siti
Well-Known Member
Yes - I recall the Tories using a similar slogan for Mrs Thatcher - make Britain great again - she didn't, you may have noticed.make America great again.
Last edited:
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Yes - I recall the Tories using a similar slogan for Mrs Thatcher - make Britain great again - she didn't, you may have noticed.make America great again.
I might, but don't worry, you won't have to decide, they only ask people who don't already have their head in a hole - or, in the case of the new EPA boss, in someone else's hole.Haha...being herded by the activists to gather on a beach and have their pic taken with their heads in a hole, is supposed, in your mind, to be a picture of sensible rational thought processes...they make great climate scientists.. would you join them do that if asked?
Yes - I recall the Tories using a similar slogan for Mrs Thatcher - make Britain great again - she didn't, you may have noticed.
Indeed she was, but unfortunately siti's knowledge of the history of the agw scam is on a par with his knowledge of the actual science.She was one of the original instigators of the global warming movement was she not?
Indeed she was, but unfortunately siti's knowledge of the history of the agw scam is on a par with his knowledge of the actual science.
She spoke with forked tongue on the issue, at one and the same time advocating climate protection measures and promoting free-market capitalism, the "great car economy" and "Roads for Prosperity". She was an educated scientist (a chemist by profession) so she would have found it difficult to deny the scientific facts - but she was loathe to abandon her capitalistic politics so she equivocated - simultaneously promoting both the cause and the problem and its solution - but eventually coming down fully on the side of capitalist irresponsibility as her right wing politicizing finally erased any clear-thinking scientific clarity from her psyche. Poor woman - imagine starting off as a scientist and ending up incapable of distinguishing between the real world and Fox News - like one of the three wise monkeys of RF and their trusty sidekick, Guy. Sad!She was one of the original instigators of the global warming movement was she not?
Or maybe its just another "lucky guess"? Eh Guy?the belief that bad weather is the fault of 'bad people' instead of natural phenomena, goes back thousands of years, possibly the oldest superstition known to mankind?
Do you consider my knowledge of history and science 'unfortunate' because you have yet to refute a single argument I have made with any actual scientific or historical evidence?unfortunately siti's knowledge of the history of the agw scam is on a par with his knowledge of the actual science.
No, unfortunate because you lack the depth of knowledge to understand reality, unfortunate too that as a result, you fall for a fake religion that is easy to believe, humans are destroying the earth, humans are bad....a Planet of the Apes scenario is coming, you wish..Do you consider my knowledge of history and science 'unfortunate' because you have yet to refute a single argument I have made with any actual scientific or historical evidence?
Lol this argument that you keep putting up is so weak that it's hilarious.I agree, it is "too bad" to see anyone behave exactly like a creationist.
The UN late last century created a unified global group that involves about 200 nations of the world who signed up to the UN IPCC claim that humans were the predominate cause of the global warming trend, and they agreed to organize and fund a UN agw movement to combat it. That funding created a feeding frenzy which has created an ever increasing number of career climatologists whose lives and careers now depend on it. It is these people who use their science, positions, guile, politics, etc., to push agw on the dumbed down masses.If the denialists' conspiracy theory about climatologists just chasing cash is true, then can someone explain to me why, now that we have an anti-warming administration (Trump) and Congress in charge of funding, are climatologists sticking to their science and the conclusion of human-caused warming?
If the conspiracy theory is true, shouldn't those same climatologists be switching their narratives to a denialist position so they can continue to get funding? Why are we seeing the opposite?
The UN late last century created a unified global group that involves about 200 nations of the world who signed up to the UN IPCC claim that humans were the predominate cause of the global warming trend, and they agreed to organize and fund a UN agw movement to combat it.
That funding created a feeding frenzy which has created an ever increasing number of career climatologists whose lives and careers now depend on it. It is these people who use their science, positions, guile, politics, etc., to push agw on the dumbed down masses.
If creationists win the day, all the funding for research into evolution will dry up and the life sciences will be honest again.If skeptics win the day, the UN IPCC and FCCC will be disbanded, and the present funding will dry up. With the combination of no pressure on climate science to push agw, plus a huge reduction in funding so that only the few sincere scientists remain, the swamp will be drained and climate science will be made great and honest again.
You are misdirecting to 'creationism' and 'conspiracies' to avoid acknowledging your question was stupid. You asked primarily why agw climatologists, under Trumpism, if they were only going with agw for the funding, would not merely switch over to the other position to continue to get the funding. Now the short answer to this question since you did not understand my longer version is that the funding will all but dry up. if Trumpism prevails....the swamp is drained....and only about 20% of existing climate scientist's careers will continue, the rest will not....got it?But by that time the fundamental science had largely been done. Remember, your and Debatable's conspiracy theory is that climatologists created the whole human-caused warming thing for nefarious reasons.
This is the exact same argument creationists make regarding evolutionary biology. They claim that those in the biological sciences are basically doing it for the money, i.e., chasing funding, even though the underlying science is largely false.
In both cases, it never seems to occur to you conspiracy theory minded denialists that there's a much more parsimonious explanation for why life scientists conduct research into evolution and climatologists research human-caused warming......because that's the reality the data points to.
If creationists win the day, all the funding for research into evolution will dry up and the life sciences will be honest again.
Denialism is pretty much the same, regardless of the topic.
Well you can laugh all the way to grave as the pollution being spewed out by the goddam SUVs in America, China and Europe slowly but surely make the planet unable to sustain human life.
Now the short answer to this question since you did not understand my longer version is that the funding will all but dry up. if Trumpism prevails....the swamp is drained....and only about 20% of existing climate scientist's careers will continue, the rest will not....got it?
On the plus side, I guess we'll both fit right in...No, unfortunate because you lack the depth of knowledge to understand reality, unfortunate too that as a result, you fall for a fake religion that is easy to believe, humans are destroying the earth, humans are bad....a Planet of the Apes scenario is coming, you wish..
Many of them are activists. Not to mention they'd lose all credibility. Who'd ever hire them again if they admitted to fraud? Hold the line and when they are proven wrong, it doesn't look as bad to say, well we weren't entirely sure so we were leaning to the side of caution.The UN late last century created a unified global group that involves about 200 nations of the world who signed up to the UN IPCC claim that humans were the predominate cause of the global warming trend, and they agreed to organize and fund a UN agw movement to combat it. That funding created a feeding frenzy which has created an ever increasing number of career climatologists whose lives and careers now depend on it. It is these people who use their science, positions, guile, politics, etc., to push agw on the dumbed down masses.
If skeptics win the day, the UN IPCC and FCCC will be disbanded, and the present funding will dry up. With the combination of no pressure on climate science to push agw, plus a huge reduction in funding so that only the few sincere scientists remain, the swamp will be drained and climate science will be made great and honest again.
NO NO NO NO NO. I never said that the Climatologists created this. In fact I have always held the position that it was created via politics and political agenda.But by that time the fundamental science had largely been done. Remember, your and Debatable's conspiracy theory is that climatologists created the whole human-caused warming thing for nefarious reasons.
This is the exact same argument creationists make regarding evolutionary biology. They claim that those in the biological sciences are basically doing it for the money, i.e., chasing funding, even though the underlying science is largely false.
In both cases, it never seems to occur to you conspiracy theory minded denialists that there's a much more parsimonious explanation for why life scientists conduct research into evolution and climatologists research human-caused warming......because that's the reality the data points to.
If creationists win the day, all the funding for research into evolution will dry up and the life sciences will be honest again.
Denialism is pretty much the same, regardless of the topic.
Ok, let's see how that goes.