Nailing Malarkey Too

Let the indoctrination begin

Recommended Posts

It would be one thing to add a section on "Climatology"  to the science curriculum but that isn't what these looney lefties are asking for. They want the little kiddies to learn "what's at stake".  The propaganda of global warming evangelism.  Next up; "The Evils of Conservatism", "You Are a Victim", and "How to Fine Tune Your Micro Offense Hair-Trigger".

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — A legislative proposal in Connecticut would mandate instruction indoctrination on climate change in public schools statewide, beginning in elementary school.

Connecticut already has adopted science standards that call for teaching of climate change, but if the bill passes it is believed that it would be the country’s first to write such a requirement into law.

“A lot of schools make the study of climate change an elective, and I don’t believe it should be an elective,” said state Rep. Christine Palm, a Democrat from Chester who proposed the bill. “I think it should be mandatory, and I think it should be early so there’s no excuse for kids to grow up ignorant of what’s at stake.”

 

  • Downvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Define indoctrination

How is science indoctrination? 

Religion  may be,  teaching of something that is knowingly  immoral, false or ignorant is..... like antsemitism

How does someone who has posted 5004 times get 5421 down votes. Of course I know, but doesn't it make you think that maybe just maybe you are almost always wrong?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, HuronBouy said:

Define indoctrination

How is science indoctrination? 

Religion  may be,  teaching of something that is knowingly  immoral, false or ignorant is..... like antsemitism

How does someone who has posted 5004 times get 5421 down votes. Of course I know, but doesn't it make you think that maybe just maybe you are almost always wrong?  

Are you ignoring that there are more holes in CAGW than Creationism?

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, warbird said:

Are you ignoring that there are more holes in CAGW than Creationism?

Creationism? Wow, you get dumber with every post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Creationism? Wow, you get dumber with every post.

I am not speaking, I am writing . Creationism is the favorite pincushion of the left in education. CAGW Climateology IS worse. 

Pacific Ocean CO2 monitoring is done at a station down wind from an active volcano . Look it up.

Sea Surface temperature as measured by NOAA is done with instruments accurate to 2.1 degrees C. Look it up.

Sea level  measurements only get correction factors (up) after  satellites were employed to take the measurement. Look it up.

CO2 has a Logrythmically decreasing effect in the high atmosphere to contain heat. Look it up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Creationism is the favorite pincushion of the left in education.

Because educators don't teach fairy tales as fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Not guilty said:

That is actually a badge of honour showing how much of guvners and his many crossdressing sock puppets time he has waisted. His down votes have nothing to do with reality, you should be smarter than that.

Yes, if you took all his personas, he'd be up in the tens of thousands of downvotes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, warbird said:

I am not speaking, I am writing . Creationism is the favorite pincushion of the left in education. CAGW Climateology IS worse. 

Pacific Ocean CO2 monitoring is done at a station down wind from an active volcano . Look it up.

Sea Surface temperature as measured by NOAA is done with instruments accurate to 2.1 degrees C. Look it up.

Sea level  measurements only get correction factors (up) after  satellites were employed to take the measurement. Look it up.

CO2 has a Logrythmically decreasing effect in the high atmosphere to contain heat. Look it up.

 

So climate change or lack thereof  is based only on these four outcomes 

Jeeze maybe you are right or maybe there are thousands of measures being taken all over the world and you are pointing out few problematic ones. You REALLY think that all this discourse is based on three observation posts and a thermodynamic calculation that we ignore. What does surface CO2 do compared to high altitude? 

 In any case what if you are wrong and climate change is real and humans are significantly contributing to it, then we fuck the planet.  You are willing to take this risk based on some ideology?  

Why do you want to burn a precious resource like oil, which we rely on for many things  we make reagent chemicals, pharmaceuticals, plastic .....

We should be preserving and moving energy that we can use that doesn't (potentailly) fuck the planet and rob us of raw materials we need to live the lifestyle we have become accustomed.   

Now I know no blog has ever changed anyone's mind and it will not do so here, but I thought a rationale POV would be helpful to the converted.

Oh and creationism is a belief not science 

  

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, solosailor said:

Because educators don't teach fairy tales as fact.

CAGW climatology could be termed a fairy tale too. The 4 facts I posted above certainly raise doubt.   But, if you are a worshipper , silly truths won't get in the way, will they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found this about your first issue nnot going to waste my time with other 

I shared an office with Dave Keeling in Stockholm in the early 1960s and can report that Dave was aware that ML is a volcano. The trade wind blows 99.9% of the time with the CO2 station well upwind. When the wind changes the CO2 goes off the chart. The nearest upwind source is about 1500 miles away. The reading stays steady for weeks at a time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, HuronBouy said:

Just found this about your first issue nnot going to waste my time with other 

I shared an office with Dave Keeling in Stockholm in the early 1960s and can report that Dave was aware that ML is a volcano. The trade wind blows 99.9% of the time with the CO2 station well upwind. When the wind changes the CO2 goes off the chart. The nearest upwind source is about 1500 miles away. The reading stays steady for weeks at a time.

There is an active volcano less than 20 mi from the NOAA monitoring station.

Dropped pin
Near Island of Hawai'i, Hawaii
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ffv9K

 

But, carry on......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, warbird said:

I am not speaking, I am writing . Creationism is the favorite pincushion of the left in education. CAGW Climateology IS worse. 

Pacific Ocean CO2 monitoring is done at a station down wind from an active volcano . Look it up.

Sea Surface temperature as measured by NOAA is done with instruments accurate to 2.1 degrees C. Look it up.

Sea level  measurements only get correction factors (up) after  satellites were employed to take the measurement. Look it up.

CO2 has a Logrythmically decreasing effect in the high atmosphere to contain heat. Look it up.

 

Adam gave one of his ribs to God to make a women out of it. Look it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really hot in Australia. If I were there and had a truck it would be hot in it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

It would be one thing to add a section on "Climatology"  to the science curriculum but that isn't what these looney lefties are asking for. They want the little kiddies to learn "what's at stake".  The propaganda of global warming evangelism.  Next up; "The Evils of Conservatism", "You Are a Victim", and "How to Fine Tune Your Micro Offense Hair-Trigger".

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — A legislative proposal in Connecticut would mandate instruction indoctrination on climate change in public schools statewide, beginning in elementary school.

Connecticut already has adopted science standards that call for teaching of climate change, but if the bill passes it is believed that it would be the country’s first to write such a requirement into law.

“A lot of schools make the study of climate change an elective, and I don’t believe it should be an elective,” said state Rep. Christine Palm, a Democrat from Chester who proposed the bill. “I think it should be mandatory, and I think it should be early so there’s no excuse for kids to grow up ignorant of what’s at stake.”

 

Should they be teaching in schools that an Angel showed up in upstate New York in the 1800's and handed out Egyptian gold plates to pedophiles?

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

It would be one thing to add a section on "Climatology"  to the science curriculum but that isn't what these looney lefties are asking for. They want the little kiddies to learn "what's at stake".  The propaganda of global warming evangelism.  Next up; "The Evils of Conservatism", "You Are a Victim", and "How to Fine Tune Your Micro Offense Hair-Trigger".

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — A legislative proposal in Connecticut would mandate instruction indoctrination on climate change in public schools statewide, beginning in elementary school.

Connecticut already has adopted science standards that call for teaching of climate change, but if the bill passes it is believed that it would be the country’s first to write such a requirement into law.

“A lot of schools make the study of climate change an elective, and I don’t believe it should be an elective,” said state Rep. Christine Palm, a Democrat from Chester who proposed the bill. “I think it should be mandatory, and I think it should be early so there’s no excuse for kids to grow up ignorant of what’s at stake.”

 

Don't like it? Win your next election, crybaby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Education and science has nothing to do with elections.    I know the religious right thinks it should but it doesn't.   Winning an election doesn't change science or research.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, solosailor said:

Education and science has nothing to do with elections.    I know the religious right thinks it should but it doesn't.   Winning an election doesn't change science or research.

It sure as hell will change research funding.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

It sure as hell will change research funding.  

Yup. When the Conservatives took over the Canadian government a few years back, virtually all government-funded science research was immediately shut down. Joe Trudeau may be a lightweight, but he doesn't seem to have some weird religious/anti-science agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, warbird said:

CAGW climatology could be termed a fairy tale too. The 4 facts I posted above certainly raise doubt.   But, if you are a worshipper , silly truths won't get in the way, will they?

I have a friend who is a climatologist.  He stepped out of his normal role to be the Australian Sailing Team meteorologist for the Beijing Olympics (they scored 2 gold and one silver, so it seems he worked it out reasonably well - Victor Kovalenko was impressed).  

While sailing in Croatia a couple of years ago, Sam told me a story about an area (IIRC, in the PNW) of USA where there was forest dieback affecting thousands and thousands of acres.  Massive resources were invested to find why this was happening.  It was discovered that the trees were host to a particular borer.  Even though the borers lived deep within the timber, the brutal winters killed off most of the borers.  Over a few years, the winter temperatures rose marginally, but enough that the borers weren't killed off to the same extent.  The borers lived, and killed the trees.  The difference in temperature was less than half a degree, but it had an enormous effect.

Fairy tale?  He had a lot of stories like that.  I believe him, not deniers like you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Recidivist said:

I have a friend who is a climatologist.  He stepped out of his normal role to be the Australian Sailing Team meteorologist for the Beijing Olympics (they scored 2 gold and one silver, so it seems he worked it out reasonably well - Victor Kovalenko was impressed).  

While sailing in Croatia a couple of years ago, Sam told me a story about an area (IIRC, in the PNW) of USA where there was forest dieback affecting thousands and thousands of acres.  Massive resources were invested to find why this was happening.  It was discovered that the trees were host to a particular borer.  Even though the borers lived deep within the timber, the brutal winters killed off most of the borers.  Over a few years, the winter temperatures rose marginally, but enough that the borers weren't killed off to the same extent.  The borers lived, and killed the trees.  The difference in temperature was less than half a degree, but it had an enormous effect.

Fairy tale?  He had a lot of stories like that.  I believe him, not deniers like you.  

That is anecdotal to steady temp rise since 1840s(?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HuronBouy said:

Just found this about your first issue nnot going to waste my time with other 

I shared an office with Dave Keeling in Stockholm in the early 1960s and can report that Dave was aware that ML is a volcano. The trade wind blows 99.9% of the time with the CO2 station well upwind. When the wind changes the CO2 goes off the chart. The nearest upwind source is about 1500 miles away. The reading stays steady for weeks at a time.

"Must not hear any facts that don't align with my religion - CAGW apostates are cast out by the mob and made to live in the harsh light of reality and I can't deal with that."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HuronBouy said:

So climate change or lack thereof  is based only on these four outcomes 

Jeeze maybe you are right or maybe there are thousands of measures being taken all over the world and you are pointing out few problematic ones. You REALLY think that all this discourse is based on three observation posts and a thermodynamic calculation that we ignore. What does surface CO2 do compared to high altitude? 

 In any case what if you are wrong and climate change is real and humans are significantly contributing to it, then we fuck the planet.  You are willing to take this risk based on some ideology?  

Why do you want to burn a precious resource like oil, which we rely on for many things  we make reagent chemicals, pharmaceuticals, plastic .....

We should be preserving and moving energy that we can use that doesn't (potentailly) fuck the planet and rob us of raw materials we need to live the lifestyle we have become accustomed.   

Now I know no blog has ever changed anyone's mind and it will not do so here, but I thought a rationale POV would be helpful to the converted.

Oh and creationism is a belief not science 

  

 

 

 

 

I referenced  creationism because it is easy to poke holes in the theory. CAGW has similar holes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, warbird said:

I referenced  creationism because it is easy to poke holes in the theory. CAGW jas similar holes

You can poke holes in any theory if you are determined enough, or disingenuous enough.  The key issue is that, if climate change theorists are correct and there is an anthropomorphic basis, changing human behaviour may reduce the effect.  If they are incorrect, it's difficult to see a downside of changing those behaviours (unless you happen to own a coal mine).

If climate change deniers are incorrect, they will happily fuck the planet for future generations.  That is not an attitude I admire.

Do you have children?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Recidivist said:

You can poke holes in any theory if you are determined enough, or disingenuous enough.  The key issue is that, if climate change theorists are correct and there is an anthropomorphic basis, changing human behaviour may reduce the effect.  If they are incorrect, it's difficult to see a downside of changing those behaviours (unless you happen to own a coal mine).

If climate change deniers are incorrect, they will happily fuck the planet for future generations.  That is not an attitude I admire.

Do you have children?

No downside to not burning coal? You are right, poverty is only a 3rd world problem anyway so why should we in the 1st world give a fuck? The lazy cunts should just buy solar panels and wind farms anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, warbird said:

I referenced  creationism because it is easy to poke holes in the theory. CAGW jas similar holes

Creationism isn't a theory. It's a faith. CAGW is not.

The US education system has a lot to answer for if you're understanding of science is anything to go by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LB 15 said:

No downside to not burning coal? You are right, poverty is only a 3rd world problem anyway so why should we in the 1st world give a fuck? The lazy cunts should just buy solar panels and wind farms anyway.

Ya need to get Grumpy in if you want to go whole coal on us. The thing about climate change is the 3rd world peeps are going to be hurt the worst.  Twerps like warbird think because they live in the north by a great lake it's all good.  Fun fact: coal mines in the USA are closing down faster now than under Obama, this in spite of Trumps being promises. Why? Not because a bunch of Gore loving dogooders did anything, nope, it's because they are better and cheaper alternatives.

But people will burn the furniture to stay warm if they have to, the rest of us should make this that isn't the case. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

No downside to not burning coal? You are right, poverty is only a 3rd world problem anyway so why should we in the 1st world give a fuck? The lazy cunts should just buy solar panels and wind farms anyway.

Actually LB, I spend a fair bit of time in so-called 3rd world places.  In the village of Weiran on the west coast of Selaru, the cooking is done on fires fueled by coconuts.  The villagers paddle their dugouts out to our boat so we can charge their mobile phones for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Not guilty said:

So you are against teaching science in school? Climate change is science, or are you as retarded as randum?

Climatology is science,  But the sponsor of the bill is not proposing teaching a neutral course in climatology he wants the kiddies to learn "what’s at stake"

Sorta like Conservative demanding a mandatory class where the little kiddies are taught what's at stake if we don't build the border wall and pretending it's a course in civil engineering.

 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Recidivist said:

Actually LB, I spend a fair bit of time in so-called 3rd world places.  In the village of Weiran on the west coast of Selaru, the cooking is done on fires fueled by coconuts.  The villagers paddle their dugouts out to our boat so we can charge their mobile phones for them.

What do they do when you are not there? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Ya need to get Grumpy in if you want to go whole coal on us. The thing about climate change is the 3rd world peeps are going to be hurt the worst.  Twerps like warbird think because they live in the north by a great lake it's all good.  Fun fact: coal mines in the USA are closing down faster now than under Obama, this in spite of Trumps being promises. Why? Not because a bunch of Gore loving dogooders did anything, nope, it's because they are better and cheaper alternatives.

But people will burn the furniture to stay warm if they have to, the rest of us should make this that isn't the case. 

And China have over 300 coal fired power stations under construction. Some token gestures by the west is not going to make any difference. And yes my house is off grid with solar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LB 15 said:

What do they do when you are not there? 

Charge them when they go into Saumlaki to sell the seaweed they have collected on the lines strung in the water in front of the village.  

That was in the past.  They now have a generator that supplies electricity to most of the village for an hour or 2 a day.  The Kepala Desa (village chief) even has a TV now.

We collect sunglasses from the op shops in Darwin and give them to the village - the fishermen spend all day in the glare and most have cataracts.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

And China have over 300 coal fired power stations under construction. Some token gestures by the west is not going to make any difference. And yes my house is off grid with solar. 

So, we should aspire to the same levels of air pollution as they have?  

But at least we get to sell them our coal.  Your besties Gina and Twiggy are happy about that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mate I think we should try and leave the politics out of climate change discussions. I also don’t dislike people just because they are successful. You know that Twiggy has pledged to give most of his wealth to charity, right? What a cunt he is hey. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Recidivist said:

So, we should aspire to the same levels of air pollution as they have?  

 

Did I say that? I must have missed myself saying that. Even if climate change is caused by co2 emissions (and that is far from settled for those of us with enquiring minds)  China, India et al are going to continue to burn coat for power at an ever increasing rate. By all means recycle your  own urine if it makes you feel all fuzzy and warm about yourself but it won’t make one iota of difference to climate change even if every American and Aussie turned the phones of and sat in the dark. 

The devoping world needs coal and for us to not sell it to them is just plain stupid. Twiggy and Gina have created jobs and wealth for many people. Creating wealth is not a sin - most of the smug wanna be climate change alarmist on here are always posting how successful they are. Like those fuckwits  Randumb and Bent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Recidivist said:

So, we should aspire to the same levels of air pollution as they have?  

But at least we get to sell them our coal.  Your besties Gina and Twiggy are happy about that.  

Don't forget that LadyBoy has been a shill for the big power co.s for a very long time.

 He's only living off grid because his ex got all the property and money, and he's living in a jungle hut with his "girl friend"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least in the good ol USA it's impossible to leave politics out of climate change. Why? Just read some of the nutters here - it's because Al Gore is leading this conspiracy to enrich himself and his coastal elite buddies at the expense of hard working Mericans.  It is not a coincidence that the deniers are Trump supporters.

Bill Clinton really pushed (as did Obama later) on the imperative need to invest in research for clean energy alternatives. That went nowhere and Trump is doing his best to take it backwards.  We have come a long way but are nowhere near ending our dependence on fossil fuels. With the current morons in power we will never get there. Note: I drive a pickup truck with a v8, it's a necessity and there is no viable alternative. 

As long as we cling to the notion that we can't fuck up the planet why bother trying to improve things? As to China, they have been leading the world in solar and wind, in fact your panels likely came from there. Most of the turbines in the US come from China. Meanwhile, the Chinese will be killing their residents with air pollution and that won't stop until the populace rises up and demands it. Personally I like clean air, I remember when in LA and even in Houston you couldn't see shit for the smog - the changes mandated by the gasp feds required modifications that now have cleaned the air a lot.

ok, stopping now before I go all random.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Not guilty said:

What is that? Can you teach a neutral course in chemistry? or maybe neutral course in geometry? how about neutral course in learning a foreign language? 

Science is science, not politics. There is no "neutral" in facts. The people that deny climate change are the same type of people that believe the earth is flat.

OK, who hijacked this account? If not you just blew my statement that all deniers are Trump supporters.  Oh wait, one is a subset of the other and uh, science and uh,  we are currently experiencing cognitive dissonance and will return when the problem is solved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

At least in the good ol USA it's impossible to leave politics out of climate change. Why? Just read some of the nutters here - it's because Al Gore is leading this conspiracy to enrich himself and his coastal elite buddies at the expense of hard working Mericans.  It is not a coincidence that the deniers are Trump supporters.

Bill Clinton really pushed (as did Obama later) on the imperative need to invest in research for clean energy alternatives. That went nowhere and Trump is doing his best to take it backwards.  We have come a long way but are nowhere near ending our dependence on fossil fuels. With the current morons in power we will never get there. Note: I drive a pickup truck with a v8, it's a necessity and there is no viable alternative. 

As long as we cling to the notion that we can't fuck up the planet why bother trying to improve things? As to China, they have been leading the world in solar and wind, in fact your panels likely came from there. Most of the turbines in the US come from China. Meanwhile, the Chinese will be killing their residents with air pollution and that won't stop until the populace rises up and demands it. Personally I like clean air, I remember when in LA and even in Houston you couldn't see shit for the smog - the changes mandated by the gasp feds required modifications that now have cleaned the air a lot.

ok, stopping now before I go all random.

Not to flog a dead horse but...... A P/U with a V8 is a necessity?

 What the hell do you haul every day that requires that herd of horses? I've never needed more than a V6 or a straight 6, but yanno..... We didn't have those steep mountains in New England like you do in south Texas....;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

Don't forget that LadyBoy has been a shill for the big power co.s for a very long time.

 He's only living off grid because his ex got all the property and money, and he's living in a jungle hut with his "girl friend"...

Nothing to contribute except lies and abuse cup cake? Or are you just auditioning for Randumb’s part? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Not guilty said:

OMG it is like just because you vote for one party you think everything they is 100% correct.

I also am pro-choice and support gay rights.

Good god! My left shoulder is starting to throb..... My fingers are going numb.... "Hold on Elizabeth! Here I come! It's the BIG ONE!!!!!" (Redd Foxx as Fred Sanford)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Not guilty said:

OMG it is like just because you vote for one party you think everything they is 100% correct.

I also am pro-choice and support gay rights.

Me too and I am pro gun control as well but to be a righty or a lefty you have to toe the party line apparently. That is why I am a centerist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mrleft8 said:

Not to flog a dead horse but...... A P/U with a V8 is a necessity?

 What the hell do you haul every day that requires that herd of horses? I've never needed more than a V6 or a straight 6, but yanno..... We didn't have those steep mountains in New England like you do in south Texas....;)

I could get by with a small car some days and tried keeping both but that isn't cost effective. Diesel transfer tank, tools and equipment, I could go on - in the newer trucks you can get power from a 6 or even a 4 IF you don't mind laying out $40 grand or more. I buy used, in good shape when they are old enough to not qualify for bank financing.  Next one (if I still need it will have a turbo 4 or 6).

 

6 minutes ago, Not guilty said:

OMG it is like just because you vote for one party you think everything they is 100% correct.

I also am pro-choice and support gay rights.

Well to be fair when you condemn one party 100% of the time it seems to portray a certain image.  I have voted straight party once or twice in my life. I voted for a number of Rs in local and county races even in this last election.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Not guilty said:
14 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Me too and I am pro gun control as well but to be a righty or a lefty you have to tow the party line apparently. That is why I am a centerist. 

And that is the yuuuge issue in US politics right now. Neither the right or left can escape it. 

People stand behind the front runners even if they don't agree with everything they say. If they don't  then the other team will, and they will win. And Trump is proof of that. More people voted against hitlery or not at all because they didn't agree with anyone, and what happened? Trump. I didn't know or care about all of Trumps political positions, but I sure as fuck would never vote for hitlery. I would have voted for Bernie if he had a chance of winning even though I don't agree with his socialist views.

The correct way to spell that is "toe the party line", just as an aside. But carry on with your captious aspersions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Not guilty said:

Hmmm a little googling shows you are correct. 

I might not always be right, but I'm usually correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

The correct way to spell that is "toe the party line", just as an aside. But carry on with your captious aspersions.

Feel better now lamb chop? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is a good illustration of the dangers of the ignore button, I never would have guessed that I have common ground with NG on any subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Feel better now lamb chop? 

You're up late/early. Colostomy bags are such a chore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LB 15 said:

Me too and I am pro gun control as well but to be a righty or a lefty you have to toe the party line apparently. That is why I am a centerist. 

And you call JWH the greatest PM ever - centrist, hah!

LB, I'm the very definition of "centrist", and you're a few standard deviations to the right of me :lol:

All good mate, but I'll keep on recycling my urine to do my bit for the climate (it goes into a tank in the backyard, and purified water gets pumped out to water the garden).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am actually out on a charter right now. A nice older fella has charted the boat for the day to get his three useless fat grandsons into sailing. They have been parroting the most unbelievable crap about climate change. I didn’t know that Moreton island will be gone in a few years because of sea level rise (The highest point is 225 meters above MHWS) but I do now. Their teacher told them that. They have spent most of the day down below on their phones and asked me if there is any water. When I poured them a glass from the tap they told me they only drink bottled water. This is what we are now producing. Ignorant self entitled little wankers that don’t even know enough to know how ignorant they are. 

The greatest danger to the earth is not climate change. It is the next generation. Both my lads are lefties but they are not  stupid nor fat. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

I am actually out on a charter right now. A nice older fella has charted the boat for the day to get his three useless fat grandsons into sailing. They have been parroting the most unbelievable crap about climate change. I didn’t know that Moreton island will be gone in a few years because of sea level rise (The highest point is 225 meters above MHWS) but I do now. Their teacher told them that. They have spent most of the day down below on their phones and asked me if there is any water. When I poured them a glass from the tap they told me they only drink bottled water. This is what we are now producing. Ignorant self entitled little wankers that don’t even know enough to know how ignorant they are. 

The greatest danger to the earth is not climate change. It is the next generation. Both my lads are lefties but they are not  stupid nor fat. 

 

I suggest you slaughter them and dump them overboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Recidivist said:

And you call JWH the greatest PM ever - centrist, hah!

LB, I'm the very definition of "centrist", and you're a few standard deviations to the right of me :lol:

All good mate, but I'll keep on recycling my urine to do my bit for the climate (it goes into a tank in the backyard, and purified water gets pumped out to water the garden).

Why? Didn’t you like his gun laws? Bit right for you were they? Was the record surplus he created to big for you? I can admire a conservative PM just as I admire some things Keeting did. Sadly mate you are just another lefty  that find the truth embarrassing. You are not a centrist you are left lite. NTTINWWT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ishmael said:

I suggest you slaughter them and dump them overboard.

Too much paper work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paging Random to the white phone in the lobby... paging Random.............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Why? Didn’t you like his gun laws? Bit right for you were they? Was the record surplus he created to big for you? I can admire a conservative PM just as I admire some things Keeting did. Sadly mate you are just another lefty  that find the truth embarrassing. You are not a centrist you are left lite. NTTINWWT.

Actually, I liked most of his gun laws, but not some of them.  IIRC it was just before the Commonwealth Games, and some events were severely disrupted because the shooters couldn't bring their firearms into the country. I think handguns were totally banned, and pistol shooting is a big thing to sporting shooters.  It was also very much JH's agenda - he listened to no-one and made capricious decisions (I know this because I was involved in implementing his decisions in the Territory, and we'd have to wait until his minders could get a decision before we could make the next move).  But on the whole, the initiative was a good one and done for appropriate reasons.

But JWH was just another politician and I have no love for any of them, left or right.  The few who enter politics for laudable reasons become corrupted by the system very quickly.  And even you would not have had any time for the slimy creep Adam Giles who besmirched the Territory with his presence as leader of the right wing party a couple of years ago.  He also created wealth - for his mates who provided the million dollar penthouse Giles lived in at half market rent.  Fuck them all - that's my official centrist manifesto!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Recidivist said:

So, we should aspire to the same levels of air pollution as they have?  

But at least we get to sell them our coal.  Your besties Gina and Twiggy are happy about that.  

Another decade or two and China is going to own Oz.

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Another decade or two and China is going to own Oz.

And what would happen to the USA if China called in the debt tomorrow?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Not guilty said:

What is that? Can you teach a neutral course in chemistry? or maybe neutral course in geometry? how about neutral course in learning a foreign language? 

Science is science, not politics. There is no "neutral" in facts. The people that deny climate change are the same type of people that believe the earth is flat or that hitlery would win the election.

Neutral is "Today kid we are going to study the effects of    Fill in the Blank   on our climate.  

  • Volcanic activity
  • Seasons
  • Ocean Currents
  • land use
  • etc. 

Neutral is "Today kid we are going to study    Fill in the Blank   

  • Solar radiance
  • the Earth's Albedo
  • Atmospheric convection
  • etc

Not Neutral is "Today kid we are going to study    Fill in the Blank    

  • How Big Oil poisoned our planet
  • America is evil for using so much energy per person
  • The only way to save the planet is to tax successful people.
  • You will all die unless you give the UN control over your economic future under one global government and tax authority
  • etc..
  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Recidivist said:

Actually, I liked most of his gun laws, but not some of them.  IIRC it was just before the Commonwealth Games, and some events were severely disrupted because the shooters couldn't bring their firearms into the country. I think handguns were totally banned, and pistol shooting is a big thing to sporting shooters.  It was also very much JH's agenda - he listened to no-one and made capricious decisions (I know this because I was involved in implementing his decisions in the Territory, and we'd have to wait until his minders could get a decision before we could make the next move).  But on the whole, the initiative was a good one and done for appropriate reasons.

But JWH was just another politician and I have no love for any of them, left or right.  The few who enter politics for laudable reasons become corrupted by the system very quickly.  And even you would not have had any time for the slimy creep Adam Giles who besmirched the Territory with his presence as leader of the right wing party a couple of years ago.  He also created wealth - for his mates who provided the million dollar penthouse Giles lived in at half market rent.  Fuck them all - that's my official centrist manifesto!

‘Even I wouldn’t have time for Adam Giles’? Since I am not a righty why would I care? Even if I had ever heard of him. To be honest I give about as much of a fuck what happens in the NT as I do about what happens in Tassie. 

JH wasn’t perfect but he is a shitload better than any since. Or before for that matter. 

And there we go. Another successful thread hi-Jack. Been on fire this week...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not let the irony of this whole thread escape us.

A mormon is making an accusation of indoctrination.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bill is not about Climate Science or Climatology it is ONLY about {Man Made} Climate Change.

You are free now to embarrass yourself and argue that her use of "Climate Change" does not mean Anthropological Induced Global Warming. Her comments on introducing the bill repeatedly refer to educating the children about the dangers of Global Warming. 

 

image.png

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Recidivist said:

And what would happen to the USA if China called in the debt tomorrow?

First of all, they can't the notes all have maturity dates. Second If I was president  I would estimate the cost to the US economy from their theft, currency manipulation, dumping, and illegal trade barriers. Send them a bill for twice the debt and say pay up. 

 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Keith said:

Paging Random to the white phone in the lobby... paging Random.............

Well pick it up Randumb you retard.

Related image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

 Send them a bill for twice the debt and say pay up. 

 

How did that go when you tried it with Lockheed? Wait - they are probably waiting for you to fix all your fuck ups before they pay you a cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

First of all, they can't the notes all have maturity dates. Second If I was president  I would estimate the cost to the US economy from their theft, currency manipulation, dumping, and illegal trade barriers. Send them a bill for twice the debt and say pay up. 

Wow, and I thought the JiZKid was bad at economics. You really do win moron of the year with that one. The instant you say "nope, not paying any of my bills, I'm just going to make up one and say you owe me instead" - you prove that the US dollar is not a safe place to park money, the value of your treasury notes plummets, and your entire economy gets sucked into the black hole of your stupidity, from which nothing intelligible ever escapes. 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, VOA said:

You’re not very bright are you. It’s a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question. Neither situation is ever going to happen in real life. 

Bents entire existence is hypothetical. But he will argue otherwise...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

Wow, and I thought the JiZKid was bad at economics. You really do win moron of the year with that one. The instant you say "nope, not paying any of my bills, I'm just going to make up one and say you owe me instead" - you prove that the US dollar is not a safe place to park money, the value of your treasury notes plummets, and your entire economy gets sucked into the black hole of your stupidity, from which nothing intelligible ever escapes. 

And there it is folks. The definitive summary of global economics, coming all the way from the Belmont caravan park, Buttfuck, New South Wales. Australia. 

How say you on the Korean situation, Oh great one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, VOA said:

And the useless panty waste pretends to have everybody on ignore. Fackin hilarious

Frankly disgusted with myself that I once made a post about putting someone on ignore (it was Randy during the VOR "debacle") I'll take the good, bad, & the ugly on this forum forever, straight just like the bourbon in my glass (a lie actually, there is ice & it's a plastic cup).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, d'ranger said:

 

Bill Clinton really pushed (as did Obama later) on the imperative need to invest in research for clean energy alternatives. 

Obama dodmt invest, he gave $ to Solyndra a company with already proven flawed or outdated tech.

That was a political move, not exological... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Not guilty said:

 

Science is science, not politics. There is no "neutral" in facts. The people that deny climate change are the same type of people that believe the earth is flat or that hitlery would win the election.

The people do not deny climate change. The people just enjoy pointing out the bad science the CAGW embraces and BELIEVES.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Recidivist said:

I have a friend who is a climatologist.  He stepped out of his normal role to be the Australian Sailing Team meteorologist for the Beijing Olympics (they scored 2 gold and one silver, so it seems he worked it out reasonably well - Victor Kovalenko was impressed).  

While sailing in Croatia a couple of years ago, Sam told me a story about an area (IIRC, in the PNW) of USA where there was forest dieback affecting thousands and thousands of acres.  Massive resources were invested to find why this was happening.  It was discovered that the trees were host to a particular borer.  Even though the borers lived deep within the timber, the brutal winters killed off most of the borers.  Over a few years, the winter temperatures rose marginally, but enough that the borers weren't killed off to the same extent.  The borers lived, and killed the trees.  The difference in temperature was less than half a degree, but it had an enormous effect.

Fairy tale?  He had a lot of stories like that.  I believe him, not deniers like you.  

There is a bit more to the story associated with bark beetle infestations that doesn't rely upon them not being frozen to death every winter. The give-away is the oft overlooked fact that the infestation is present in regions as varied as Mexico, California, Canada, Alaska and Siberia. Unfortunately, as is all too commonly the case as evidenced by your friend's explanation, climate change is promoted as the primary - if not the downright only - cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Recidivist said:

And what would happen to the USA if China called in the debt tomorrow?

With Trump in office?

He might well say that was an act of war and retaliate in kind.

Give him credit, he is savvy to NY hardball. It’s about the only game he’s great at playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, VOA said:

And the useless panty waste pretends to have everybody on ignore. Fackin hilarious

and that would be panty waist.  more hilarity.  I would comment on panty waste but then that might intrude on why you got flicked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, warbird said:

There is an active volcano less than 20 mi from the NOAA monitoring station.

Dropped pin
Near Island of Hawai'i, Hawaii
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ffv9K

 

But, carry on......

ML is in Hawaii FFS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, HuronBouy said:

ML is in Hawaii FFS

The Mauna Loa observatory is 20-25 mi west of "Hawaii Volcanoes National Park" which includes at least one active volcano on the big  Island. That is the link i posted .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, d'ranger said:

and that would be panty waist.  more hilarity.  I would comment on panty waste but then that might intrude on why you got flicked.

Why did GUMPY get the flick anyway? Everyone knew he was a debased, sick little pervert for years. How did that suddenly become an issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, toecutter said:

There is a bit more to the story associated with bark beetle infestations that doesn't rely upon them not being frozen to death every winter. The give-away is the oft overlooked fact that the infestation is present in regions as varied as Mexico, California, Canada, Alaska and Siberia. Unfortunately, as is all too commonly the case as evidenced by your friend's explanation, climate change is promoted as the primary - if not the downright only - cause.

Okay, I have an open mind.  Would you care to point me to some reading to improve my understanding?

Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't put it past Rump to try and stiff China. I kinda hope he does it before that hypersonic whatever gets built. We're slip-sliding behind them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This article seems to suggest that increase in temperature over time (aka climate change) is a primary factor.  And the geographic spread you mention is because of different species of conifers - even central America gets a mention.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/small-pests-big-problems-the-global-spread-of-bark-beetles

If indeed this is misleading because it's overly simplistic, I'd appreciate some more information.  The article doesn't attribute any other cause for the infestations that I noticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Recidivist said:

This article seems to suggest that increase in temperature over time (aka climate change) is a primary factor.  And the geographic spread you mention is because of different species of conifers - even central America gets a mention.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/small-pests-big-problems-the-global-spread-of-bark-beetles

If indeed this is misleading because it's overly simplistic, I'd appreciate some more information.  The article doesn't attribute any other cause for the infestations that I noticed.

This is a perfect example of down playing the obvious. Planting vast forests of the same species of tree, all the same age at 4 X the natural density is only going to end badly as many forestry industries are now learning the hard way. Would it have happened without climate change? Who knows? Management practices certainly haven't helped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, toecutter said:

Planting vast forests of the same species of tree, all the same age at 4 X the natural density is only going to end badly 

Yes, I see what you mean.  Thanks for the link.  There are complicating factors, for sure, but temperature is certainly indicated as a principal factor.  I guess it's not surprising that a climatologist would focus on temperature and not age homogeneity or planting density.

Certainly, however, this is not evidence that climate change is not occurring, nor that it would be futile to take measures to try to limit human caused aspects of the problem.  (I understand that you did not suggest either of these things).

Thanks again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Recidivist said:

Yes, I see what you mean.  Thanks for the link.  There are complicating factors, for sure, but temperature is certainly indicated as a principal factor.  I guess it's not surprising that a climatologist would focus on temperature and not age homogeneity or planting density

That is exactly why climatology OS a RELIGION

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, toecutter said:

This is a perfect example of down playing the obvious. Planting vast forests of the same species of tree, all the same age at 4 X the natural density is only going to end badly as many forestry industries are now learning the hard way. Would it have happened without climate change? Who knows? Management practices certainly haven't helped.

This 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, warbird said:

That is exactly why climatology OS a RELIGION

 

Did you miss this bit?

Certainly, however, this is not evidence that climate change is not occurring, nor that it would be futile to take measures to try to limit human caused aspects of the problem.  

And how did you make a connection  between my comment and religion?  Non-sequitur of the year!

Perhaps you should try an open mind - I learned something today and it wasn't from you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Recidivist said:

Yes, I see what you mean.  Thanks for the link.  There are complicating factors, for sure, but temperature is certainly indicated as a principal factor.  I guess it's not surprising that a climatologist would focus on temperature and not age homogeneity or planting density.

Certainly, however, this is not evidence that climate change is not occurring, nor that it would be futile to take measures to try to limit human caused aspects of the problem.  (I understand that you did not suggest either of these things).

Thanks again.

Glad to be of assistance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Recidivist said:

Did you miss this bit?

Certainly, however, this is not evidence that climate change is not occurring, nor that it would be futile to take measures to try to limit human caused aspects of the problem.  

And how did you make a connection  between my comment and religion?  Non-sequitur of the year!

Perhaps you should try an open mind - I learned something today and it wasn't from you.

I should have multi quoted. Your response amd the original post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, toecutter said:

This is a perfect example of down playing the obvious. Planting vast forests of the same species of tree, all the same age at 4 X the natural density is only going to end badly as many forestry industries are now learning the hard way. Would it have happened without climate change? Who knows? Management practices certainly haven't helped.

 

12 hours ago, Recidivist said:

Yes, I see what you mean.  Thanks for the link.  There are complicating factors, for sure, but temperature is certainly indicated as a principal factor.  I guess it's not surprising that a climatologist would focus on temperature and not age homogeneity or planting density.

Certainly, however, this is not evidence that climate change is not occurring, nor that it would be futile to take measures to try to limit human caused aspects of the problem.  (I understand that you did not suggest either of these things).

Thanks again.

This is exactly WHY climatology is viewed as a RELIGION.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites