49caee84d306f9a1b81ffc5b6de46ed1/c=121-0-1553-1077&r=x383&c=540x380/local/-/media/2015/03/05/WFAA/WFAA/635611388349050445-ashton-records.JPG)
-
I have to agree. This tax is excessive. Doesn't matter what the political justification is.
-
March 5th here in Dallas/Fort Worth and we have school closures galore.
Snow and ice all over the road.
Record snowfall totals in Dallas-Fort Worth area
The overnight snowfall is officially the fourth highest snow total for the month of March in Dallas-Fort Worth area, with 3.4 inches recorded at Dallas-Fort Worth International airport as of 3 a.m.
Another tenth of an inch was recorded early Thursday morning, putting the official total at 3.5 inches.
The most snow recorded in the area came in 1942, when DFW airport saw just over six inches of snow.
The DFW airport's total is used as the official "snow stick" for the metroplex, but several areas saw six or more inches of snowfall overnight. It was the largest snow event in the area since February of 2010.
Grapevine saw as much as seven inches, with North Dallas and McKinney seeing six and 5.3 inches, respectively. Fort Worth saw around four inches of snow.
(http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/f276de5d49caee84d306f9a1b81ffc5b6de46ed1/c=121-0-1553-1077&r=x383&c=540x380/local/-/media/2015/03/05/WFAA/WFAA/635611388349050445-ashton-records.JPG)
My head hurts, I give up you guys are right. SEASONS should not exist right? isn't earth suppose to be a ball of pure fire by now?
Fucking libtards want us in caves using candles.
I wonder if it's really really hot (record level) anywhere else in the globe? as you know the US is the only place that matters.
-
My head hurts, I give up you guys are right. SEASONS should not exist right? isn't earth suppose to be a ball of pure fire by now?
Fucking libtards want us in caves using candles.
I wonder if it's really really hot (record level) anywhere else in the globe? as you know the US is the only place that matters.
Nothing like "Gee Wiz" Graphs to attract parrots.
-
My head hurts, I give up you guys are right. SEASONS should not exist right? isn't earth suppose to be a ball of pure fire by now?
Fucking libtards want us in caves using candles.
I wonder if it's really really hot (record level) anywhere else in the globe? as you know the US is the only place that matters.
If you feel so strongly about it go ahead and write a personal check for the cause.
-
the study they did on news outlets that found fox news viewers are the must uninformed and found that 60 % of the shit they spew is lies,you think to yourself that can't be.then you come on getbig and you find out dam they're right :D
-
Oh, please tell us how much the cost will be and when the coast lines will be disappearing? Were the coast lines supposed to disappear 2 years age along with all the Arctic ice?
Please tell us, stupid fag.
I always assumed I would be walking around in 2 feet of water by now.
Cause them there magazines with them scientist fellas told me so.
-
If you feel so strongly about it go ahead and write a personal check for the cause.
That's an absurd proposition, I might not like starving children in Africa but I won't donate for a number of reasons.
The argument needs to stop now, the debate is settled, solutions should be the focus. But instead we are roadblocked by stupidity.
-
That's an absurd proposition, I might not like starving children in Africa but I won't donate for a number of reasons.
The argument needs to stop now, the debate is settled, solutions should be the focus. But instead we are roadblocked by stupidity.
No - you are roadblocked by reality - "green energy' is a scam
-
FLASHBACK: IN 1972, CRONKITE WARNED OF ‘NEW ICE AGE
As winter weather continues to dominate the Midwest and the East Coast, the Media Research Center’s Julia Seymour provides this piece of video from Walter Cronkite’s CBS evening news broadcast on Sept, 11, 1972 in which Cronkite warned of the forthcoming ice age.
“But then there is some good news,” Cronkite continued. “That while the weather may be just a little colder in the immediate years to come, the full extent of the new ice age won’t be reached for 10,000 years. And if you can stand any more good news, even then it won’t be as bad as the last ice age 60,000 years ago. Then New York, Cincinnati, St. Louis, were under 5,000 feet of ice. Presumably no traffic moved and school was let out for the day. And that’s the way it is, Monday Sept. 11, 1972.”
According to the report from Seymour, Cronkite’s words from nearly 43 years ago call into question the theory of anthropogenic global warming
“Global warming activists have claimed for years that the 1970s global cooling scare never existed. They have tried to erase the inconvenient history which ironically blamed extreme weather like tornadoes, droughts, record cold and blizzards on global cooling,” Climate Depot’s Marc Morano told Seymour. “But now — unearthed from bowels of media archives — comes none other than Walter Cronkite reporting on fears of a coming ice age in 1972. Having Cronkite’s image and face discussing global cooling fears reveals the fickleness of the climate change claims.”
“Climate fear promoters switched effortlessly from global cooling fears in the 1970s to global warming fears in the 1980s. In the present day, the phrase ‘global warming’ has lost favor in favor of ‘climate change’ or ‘global climate disruption’ or even ‘global weirding,’ he added. “’Settled science’ has never seemed so unsettled.”
-
The cultists of climate change cant keep the bs they peddle straight from year to year
FLASHBACK: IN 1972, CRONKITE WARNED OF ‘NEW ICE AGE
As winter weather continues to dominate the Midwest and the East Coast, the Media Research Center’s Julia Seymour provides this piece of video from Walter Cronkite’s CBS evening news broadcast on Sept, 11, 1972 in which Cronkite warned of the forthcoming ice age.
“But then there is some good news,” Cronkite continued. “That while the weather may be just a little colder in the immediate years to come, the full extent of the new ice age won’t be reached for 10,000 years. And if you can stand any more good news, even then it won’t be as bad as the last ice age 60,000 years ago. Then New York, Cincinnati, St. Louis, were under 5,000 feet of ice. Presumably no traffic moved and school was let out for the day. And that’s the way it is, Monday Sept. 11, 1972.”
According to the report from Seymour, Cronkite’s words from nearly 43 years ago call into question the theory of anthropogenic global warming
“Global warming activists have claimed for years that the 1970s global cooling scare never existed. They have tried to erase the inconvenient history which ironically blamed extreme weather like tornadoes, droughts, record cold and blizzards on global cooling,” Climate Depot’s Marc Morano told Seymour. “But now — unearthed from bowels of media archives — comes none other than Walter Cronkite reporting on fears of a coming ice age in 1972. Having Cronkite’s image and face discussing global cooling fears reveals the fickleness of the climate change claims.”
“Climate fear promoters switched effortlessly from global cooling fears in the 1970s to global warming fears in the 1980s. In the present day, the phrase ‘global warming’ has lost favor in favor of ‘climate change’ or ‘global climate disruption’ or even ‘global weirding,’ he added. “’Settled science’ has never seemed so unsettled.”
-
No - you are roadblocked by reality - "green energy' is a scam
How is it a scam?
if battery technology was advanced, a plot of solar cells the size of twenty football fields could supply the worlds power a couple times over. Hydro, geothermal, wave energy is progressing. Germany is utilizing solar exceptionally well, yet its a scam?
I live in the reality where properly designed experiments and predictive models along with overwhelming majority consensus (across the globe) among experts dictates my opinion. You on the other hand, won't believe every major science org, the US navy, NASA etc.. it's all a scam bro. Ever wonder if big oil is paying scientists to say what they want? how many more examples do we need?
They fund think tanks designed to obfuscate the issue. If it wasn't true why would they need to do this? The puny oil/petro companies can't keep up with all the bullying scientists? They are trying to confuse the dumb among us, the people who will tow the company line , will ignore facts and are blinded by their political ideology.
explain why NASA is lying? are the satellite images fake?
-
How is it a scam?
if battery technology was advanced, a plot of solar cells the size of twenty football fields could supply the worlds power a couple times over. Hydro, geothermal, wave energy is progressing. Germany is utilizing solar exceptionally well, yet its a scam?
I live in the reality where properly designed experiments and predictive models along with overwhelming majority consensus (across the globe) among experts dictates my opinion. You on the other hand, won't believe every major science org, the US navy, NASA etc.. it's all a scam bro. Ever wonder if big oil is paying scientists to say what they want? how many more examples do we need?
They fund think tanks designed to obfuscate the issue. If it wasn't true why would they need to do this? The puny oil/petro companies can't keep up with all the bullying scientists? They are trying to confuse the dumb among us, the people who will tow the company line , will ignore facts and are blinded by their political ideology.
explain why NASA is lying? are the satellite images fake?
Solyndra :D
-
Solyndra :D
Oh so if exxon went under that means oil is a scam, is this the best argument your brain could muster?
-
FLASHBACK: IN 1972, CRONKITE WARNED OF ‘NEW ICE AGE
As winter weather continues to dominate the Midwest and the East Coast, the Media Research Center’s Julia Seymour provides this piece of video from Walter Cronkite’s CBS evening news broadcast on Sept, 11, 1972 in which Cronkite warned of the forthcoming ice age.
“But then there is some good news,” Cronkite continued. “That while the weather may be just a little colder in the immediate years to come, the full extent of the new ice age won’t be reached for 10,000 years. And if you can stand any more good news, even then it won’t be as bad as the last ice age 60,000 years ago. Then New York, Cincinnati, St. Louis, were under 5,000 feet of ice. Presumably no traffic moved and school was let out for the day. And that’s the way it is, Monday Sept. 11, 1972.”
According to the report from Seymour, Cronkite’s words from nearly 43 years ago call into question the theory of anthropogenic global warming
“Global warming activists have claimed for years that the 1970s global cooling scare never existed. They have tried to erase the inconvenient history which ironically blamed extreme weather like tornadoes, droughts, record cold and blizzards on global cooling,” Climate Depot’s Marc Morano told Seymour. “But now — unearthed from bowels of media archives — comes none other than Walter Cronkite reporting on fears of a coming ice age in 1972. Having Cronkite’s image and face discussing global cooling fears reveals the fickleness of the climate change claims.”
“Climate fear promoters switched effortlessly from global cooling fears in the 1970s to global warming fears in the 1980s. In the present day, the phrase ‘global warming’ has lost favor in favor of ‘climate change’ or ‘global climate disruption’ or even ‘global weirding,’ he added. “’Settled science’ has never seemed so unsettled.”
WHO GIVES A FUCK WHAT WALTER CRONKITE OR AL GORE HAS TO SAY? they are not experts. Honestly, go to school or something. This isn't an argument. Not only did the person who Cronkite is quoting state warming was occurring but he even clarified his cooling statement.
Show me evidence, like literature, satellite images, etc. Not a news article, you watch fox a lot?
-
WHO GIVES A FUCK WHAT WALTER CRONKITE OR AL GORE HAS TO SAY? they are not experts. Honestly, go to school or something. This isn't an argument. Not only did the person who Cronkite is quoting state warming was occurring but he even clarified his cooling statement.
Show me evidence, like literature, satellite images, etc. Not a news article, you watch fox a lot?
get ready for Obama's gay lol
-
the cronkite story was on all the far right sites today must have been their catch phrase today ,you notice all the dumb parrots repeating it lol
-
get ready for Obama's gay lol
That too bro!!!!
-
How does taxing gas more in this state (and giving the money to illegal aliens) stop global warming again?
will the billions of Chinese and Indian gas users see how progressive we are here in CA and decide to stop using fossil fuels?
should we burn a huge pile of Obama bucks as an offering to Gaia ?
-
How does taxing gas more in this state (and giving the money to illegal aliens) stop global warming again?
will the billions of Chinese and Indian gas users see how progressive we are here in CA and decide to stop using fossil fuels?
should we burn a huge pile of Obama bucks as an offering to Gaia ?
it's poor execution, but an attempt to "lead the way" if one exists.
The cost should be in fines or penalties for the companies doing the vast majority of earth rape.
Either way it's not the solution, the economy needs to shift and transform. We need to move into a new age and into a new revolution like the industrial revolution. Clean energy needs far more RandD. I think solar panels and wave/tidal energy can largely replace gas if we make a big push. Electric cars are becoming viable, Germany has made solar work despite the technological shortcomings.
-
it's poor execution, but an attempt to "lead the way" if one exists.
The cost should be in fines or penalties for the companies doing the vast majority of earth rape.
Either way it's not the solution, the economy needs to shift and transform. We need to move into a new age and into a new revolution like the industrial revolution. Clean energy needs far more RandD. I think solar panels and wave/tidal energy can largely replace gas if we make a big push. Electric cars are becoming viable, Germany has made solar work despite the technological shortcomings.
But it's not an attempt to lead the way, it's a tax grab for the "general fund" aka the hidden costs of illegals that they can get away with because the state has a permanent D majority. It also hits the middle class and working class the hardest as it increases the cost of everything from food to rent.
Taxing me more on gas won't stop me driving, unless I quit my job then I'll continue to have to drive 100s of miles a week. If brown would like to pay me to stay home and not work I'd be fine with that. If he buys me a Tesla that's fine too as we have free charging stations at work, but most people aren't as lucky as I am.
Here in SF, rather than encouraging commute options , we have populist politicians actually fining tech companies for providing free bus transport for their workers ... because Gentrification is Bad.
-
I don't know enough to have an opinion on climate change. as far as I can tell presently there is scientific consensus that man made climate change is real. I may be wrong.
my problem is this.
here is the typical liberal opinion:
"i'm quite certain that every penny of additional tax paid will be put to its intended use. I have absolute confidence in the federal government to use this money to solve our energy problems. they are good people trying to do the right thing.
but the FDA and the USDA, don't give any money to them. they're trying to give us cancer."
someone please explain to me how they can have absolute faith in the government regarding global warming but are absolutely sure that the FDA is trying to give us cancer and autism because they are part of "big pharma".
why do I seem to be the only person who recognizes these ridiculously conflicting assumptions?
-
I don't know enough to have an opinion on climate change. as far as I can tell presently there is scientific consensus that man made climate change is real. I may be wrong.
my problem is this.
here is the typical liberal opinion:
"i'm quite certain that every penny of additional tax paid will be put to its intended use. I have absolute confidence in the federal government to use this money to solve our energy problems. they are good people trying to do the right thing.
but the FDA and the USDA, don't give any money to them. they're trying to give us cancer."
someone please explain to me how they can have absolute faith in the government regarding global warming but are absolutely sure that the FDA is trying to give us cancer and autism because they are part of "big pharma".
why do I seem to be the only person who recognizes these ridiculously conflicting assumptions?
Those positions are conflicting, but only a moron would hold them. There is no giving someone Autism, it's genetic nothing more, the more people we keep alive by circumventing nature (people with ALS wouldn't have kids, see stephen hawking) we flood the gene pool with weak fucked up genetics. The older we get before we have kids also plays a massive role.
The issue you have is that the people you talk to are morons. Big Pharma has invested so much into cancer research, treatment (including cures for many). If you know the facts about say Autism or Cancer you could immediately shut down such silly arguments.
-
Those positions are conflicting, but only a moron would hold them. There is no giving someone Autism, it's genetic nothing more, the more people we keep alive by circumventing nature (people with ALS wouldn't have kids, see stephen hawking) we flood the gene pool with weak fucked up genetics. The older we get before we have kids also plays a massive role.
The issue you have is that the people you talk to are morons. Big Pharma has invested so much into cancer research, treatment (including cures for many). If you know the facts about say Autism or Cancer you could immediately shut down such silly arguments.
I don't know many liberals who don't believe that GMOS are killing us and that "only buy organic because conventional produce is DANGEROUS". and the scientific consensus just does not support any of that. the states that these mandatory labeling lobbyists are pushing the hardest are in the ultra liberal states like New York, California, Oregon and Massachusetts. and its all bullshit.......if you are on the side of science.
either you ONLY associate with very level headed liberals or you're in denial that the majority actually believe that.
-
I don't know many liberals who don't believe that GMOS are killing us and that "only buy organic because conventional produce is DANGEROUS". and the scientific consensus just does not support any of that. the states that these mandatory labeling lobbyists are pushing the hardest are in the ultra liberal states like New York, California, Oregon and Massachusetts. and its all bullshit.......if you are on the side of science.
either you ONLY associate with very level headed liberals or you're in denial that the majority actually believe that.
I tend to think of myself as liberal in many areas and conservative in others, the concept of being a certain way based on political affiliation seems absurd. I can't see how others can't see this stuff is bullshit, it has to be either delusion or stupidity. I equally dislike the anti-vaccine, energy medicine nut jobs as much as the young earth creationist, oil lovers, both are different forms of irrationality.
For example, GMO's might have health effects, they appear to be safe in most however. The idea of adding healthy genes or splicing things like corn to alter protein expression for less allergenicity is somewhat concerning. Evolution can't be stopped, why couldn't we improve food quality genetically?
The gas people denying global warming is just as bad. There is far more evidence for GMO's being unhealthy then global warming being a hoax. Numerous countries have yet to adopt GMO positive policies, none reject global warming being man made.
-
I tend to think of myself as liberal in many areas and conservative in others, the concept of being a certain way based on political affiliation seems absurd. I can't see how others can't see this stuff is bullshit, it has to be either delusion or stupidity. I equally dislike the anti-vaccine, energy medicine nut jobs as much as the young earth creationist, oil lovers, both are different forms of irrationality.
For example, GMO's might have health effects, they appear to be safe in most however. The idea of adding healthy genes or splicing things like corn to alter protein expression for less allergenicity is somewhat concerning. Evolution can't be stopped, why couldn't we improve food quality genetically?
The gas people denying global warming is just as bad. There is far more evidence for GMO's being unhealthy then global warming being a hoax. Numerous countries have yet to adopt GMO positive policies, none reject global warming being man made.
I used to believe that too. I was also skeptical of the liberal position on climate change for a time. but i always come around to listening to the boots on the ground scientists when it comes to either.
And there is ZERO scientific evidence that GMO's are more or less dangerous than the non GMO alternatives (organic). ZERO. and the current scientific consensus on man made climate change is that it is a reality.
if I see another article citing the Seralini study my head will explode. my wife is an RD so she gets CPE on this shit all the time. I read it while i'm on the shitter.
and don't get me wrong. the majority of conservatives believe the same shit. liberals don't have a monopoly on stupid when it comes to these issues.
-
the best way I've heard it explained was something i read from a scientist blogger. he said "the only difference between the climate change deniers, the anti GMO people, and the scientific community is that the scientific community is open to the idea that they're wrong. If they are presented with peer reviewed empirical evidence that is contrary to their scientific opinion, their opinion will change. the climate change deniers and the anti GMO's position will not change. they will simply deflect and find a new route to come to their original opinion.
-
the best way I've heard it explained was something i read from a scientist blogger. he said "the only difference between the climate change deniers, the anti GMO people, and the scientific community is that the scientific community is open to the idea that they're wrong. If they are presented with peer reviewed empirical evidence that is contrary to their scientific opinion, their opinion will change. the climate change deniers and the anti GMO's position will not change. they will simply deflect and find a new route to come to their original opinion.
The problem is in the so called 'Solutions' and whether anything these people propose would make any difference at all while at the same time costing normal people an arm and a leg.
-
I used to believe that too. I was also skeptical of the liberal position on climate change for a time. but i always come around to listening to the boots on the ground scientists when it comes to either.
And there is ZERO scientific evidence that GMO's are more or less dangerous than the non GMO alternatives (organic). ZERO. and the current scientific consensus on man made climate change is that it is a reality.
if I see another article citing the Seralini study my head will explode. my wife is an RD so she gets CPE on this shit all the time. I read it while i'm on the shitter.
and don't get me wrong. the majority of conservatives believe the same shit. liberals don't have a monopoly on stupid when it comes to these issues.
I agree there is zero evidence, a lot of it is theoretical. There is some lively debate, particularly about gene insertion and modifying plants for healthful properties. I agree with you and think they are fine, I was more so using it to highlight how absurd the climate change deniers are. There is far more "debate" with GMO's, whether needed or not than in climatology. Yet you have deniers being adamant it is a hoax, a lie etc.. If the strength of scientific weight convinces you regarding GMO, Climate Change should be crushing. There are some rodent studies showing induction of dysbiosis and GI issues with GMO foods. Now the methodology is poor, it was only GMO foods etc.
Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2014 Mar;34(1):77-88. doi: 10.3109/07388551.2013.823595. Epub 2013 Sep 16.
An overview of the last 10 years of genetically engineered crop safety research.
Nicolia A1, Manzo A, Veronesi F, Rosellini D.
Author information
Abstract
The technology to produce genetically engineered (GE) plants is celebrating its 30th anniversary and one of the major achievements has been the development of GE crops. The safety of GE crops is crucial for their adoption and has been the object of intense research work often ignored in the public debate. We have reviewed the scientific literature on GE crop safety during the last 10 years, built a classified and manageable list of scientific papers, and analyzed the distribution and composition of the published literature. We selected original research papers, reviews, relevant opinions and reports addressing all the major issues that emerged in the debate on GE crops, trying to catch the scientific consensus that has matured since GE plants became widely cultivated worldwide. The scientific research conducted so far has not detected any significant hazards directly connected with the use of GE crops; however, the debate is still intense. An improvement in the efficacy of scientific communication could have a significant impact on the future of agricultural GE. Our collection of scientific records is available to researchers, communicators and teachers at all levels to help create an informed, balanced public perception on the important issue of GE use in agriculture.
-
Global Warming is for losers.
-
evidence is murky and biased on BOTH sides.
What we can agree upon is that 6 years ago, most top republicans were blaming mankind for the temp rises - Mitt, Palin, Mccain, and Newt, remember?
it's only when the base decided they didn't like it anymore, that most republicans decided they too were against it.
Here's the bottom line, from a guy who doesn't buy into it:
Most liberals/democrats still blame pollution for air damage and warming trends, most repubs do not. it's that simple.
Therefore, dem politicians keep supporting the theory, and repub politicians do not. They just reflect the views of their average IQ voters, it's that simple, it really is. If the "tea party" supporters believed the theory that man was affecting the air (as repubs used to), so would palin and the other repubs.
Essentially, it just became another issue to divide people, and people were all too happy to choose their side. Seriously, EITHER PARTY scientists could discover cure to cancer tomorrow, and the other party would cry about the damage to healthcare workers in the US, it's how it'll always be. Global warming is another wedge issue that NEITHER side can prove, and both are paying scientists to do just that lol. No credibility from either side at the moment. Give it 20 years.
-
Global Warming is for losers. suckers.
fixed
-
fixed
So why are people around the world perpetuating a hoax? What gain is there for all of these different countries?
I don;t see where the conspiracy theory is coming from. It makes no sense for it to be a lie, on such a grand scale? The are using basic science to trick us?
-
So why are people around the world perpetuating a hoax? What gain is there for all of these different countries?
I don;t see where the conspiracy theory is coming from. It makes no sense for it to be a lie, on such a grand scale? The are using basic science to trick us?
the conspiracy theory comes into play when they are faced with overwhelming amounts of science that disprove their theory. then they say, "oh yeah well they're just saying that because its a cover up by all the scientists because they're part of Big.......INSERT WHATEVER HERE"
-
evidence is murky and biased on BOTH sides.
What we can agree upon is that 6 years ago, most top republicans were blaming mankind for the temp rises - Mitt, Palin, Mccain, and Newt, remember?
it's only when the base decided they didn't like it anymore, that most republicans decided they too were against it.
Here's the bottom line, from a guy who doesn't buy into it:
Most liberals/democrats still blame pollution for air damage and warming trends, most repubs do not. it's that simple.
Therefore, dem politicians keep supporting the theory, and repub politicians do not. They just reflect the views of their average IQ voters, it's that simple, it really is. If the "tea party" supporters believed the theory that man was affecting the air (as repubs used to), so would palin and the other repubs.
Essentially, it just became another issue to divide people, and people were all too happy to choose their side. Seriously, EITHER PARTY scientists could discover cure to cancer tomorrow, and the other party would cry about the damage to healthcare workers in the US, it's how it'll always be. Global warming is another wedge issue that NEITHER side can prove, and both are paying scientists to do just that lol. No credibility from either side at the moment. Give it 20 years.
the problem comes in when we raise taxes to pay for it. my question is "pay for what?"
I believe man made climate change is real.
I do NOT believe that me giving more money right now to the federal government is necessarily going to help.
and I KNOW that there are a bunch of guys making a shit ton of $$ from the federal government because of climate change.
I just hope that the $$ we spend actually goes towards something fruitful. I'm not confident.
-
I don't know many liberals who don't believe that GMOS are killing us and that "only buy organic because conventional produce is DANGEROUS". and the scientific consensus just does not support any of that. the states that these mandatory labeling lobbyists are pushing the hardest are in the ultra liberal states like New York, California, Oregon and Massachusetts. and its all bullshit.......if you are on the side of science.
either you ONLY associate with very level headed liberals or you're in denial that the majority actually believe that.
The liberals you know seem like scared little girls. Give them a beating you have my blessing.
-
the conspiracy theory comes into play when they are faced with overwhelming amounts of science that disprove their theory. then they say, "oh yeah well they're just saying that because its a cover up by all the scientists because they're part of Big.......INSERT WHATEVER HERE"
It's insanity. Facts are facts.