CLIMATE MCCARTHYISM by AURaptor

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by ElvisChrist:

If those birds were being shot instead of being burned, raptard and the rest of his right-wing fucktard buddies would be yelling "FREE-DUMB!" as loud as they could.

Yep. You nailed us.

Now go tell that Lib Dem scientist who was sacked that he should stop whining and fall in line w/ the collective.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 24, 2014 2:29 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by ElvisChrist:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Why don't you ask PETA or The Sierra Club what that number should be.

Because they didn't come here and post that solar energy is causing "senseless loss of life." You did.

Show us where I said that, please. This thread wasn't about that topic.

Quote:

And when I asked for a specific number, you ran away like the fucking cunt we all know you to be.

Because it was and is a ridiculous, straw man of a question.

But keep spouting profanities and insults like the foul mouthed teenager we all know YOU to be.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 24, 2014 5:56 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

... has been fired by a progressive think tank ...

You mean a private entity exercised its prerogative to decide who should work for them and who shouldn't??? WHAT HORROR!

Meanwhile, you are all OK with private entities telling women they can't be insured to receive a legal medication.

Your boundless hypocrisy is on display - yet again. No wonder we all know you to be a crapturd.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 24, 2014 10:05 PM

ELVISCHRIST

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by ElvisChrist:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Why don't you ask PETA or The Sierra Club what that number should be.

Because they didn't come here and post that solar energy is causing "senseless loss of life." You did.

Show us where I said that, please. This thread wasn't about that topic.

"What does eating meat have to do w/ the 100% senseless loss of life via wind turbines and solar collectors ?"

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=58522

Are you suggesting that your point of view and your facts change depending on which thread they're posted in?

In addition to not being able to own a mistake, are you also unable to apply concepts broadly across different areas of thought?

I'm learning so much about your ridiculously narrow and restricted mind and how it tries to function!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 25, 2014 8:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:

The analogy just doesn't work. Scientific communities have the right to employ people based on their expertise, and someone who is a climate change denier is someone who rejects evidence.

I kept waiting for you to make a point, to make a logical explanation of your stated viewpoint.
But here you expose your fallacy, your inability to discern the foundation of logic.
You did have me wondering where you were going - curious to see how your view and understanding of McCarthy would differ from those of Americans of many stripes.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 25, 2014 9:13 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Are you suggesting that your point of view and your facts change depending on which thread they're posted in?

Yeah, that's exactly NOT what I'm saying.

But you can't carry on a simple , straight forward discussion w/ our resorting to antics of cherry picking things others have said in entirely different threads, so as to twist their words out of context.

Each thread is like a different conversation. If you're gonna take quotes and comments OUT OF CONTEXT from other threads, then there's no point in trying to converse w/ you, at all.

This only goes to show how thin your position is, that you can't debate the issue, and have to resort to juvenile tactics of migrating remarks from entirely different threads ( hell, why not snatch something from another forum entirely, as y'all love to stalk me across the internet anyways ) then you've already lost.

But we already knew that, didn't we ?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 26, 2014 8:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:

The analogy just doesn't work. Scientific communities have the right to employ people based on their expertise, and someone who is a climate change denier is someone who rejects evidence.

I kept waiting for you to make a point, to make a logical explanation of your stated viewpoint.
But here you expose your fallacy, your inability to discern the foundation of logic.
You did have me wondering where you were going - curious to see how your view and understanding of McCarthy would differ from those of Americans of many stripes.

Uh, my point was that it's not accurate to compare it to McCarthyism/

And I suspect that you and Rap and a few others would have strongly supported McCarthy back in the day.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 26, 2014 8:49 AM

America loves a winner!

But it IS accurate , and by trying to claim otherwise, you ignore the intolerance in science of those who dissent from a favored or " official " point of view.

So intolerant, they'll sack one of their own, a bonafide Left winger. Kinda like how Isis terrorists will kill fellow Muslims who don't fall in line with their narrow views.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 26, 2014 11:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
But it IS accurate , and by trying to claim otherwise, you ignore the intolerance in science of those who dissent from a favored or " official " point of view.

So intolerant, they'll sack one of their own, a bonafide Left winger. Kinda like how Isis terrorists will kill fellow Muslims who don't fall in line with their narrow views.

As pointed out, lots of professions wont tolerate someone whose beliefs contradict scientific evidence. For example, a doctor who didnt believe in blood transfusions would probably struggle to find work in a hospital.

Also as pointed out, organisations generally have the right to fire employees whose beliefs contradict organisations ethos and values.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 27, 2014 5:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
But it IS accurate , and by trying to claim otherwise, you ignore the intolerance in science of those who dissent from a favored or " official " point of view.

So intolerant, they'll sack one of their own, a bonafide Left winger. Kinda like how Isis terrorists will kill fellow Muslims who don't fall in line with their narrow views.

I really think she won't get it, and certainly hasn't yet.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 27, 2014 5:16 PM

Oh do explain it more sweetpea. Your logic is always so convincing...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 27, 2014 7:17 PM

America loves a winner!

Despite the dictates from upon high, the matter is NOT settled. And the issue here isn't whether this guy believes in a flat earth, or thinks modern medicine is of the devil. But hey, if you thought communism was super cool, then Hollywood should have had the right to ban you from ever working in the business too, right ? No harm, no foul.

Funny, that's not how I recall the Left's view on THAT matter.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 28, 2014 6:09 AM

I thought it was the left who bore the brunt of the McCarthy witchhunts?

The matter is 97% settled, which is as close to consensus as you will get in the scientific community. The rest is just about creating doubt through massive media campaigns by those with a vested interest in keeping the status quo.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 28, 2014 6:14 AM

Here is how climate deniers get so much airspace

http://tcktcktck.org/2011/10/treehugger-climate-denial-works-handy-cha
rt/14149

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 28, 2014 7:53 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I thought it was the left who bore the brunt of the McCarthy witchhunts?

exactly my point. If anyone should be cognizant of blackballing folks for having different views, it SHOULD be the Left.

Quote:

The matter is 97% settled, which is as close to consensus as you will get in the scientific community. The rest is just about creating doubt through massive media campaigns by those with a vested interest in keeping the status quo.

2 things wrong here. 1 - The " 97% " number is completely fabricated, and 2 - science is not determined by consensus.

And I agree w/ keeping the status quo, when the alternative is a solution to NOTHING, and it'll end up costing trillions of dollars needlessly,put further burdens on the poor, and making con artists and scammers ( like AlGore ) billionaires.

Change for the sake of change, and not for actually doing any good, isn't " the right thing to do ".

And btw - where are these ' massive media campaigns ' of which you speak ? You mean like NBC's Green Week, which tries to guilt folks into doing everything in their lives to combat AGW ?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 28, 2014 6:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Dissent or political criticism is different from scientific debate, espeically when on one side of the debate they are rejecting evidence.

Dissent and political criticism is exactly the same as scientific debate, when on one side of the debate they are fabricating, manufacturing fake evidence, and obfuscating the evidence which does not conform to the politically correct filters in use.
And since your statement accidentally "truthed" (I assume you swerved into the truth unintentionally) by pointing out that the Global Warming drones are rejecting evidence, you have supported the argument that you are trying to dispute.
Quote:

McCarthyism prevented people from getting work in any industry, because of their political affiliation, not because there was a disagreement about some key point of an industry. To be more like McCarthyism, this man would have been denied a job because he voted republican, or expressed support for jihadism, or more accurately, had been accused of such things to by someone else looking to evade punitive action as per the witch hunts. You accuse 4 others and you get off scott free while they hang.

The analogy just doesn't work. Scientific communities have the right to employ people based on their expertise, and someone who is a climate change

drone

Quote:
is someone who rejects evidence.

Fixed that for you, assuming you were attempting to be accurate.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 28, 2014 6:35 PM