OldBrownsFan Posted February 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 "And again, what do you think Nye said about jailing skeptics?" *********************** Bill Nye says that we should throw “climate deniers” in jail. "Bishop of the Church of Climate Change, Bill Nye, has been preaching the fire and brimstone theology of global cooling – I mean global warming – I mean climate change for a while. Not only is he a diehard in the faith, but he’s lashed out against those who don’t quite see it his way. His latest sermon has him stating that “climate deniers,” maybe should go to jail. YouTube channel, cfact, sat down with Nye and at some point Marc Morano asked the celebrity in a lab coat if the idea being passed around by climate change activists to throw skeptics in jail isn’t too extreme. “We’ll see what happens, was it appropriate to jail the guys at Enron?” responded Nye. “Was it appropriate to jail people from the cigarette industry who insisted that this addictive product was not addictive?” The heretics, such as myself, would argue that we’ve seen far too much evidence that points to Nye’s end times climate gospel being nothing but a false story drummed up to get votes and expand government control through regulatory actions from unelected officials, such as the EPA. I mean, should I also just believe in a flying spaghetti monster? Even without the evidence that Nye was an unkempt beard, and set of ragged clothes short of being a doomsday corner crazy, jailing people who simply disagree with you only further proves that maybe the strength of your arguments isn’t all that hardy. If everything Nye said was true, then he could easily disprove it, and not worry about the opposition being taken seriously. But he can’t. Instead, Nye is suggesting we strip freedoms from the citizenry, and punish those who would dare speak out against him, so that his faith can spread. No dissension, or else. I realize Nye’s time as a children’s show host has garnered him a loyal following amongst the citizenry, but I think it’s time he ditches the childish notions of throwing people into the lion pit because people, even within the scientific community, say he’s wrong." http://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2016/04/14/no-one-expects-the-climate-inquisition/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Nye going apecrap on CNN https://youtu.be/iNI3EmMqa94 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 how opportunistic and dishonest, using the flood as "proof" that mankind is causing it. Flooding has always been happening. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Mississippi_Flood_of_1927 and....... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floods_in_the_United_States_before_1901 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 1) Yes, you're doing exactly what Carlson did. "answer every last question I have or you're wrong." Nye fell for the bait there. I'm guessing he was referring to 1750 as the point where man starts to affect the climate. Without that, it's not difficult to say we'd be closer to 1750 climate today. Without the influence of man on the climate. 2) Again, what do YOU THINK he said. You're just copy and pasting literally the most biased sources you can. (Again, how can you read that article and think "Yeah, that told the whole story!"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 1) Yes, you're doing exactly what Carlson did. "answer every last question I have or you're wrong." Nye fell for the bait there. I'm guessing he was referring to 1750 as the point where man starts to affect the climate. Without that, it's not difficult to say we'd be closer to 1750 climate today. Without the influence of man on the climate. 2) Again, what do YOU THINK he said. You're just copy and pasting literally the most biased sources you can. (Again, how can you read that article and think "Yeah, that told the whole story!"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 1) Yes, you're doing exactly what Carlson did. "answer every last question I have or you're wrong." Nye fell for the bait there. I'm guessing he was referring to 1750 as the point where man starts to affect the climate. Without that, it's not difficult to say we'd be closer to 1750 climate today. Without the influence of man on the climate. 2) Again, what do YOU THINK he said. You're just copy and pasting literally the most biased sources you can. (Again, how can you read that article and think "Yeah, that told the whole story!"). If you are stating something as factual then produce the facts and Nye cannot do it because they aren't there. It is speculation. I don't see why Nye doesn't just make more of the case the facts appear to suggest this instead of speaking about climate change being caused by man as an exact science and even going so far as to want to punish scientists who differ on it. The article is about the interview with Carlson and Nye and I watched the video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 I watched it, too. Nye the Fake Guy answered his question...about proof that mankind caused it... "because it flooded in Louisiana"... something like that. If he's going to arrogantly make claims, even to the point of jailing skeptics... and he can't answer legit questions... that's egg on his face. He looked as stupid as Debbie Wasserman Shultz of the DNC.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 I'm sick to the death of articles going "Joe blow DESTROYS noob dingleberry!" "Haircut McGee OUTS col. Bowtie!" "Lenin Stalin mcMarx OBLITERATED by John Smith with simple gotcha question!" Sick. To the death. In the house of commons when a speaker says something an MP agrees with, that MP will stand briefly to show support for said statement. It's quite comical at times, like whack a mole. But on this, I stand with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 If you are stating something as factual then produce the facts and Nye cannot do it because they aren't there. It is speculation. I don't see why Nye doesn't just make more of the case the facts appear to suggest this instead of speaking about climate change being caused by man as an exact science and even going so far as to want to punish scientists who differ on it. The article is about the interview with Carlson and Nye and I watched the video. The article is his drug fueled interpretation of the interview. I mean, it must be. It has hardly any basis in reality... Because we're at a consensus of climate experts agreeing on man influencing the climate. Not "Well we think the data might point to this." I realize, based on the sites you're frequenting for your news, this may come as a shock. Again, he isn't calling for every denier to be jailed. Though, again, RedState or whatever might be saying that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 The article is his drug fueled interpretation of the interview. I mean, it must be. It has hardly any basis in reality... Because we're at a consensus of climate experts agreeing on man influencing the climate. Not "Well we think the data might point to this." I realize, based on the sites you're frequenting for your news, this may come as a shock. Again, he isn't calling for every denier to be jailed. Though, again, RedState or whatever might be saying that. Even if he went with that argument he should just state the facts. More scientists agree with MMGW than disagree with it. That would be factual. I don't care if he is calling for every denier of MMGW to be jailed (or just a few)...calling for the jailing of even one is terrible under a free democratic society that prides itself on the concept of free and open speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Nye was totally owned. Totally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Even if he went with that argument he should just state the facts. More scientists agree with MMGW than disagree with it. That would be factual. I don't care if he is calling for every denier of MMGW to be jailed (or just a few)...calling for the jailing of even one is terrible under a free democratic society that prides itself on the concept of free and open speech. That would be the most denier friendly interpretation of that fact If a tobacco company was knowingly publishing false reports claiming no ill effects to smoking, should their be legal consequences? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 That would be the most denier friendly interpretation of that fact If a tobacco company was knowingly publishing false reports claiming no ill effects to smoking, should their be legal consequences? Should Climate Change Deniers Be Prosecuted?http://www.newsweek.com/should-climate-change-deniers-be-prosecuted-378652 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 But do you have an opinion of your own? It isn't looking good... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
htownbrown Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 The ice isotopic ratio records available from three sites in the high Andes (Figures 6-1 and 6-2) together suggest warm conditions and weak Amazonian precipitation over the last two centuries, relatively cold and wet from 1400 to 1800, and relatively warm and dry before then (Thompson et al. 1986, 1995, 1998, 2000b, 2003, 2006). The current warm/dry period is a 20th century phenomenon at Quelccaya, but clearly began around 1750 at Huascaran (to the north) and is absent from Sajama (to the south). This latitudinal gradient is interesting but not yet understood. Ice isotopic ratios from Kilimanjaro reveal no consistent trend over the last two millennia (Thompson et al. 2002). The combined isotopic signal from all available ice cores in Tibet and the Andes shows that the climate of the 20th century was unusual with respect to the preceding 1900 years (Figure 6-3). In Greenland (Figure 6-2) and coastal Antarctica, ice isotopic ratio records clearly shows 20th century warming, a Little Ice Age, and earlier warmth. In Greenland, this earlier warmth is centered at about A.D. 1000, whereas in Antarctica it was much earlier. Borehole temperature analyses yield the same pattern (see Chapter 8). In Greenland, the 20th century warmth is not higher than that during medieval times (11th century). In the Canadian Arctic, ice isotopic ratio records from the Agassiz Ice Cap on Ellesmere Island show warming over the last 150 years, which is unprecedented for the last millennium (Fisher et al. 1995). As a group, the ice cores from interior Antarctica (Figure 6-2) show nothing anomalous about the 20th century (Masson et al. 2000). I believe we have influenced the climate some, seems like common sense. But given the random data over the years, how do you designate a rate to which mankind has contributed? Its a fair question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 But do you have an opinion of your own? It isn't looking good... It looks good for the first amendment as it doesn't appear that the brilliant idea of criminal penalties for those who don't agree with MMGW is going to happen any time soon under a RICO act or any other charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 I really do hate this climate argument. I hate that it's such a partisan issue. I wish climate scientists could just work on this in peace and quiet and could slowly filter out recommendations. I constantly see two arguments from the right. 1) it isn't happening. 2) it's happening but not our doing See why ur all not serious people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 there is plenty of good reason to question the mmgw hysteria. Nye was emoting, and couldn't back up his mmgw catch phrases. and it's bogus to compare any deliberate hiding of true information about the effects of tobacco smoke, etc.... with the controversy of global warming. It's the skeptics that are looking at evidence on both sides... it's the UN, and many liberals, who choose to only look at their sides' evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Evidence that's been accumulating since the 70's and 80's, long before main stream people gave a flying fuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Deforestation and Its Extreme Effect on Global Warming - Scientific ... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/deforestation-and-global-warming/ By most accounts, deforestation in tropical rainforests adds more carbon ... forest destruction, forest clearing will put another 200 billion tons of carbon into the ... “Conservation costs money, while profits from timber, charcoal, pasture and ... The Cost of the Biofuel Boom: Destroying Indonesia's Forests - Yale ... e360.yale.edu/features/the_cost_of_the_biofuel_boom_destroying_indonesias_forests Jan 19, 2009 - The clearing of Indonesia's rain forest for palm oil plantations is having ... people, and releasing massive amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. ... The Cost of the Biofuel Boom:Destroying Indonesia's Forests. $5,000,000,000,000: The cost each year of vanishing rainforest | The ... www.independent.co.uk › Environment › Climate Change Oct 2, 2010 - British scientific experts have made a major breakthrough in the fight to save the natural world from destruction, leading to an international effort ... Cocaine and the Destruction of the Rainforests - Drug-Aware.com www.drug-aware.com/articles/157/cocaine-and-the-destruction-of-the-rainforests/ ... costs of cocaine production - Cocaine and the Destruction of the Rainforests. ... be cleared or burned (how's that for a carbon footprint), causing air pollution, ... The Impact of Agriculture in the Rainforest - Rainforests rainforests.mongabay.com/0811.htm Jul 28, 2012 - Agricultural use of some rainforest land proves to be a failure because of the ... with theprice fluctuations so common in international commodities markets. .... accuses McDonald's ofdestroying the Amazon rainforest (04/07/2006) ... When peatlands are drained, the stored carbonreacts with air to release ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 but talking about destruction of the earth's rainforests doesn't redistribute America's wealth......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Saving the rainforests have been a liberal agenda for decades, where have you have been? Conservatives have been mocking the "tree huggers" for the whole duration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 It looks good for the first amendment as it doesn't appear that the brilliant idea of criminal penalties for those who don't agree with MMGW is going to happen any time soon under a RICO act or any other charge. So what would you recommend if a tobacco company was willfully presenting false information to the public to downplay the health rusks of smoking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 So what would you recommend if a tobacco company was willfully presenting false information to the public to downplay the health rusks of smoking? I will throw it back on you. Should Al Gore be charged with inducing panic for making false claims: 8 Years Ago Al Gore Predicted North Pole Would Be Ice Free in 5 Yearshttp://humansarefree.com/2017/01/8-years-ago-al-gore-predicted-north.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Answer me first. I've been asking for a while now and all you seem to be able to do is copy and paste articles... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Look at her what the hell is she doing? Is there any reason whatsoever she's sitting on the couch like my 8 yr old niece? Who would get lit up by her grandma for that if she had shoes on......i speak from personal exp there, her grandma is a major pain in the ass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Looks like she's getting ready for a gangbang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 That dude over her left shoulder is down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Answer me first. I've been asking for a while now and all you seem to be able to do is copy and paste articles... LOL I make a comment about what Al Gore said and then provide the link so I don't get "where's the link?" and now that is copy and pasting... The comparison is apples to oranges. There is a clear link between smoking and lung cancer which is why tobacco industry has lost a number of lawsuits. The science is not there to prove man made climate change so people can and do disagree about it. The polar ice cap hasn't melted away as Al predicted it would years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.