I-Mockery Forum

I-Mockery Forum (http://i-mockery.com/forum/index.php)
-   Philosophy, Politics, and News (http://i-mockery.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   Global Warming (http://i-mockery.com/forum/showthread.php?t=69704321)

Colonel Flagg Mar 11th, 2010 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guitar Woman (Post 675726)
I didn't read this thread, but it's the middle of March and I am freezing my nipples off.

Global warming is absolute horse shit.

and this argument is about 100x more convincing that anything Coolie said.

Dimnos Mar 11th, 2010 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator (Post 675710)
I got warned so I will leave the forum.

Oh dont puss out now. Stick with it. If your just going to leave you might as well go out with a ban.

Tadao Mar 11th, 2010 12:26 PM

:lol all this guy seems to do is run as soon as someone explains to him how he is wrong.

Supafly345 Mar 11th, 2010 02:48 PM

Jeez, I feel cheated. This is one of the few topics I know a lot about and I wanted to flex.

Colonel Flagg Mar 11th, 2010 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tadao (Post 675746)
:lol all this guy seems to do is run as soon as someone explains to him how he is wrong.

I tried to engage him into a discussion about the difference between the POLITICS and the SCIENCE surrounding the issue, and he responded with verbatim quotations from blogs, Google searches and Wikipedia. :blah

Remember, sometimes they come back .... :eek

Colonel Flagg Mar 15th, 2010 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator (Post 676062)
I will take Dimno's advice. May Rog protect me.



First off, Bill O'Reilly and Glenn beck both believe the myth of Global Warming. Youtube it.


Other right wing media whores (Sean Hannity & Co.) never bring up the corporate funding behind Global warming nor do they ever bring up the clean energy solutions that the Global warmers consistently ignore. Nor do they talk about "Cap and Trade" schemes on carbon or the international "CARBON TAX" that will be paid directly to unaccountable factions within the United Nations.

Nor do they bring up other hazardous chemicals that effect ours and other organisms health and should have stricter regulations put on them. Right wingers also never speak about how Al Gore was essential in passing FREE TRADE policies and has always been in the pocket of private corporate interests. They usually just harp on how he allegedly said that "He invented the internet".

Everything I said is attacking the Global Warming myth from the left.

1. Are Global Warmers getting their money from private corporations?

2. Is their movement based around the implementation of a Carbon Tax?

3. Will Wall Street and other parasitical interests be able to speculate on carbon after they pass cap and trade regulations on carbon only? (no other harmful chemicals included)

4. Did Al Gore help in passing Free Trade policies?

5. Are the Global Warmers ignoring all other environment problems and focusing on Carbon?

I-Mockery inspired article:
http://the-coolinator-lounge.blogspo...te-change.html

I rest my case. :blah

TheCoolinator Mar 15th, 2010 11:16 AM

You forgot the quotes that were attached and forgot to answer any of the questions. Shell Gasoline and the Rockefeller foundation pays for the Global Warmers.

Quote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grislygus (Post 675947)
So if you're attacking global warming "from the left", then how come you're using a spectacularly dense argument that I've seen used, VERBATIM, by Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly on their respective programs in the last month alone?

I will take Dimno's advice. May Rog protect me.

Quote:

Disclaimer:I hope that my reply to this post will not be misconstrued as "FLOODING AND / OR GRIEFING". I really want to continue the conversation in the most civilized way possible. Thank you.
First off, Bill O'Reilly and Glenn beck both believe the myth of Global Warming. Youtube it.


Other right wing media whores (Sean Hannity & Co.) never bring up the corporate funding behind Global warming nor do they ever bring up the clean energy solutions that the Global warmers consistently ignore. Nor do they talk about "Cap and Trade" schemes on carbon or the international "CARBON TAX" that will be paid directly to unaccountable factions within the United Nations.

Nor do they bring up other hazardous chemicals that effect ours and other organisms health and should have stricter regulations put on them. Right wingers also never speak about how Al Gore was essential in passing FREE TRADE policies and has always been in the pocket of private corporate interests. They usually just harp on how he allegedly said that "He invented the internet".

Everything I said is attacking the Global Warming myth from the left.

1. Are Global Warmers getting their money from private corporations?

2. Is their movement based around the implementation of a Carbon Tax?

3. Will Wall Street and other parasitical interests be able to speculate on carbon after they pass cap and trade regulations on carbon only? (no other harmful chemicals included)

4. Did Al Gore help in passing Free Trade policies?

5. Are the Global Warmers ignoring all other environment problems and focusing on Carbon?

I-Mockery inspired article:
http://the-coolinator-lounge.blogspo...te-change.html

Colonel Flagg Mar 15th, 2010 12:00 PM

I don't think you get it. I don't want to debate the politics of global warming. If you want to talk about the SCIENCE behind the theory, then fine. Otherwise, I'm not going to waste my time.

And, unlike you, I mean it. :(

TheCoolinator Mar 15th, 2010 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg (Post 676081)
I don't think you get it. I don't want to debate the politics of global warming. If you want to talk about the SCIENCE behind the theory, then fine. Otherwise, I'm not going to waste my time.

I guess that's another place where we differ. From my studies Global Warming / Climate Change is nothing more than a political ideology. It actually has many similarities to 1940's German Race Science. Remember all that SCIENCE? I wonder who funded those researchers.


Quote:

100 Articles on the Global Warming / Climate change hoax

http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/nbbw.cgi

The Leader Mar 15th, 2010 02:19 PM

Honey, you have not shown one piece of evidence that global warming doesn't exist and you clearly don't even understand the theory because you insist that carbon dioxide is treated as a pollutant in said theory. That and you don't understand what a political ideology is. You don't really understand a lot of things, really. That's why people who actually read up on politics and various studies, and who don't rely on internet conspiracy sites for their information, keep making fun of you.

TheCoolinator Mar 15th, 2010 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Leader (Post 676101)
Honey, you have not shown one piece of evidence that global warming doesn't exist


Quote:

Now, IPCC claims on Amazon fall flat

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/h...ow/5502902.cms

Quote:

UN exaggerated warming 6-fold: the scare is over

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/mo...port_july.html




Quote:

Two Peer-Reviewed Scientific Papers Debunk CO2 Myth

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/arti...ebunk_myth.htm


Ahem.....cough cough....:posh

Blasted Child Mar 15th, 2010 04:08 PM

Everything can be bad in the wrong place. Ozone is vital for all life on earth as long as it's in the stratosphere, but would be highly toxic to breath.
Co2 - good in some places, bad in some.
Like garlic.

TheCoolinator Mar 15th, 2010 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blasted Child (Post 676109)
Everything can be bad in the wrong place. Ozone is vital for all life on earth as long as it's in the stratosphere, but would be highly toxic to breath.
Co2 - good in some places, bad in some.
Like garlic.

I like your avatar. I have an HP Lovecraft book with that same picture on it.

Tadao Mar 15th, 2010 04:25 PM

idiot

Blasted Child Mar 15th, 2010 04:45 PM

thanks, actually I didn't really choose it with much thought, I just picked a random image and I intend to replace it with something more personal in due time.

Even though I'm rather confident that humans are about to mess up our planet, I do think you've built up a quite solid case and displayed a fair amount of evidence. I'd hate to be a contrarian, but contrary to the rest here I don't think you're an idiot :)

I think the thing here is that you can always find a plethora of "evidence" and articles supporting either side of a case if you look hard enough. In a matter as zealously debated as this, it's simply useless to merely list links - the opponent could do the same, and a more prudent approach would be to just sit back and assess what seems to be the prevalent opinion in the scientist community.

The Leader Mar 15th, 2010 04:59 PM

A solid case? Blasted Child, all he does is post links to biased websites. That and he clearly doesn't understand what the theory of global warming actually is or rudimentary science.

Pentegarn Mar 15th, 2010 04:59 PM

I think this thread needs some Catholic talk in it

Colonel Flagg Mar 15th, 2010 05:08 PM

Veni. Veni creator spiritus.

TheCoolinator Mar 15th, 2010 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blasted Child (Post 676119)

Even though I'm rather confident that humans are about to mess up our planet, I do think you've built up a quite solid case and displayed a fair amount of evidence. I'd hate to be a contrarian, but contrary to the rest here I don't think you're an idiot :)

Thank you good sir!

and I agree with you that Human's are messing up the planet. I cannot deny that, problem is that the Environmentalist movement is being diverted to serve a corporate agenda when they should be united in a regulation / clean power solution instead of this fanatically devotion to "Carbon". Which as you can see from the articles that I posted has absolutely nothing to do with the warming of the planet.

Quote:

I think the thing here is that you can always find a plethora of "evidence" and articles supporting either side of a case if you look hard enough. In a matter as zealously debated as this, it's simply useless to merely list links - the opponent could do the same, and a more prudent approach would be to just sit back and assess what seems to be the prevalent opinion in the scientist community.
Very true but after both sides have laid down their evidence then an unbiased third party must decide which is the better argument.

We've come to the part in the debate where my evidence and ideology has been laid down on the table and the other side must admit their research and then an unbiased third party needs to decide.

This is very difficult to do since all I've been getting out of these cultists is insult's and how I don't know "science" or whatever that's supposed to mean.




Quote:

Originally Posted by The Leader (Post 676122)
all he does is post links to biased websites..

You only find them biased because they contradict what you believe. :bow

The Leader Mar 15th, 2010 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator (Post 676128)
You only find them biased because they contradict what you believe. :bow

You don't know what I believe as I have yet to discuss my opinion. They are biased because they lean towards one side of the argument instead of presenting information without commentary. Not only that but none of them are official sites. They also commonly have information which is completely false. What country are you from? You would have thought that if you made it through university you would understand how to find credible sources and what biased means. Apparently the school system there is failing.

The Leader Mar 15th, 2010 05:33 PM

Seriously man, this is exactly your problem. You don't actually understand how to look at things without bias. You're probably someone who is devoted to one political party and will never vote for a candidate from a rival party not because they are not the better choice for the job but because they're not part of the party you idolize. You exemplify what is wrong with politics in the United States right now so I wouldn't be surprised if you are American.

Pentegarn Mar 15th, 2010 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg (Post 676125)
Veni. Veni creator spiritus.


Supafly345 Mar 15th, 2010 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Leader (Post 676131)
Seriously man, this is exactly your problem. You don't actually understand how to look at things without bias. You're probably someone who is devoted to one political party and will never vote for a candidate from a rival party not because they are not the better choice for the job but because they're not part of the party you idolize. You exemplify what is wrong with politics in the United States right now so I wouldn't be surprised if you are American.

I don't know if his biasms are necessarily political party motivated. I think he is into the whole 'conspiracy theory' mythos. My brother had a friend like that- whatever was the underdog opinion he latched on to because he was so determined to not be a sheep or whatever. I think people like this believe themselves to be much smarter than the average person, so they can't share opinions with us lower life forms. He probably believes Hitler designed the VW bug and that the US is run by the Illuminati. Maybe even aliens too.

Its too easy and sort of ignorant to just say he's a republican or whatever, I think he's just paranoid. The republicans have already proposed their own version of Cap and Trade that is almost exactly the same as the D's, the only differance is that REPUBLICANS made it, making it automatically better because nothing the democrats do is right- but I'm getting off toipic. Conspiracy theorists are typically pretty conservative, but they are still paranoid about everyone.

Evil Robot Mar 15th, 2010 06:48 PM

come on guys, coolies obviously right because he RESEARCHED thiss stuff on youtube. These are facts that he GATHERD from his STUDIES in a two year liberal arts college. The only thing left to question is whether he prefers CDs or tapes.

TheCoolinator Mar 15th, 2010 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Leader (Post 676130)
You don't know what I believe as I have yet to discuss my opinion. They are biased because they lean towards one side of the argument instead of presenting information without commentary. Not only that but none of them are official sites. They also commonly have information which is completely false. What country are you from? You would have thought that if you made it through university you would understand how to find credible sources and what biased means. Apparently the school system there is failing.Seriously man, this is exactly your problem. You don't actually understand how to look at things without bias. You're probably someone who is devoted to one political party and will never vote for a candidate from a rival party not because they are not the better choice for the job but because they're not part of the party you idolize. You exemplify what is wrong with politics in the United States right now so I wouldn't be surprised if you are American.

I don't know why your getting so upset. :|

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supafly345 (Post 676140)

The republicans have already proposed their own version of Cap and Trade that is almost exactly the same as the D's.

Thank you for proving my point. :lol

Quote:

2. Is their movement based around the implementation of a Carbon Tax?

3. Will Wall Street and other parasitical interests be able to speculate on carbon after they pass cap and trade regulations on carbon only? (no other harmful chemicals included)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Robot (Post 676145)
come on guys, coolies obviously right.

Thanks! :love


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:34 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.