Cycles

Message boards : Politics : Cycles
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 6 · 7 · 8 · 9

AuthorMessage
Batter Up
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 May 99
Posts: 1946
Credit: 24,860,347
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1516568 - Posted: 15 May 2014, 16:29:14 UTC - in response to Message 1516567.  
Last modified: 15 May 2014, 16:33:00 UTC

Yes. A "correct" label doesn't mean it can't used to discredit an entire group. Am I correct that you were utilizing this Congressman's obvious lack of understanding of plate tectonics as a way to imply that all "changers" share the same basic misunderstandings of science?

I stated a fact, how others feel about facts and the associations they make I have no control over. I could have said he is a Democratic, ether way it shows a political ideology not a factual ideology.
ID: 1516568 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 1516574 - Posted: 15 May 2014, 16:36:14 UTC - in response to Message 1516568.  

Yes. A "correct" label doesn't mean it can't used to discredit an entire group. Am I correct that you were utilizing this Congressman's obvious lack of understanding of plate tectonics as a way to imply that all "changers" share the same basic misunderstandings of science?

I stated a fact, how others feel about facts and the associations they make I have no control over. I could have said he is a Democratic, ether way it shows a political ideology not a factual ideology.


You didn't answer the question though. You may not be able to control other people's associations, but you can make implied statements in an attempt to discredit. And that was my question; were you trying to imply something negative from your stated fact? Or will you continue to squirrel around the implication?
ID: 1516574 · Report as offensive
Batter Up
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 May 99
Posts: 1946
Credit: 24,860,347
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1516603 - Posted: 15 May 2014, 17:23:10 UTC - in response to Message 1516574.  
Last modified: 15 May 2014, 17:29:10 UTC

Or will you continue to squirrel around the implication?

"Squirrel around"? That's just nuts.

I just pointed out one example of someone in power who is totally clueless. There is not one legislator who wrote a peer reviewed paper, let alone can read one, on climate change. They all just believe along party lines. This is not the way science works.

I didn't know the congressman was a "changer" for a fact until I looked it up; I did know he was a Democrat so I felt safe with my assumption.
ID: 1516603 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 1516672 - Posted: 15 May 2014, 19:09:16 UTC - in response to Message 1516603.  

Or will you continue to squirrel around the implication?

"Squirrel around"? That's just nuts.


Ha! :-D

I just pointed out one example of someone in power who is totally clueless. There is not one legislator who wrote a peer reviewed paper, let alone can read one, on climate change. They all just believe along party lines. This is not the way science works.


Considering it's two different fields, I don't see why you'd expect a Congressperson to have written a peer reviewed paper, let alone know how science works. I get the point you're trying to make, but I'm saying that science papers are written by scientists and politicking is handled by politicians. It is up to those elected officials in office to listen to what the majority finding of experts in a given field has found so they can try to do what is best for their constituents.

Politicians toeing the party line has been the case since the first government system began. You point out "one example of someone in power who is totally clueless", however, have you pointed out how most in the GOP used to be onboard with human-induced climate change, but now their party line insists there's no room for "changers" in their party and have begun taking action to replace the entire GOP with Tea Party-leaning representatives? They even have their own derogatory name for those that don't toe their line: RINO. Anyone else who isn't in the Tea Party isn't a true Republican! Distrust of scientists is now on par with distrust of government. I understand the latter but the former has me perplexed.
ID: 1516672 · Report as offensive
Jim1348

Send message
Joined: 13 Dec 01
Posts: 212
Credit: 520,150
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1516685 - Posted: 15 May 2014, 19:33:55 UTC

We actually had a Congressman a few years ago (in the 90's) who had a PhD in physics from MIT, and knew a thing or two about the subject. He was on the conservative side of the spectrum, but that was before the Republicans had become screwballs, and he had some reasonable arguments about how the environmental legislation (protection of endangered species, etc.) was not considering cost/benefit tradeoffs. I think that as a bright person with academic training, he would now be appalled by what he sees in his party.

But the best line about the Republicans in science is the one that Al Gore gave about W.'s science adviser, who as I recall was Al's prep-school classmate or something like that. It it priceless, and you should see his film for that alone. (No wonder the right-wing commentators all oppose it.)
ID: 1516685 · Report as offensive
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1517041 - Posted: 16 May 2014, 16:46:16 UTC - in response to Message 1516360.  

Sometimes I feel like this gent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cesSRfXqS1Q

The congressman is obviously a "changer".

One more thing about so called "super storm" Sandy. Wile it did do massive damage to NYC and the North Jersey Shore fifty miles to the south the Atlantic City area had little damage.


Little damage? Google is your friend.
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1517041 · Report as offensive
Batter Up
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 May 99
Posts: 1946
Credit: 24,860,347
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1517081 - Posted: 16 May 2014, 17:52:03 UTC
Last modified: 16 May 2014, 18:03:49 UTC



Little damage? Google is your friend.

I don't need the spurious Wide World of the Web to tell me facts. Only the north end of the board walk was destroyed because that is where the inlet is. The storm surge build up was massive in inlets. As there was little wind there was little damage farther south. Now why don't you Google how long the casino's were closed. I'm sure as familiar as you are with AC you know the casinos are on the south end of the boardwalk.

ID: 1517081 · Report as offensive
Profile MOMMY: He is MAKING ME Read His Posts Thoughts and Prayers. GOoD Thoughts and GOoD Prayers. HATERWORLD Vs THOUGHTs and PRAYERs World. It Is a BATTLE ROYALE. Nobody LOVEs Me. Everybody HATEs Me. Why Don't I Go Eat Worms. Tasty Treats are Wormy Meat. Yes
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 02
Posts: 6895
Credit: 6,588,977
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1517169 - Posted: 16 May 2014, 20:13:39 UTC

Batter Up said:
I don't need the spurious Wide World of the Web to tell me facts.


'Source'?

Motor Cylces Good.

No Land Falling 'Cane fO Florida since 2005. And 'they' 'said' otherwise fO '05 on. Scared Everyone. Guess FL is having a 'Cycle' of No 'Canes.

' '

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!
ID: 1517169 · Report as offensive
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1518533 - Posted: 20 May 2014, 1:41:18 UTC - in response to Message 1517081.  



Little damage? Google is your friend.

I don't need the spurious Wide World of the Web to tell me facts. Only the north end of the board walk was destroyed because that is where the inlet is. The storm surge build up was massive in inlets. As there was little wind there was little damage farther south. Now why don't you Google how long the casino's were closed. I'm sure as familiar as you are with AC you know the casinos are on the south end of the boardwalk.


You first said "Atlantic City area", not southern AC.


The AC pier post Sandy.

How about 12 photos of Atlantic City area storm damage from Hurricane Sandy?

While there was comparatively little damage to AC (vs NYC, Hoboken, etc), again that's not what you said.

Oh and I did not need to google that the AC casinos were closed for a few days, though if you're looking for good information, this seems reasonably well researched.
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1518533 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 . . . 6 · 7 · 8 · 9

Message boards : Politics : Cycles


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.