Writer claims Trump raped her

[Ben Dhyan]

By whom?


Given that many members of Congress are science deniers, it is no surprise that Curry is called to testify.


Curry's bio from your link:
Education B.Sc. in geography, Ph.D. in geophysical sciences

Mann's bio from Michael E. Mann — Penn State Meteorology and Atmospheric Science

• Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science Penn State
• Joint Appointment with the Department of Geosciences
• Director, Earth System Science Center

Education:

1. PhD -- Yale University

Research Specialties:
Atmospheric Business and Policy:
Atmospheric Dynamics:
Climate:
Earth-Atmosphere Interactions:
Oceanography:
Statistical Meteorology:






Hearing on climate change and natural disasters: Today
https://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2019/06/mann.20190612.testimony.pdf

The two links above are prepared statements to Congress by Curry and Michael Mann.

Curry's testimony contains her opinions with no supporting documents.
Mann's testimony contains dozens of references to the sources supporting his arguments.

"By whom?" ....by both houses of Congress. Here's a google search....

https://www.google.com/search?clien....228.450.2-2......0....1..gws-wiz.k5ZW7dbUeOI

Here is a coverage of a Senate hearing, make up your own mind as to who actually understands how science is meant to be conducted, ie., questioning the agw claims against reality, and who is just a talking head repeating media claims...denier, denier, doom, gloom..

 

[Shad]

Yeah, that's what the conversation is about. Why does someone say something that makes them appear guilty? That's what is being discussed.
Sheesh.

You just have no sense of humor. Nothing more.

You couldn't even try answering the question, could you?

Wrong. I pointed out your claim was wrong. I pointed out it was a joke. Try again.

Don't worry though, your silence speaks volumes.

More fiction in your head. Your claim was wrong. Try again .

Face it you have TDS. Nothing Trump does will change your mind hence why you have to ignore principles regarding guilt or had none to begin with

 

[Wandering Monk]

Just wondering how we got from a discussion about Trump and rape to Young Earth Creationism?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I did, especially since I have a friend of mine that belongs to one of their synagogues, but I have problems with some parts of their theology. However, I really don't want to discuss that.

There are several reasons why I reconverted back to Catholicism, such as that I wanted to be very active in helping the poor in my area and also to teach theology, and I can and already am doing that at our local Catholic parish. My 20 year involvement in my synagogue was very meaningful for me, and I was actively involved there, including teaching our Lunch & Learn program, alternating with the rabbi. This week I spent two evenings there helping them out with the SOS program that houses and feeds 30+ homeless families in our area for a week.

Thank you, and the same to you as well.

I am impressed metis, you are a blessed instrument of the on High.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Well you may not approve, but the investigations are underway. in fact I understand the IG report in draft form is complete, should be released later this month or in August. Though it is the AG investigation that is looking into CIA, DNI, FBI, and SD., and the report will probably be later this year.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I see that you took a silent 5th Amendment position regarding:

That leads me to wonder if anyone has done a study to determine how many Evolution deniers are also AGW deniers. I'm guessing that there would be a significant correlation.

Does my comment about a correlation of AGW deniers and Evolution deniers apply to you?
​

It may not be fair but, when people take the 5th, we usually suspect they are hiding something.

No, I was focused on showing the fact that the head of the IPCC considered he was on a religious mission. Concerning evolution, I look at things from a pantheistic viewpoint, physical nature studied by science is the manifestation of the ONE GOD that is all. Creation, preservation, and destruction are ongoing simultaneously, all human scientific concepts are merely an attempt to understand the deeper nature of things, such is the concept of evolution. There is no conflict between understanding based on a short time period, ie., evolution, and the understanding based on the eternal creative nature of the Cosmos.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

But you don't want to share it with me. OK.


ETA: I've backlinked but cannot find any link by you that shows "wide spread msm coverage".

Your observational skills are deficient, why am I even doing this. Like metis I suppose, someone has to walk the walk.


Writer claims Trump raped her

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I'll ask again, why did you reference him if he has no scientific credentials?

See on that same link above, it said he was "a researcher into climate change".
Btw, I consider this never ending game of "gotcha" that you appear to be playing is not adding to furthering understanding, and is a time waster, it would be more productive if you do less of it. I will try to do less too.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yeah. The world is not doomed. Define "cope". Will millions of displaced people "cope"? Will countries "cope" with water rights?

BTW you have continued to ignore...
Is that how you decide between Creationism and Evolution?

Large scale displacement is mere speculation, in any event mankind will always adapt as the environment changes, always have and always will. Cope means survive through some means or another.
I've replied to to the question on creation and evolution.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Just wondering how we got from a discussion about Trump and rape to Young Earth Creationism?

You forgot to include Climate Change...

 

[fantome profane]

You forgot to include Climate Change...

I suppose the flat earth debate is something we can look forward too.

Anything to avoid the reality that Trump is a rapist.

 

[ecco]

Here is a coverage of a Senate hearing, make up your own mind

I have made up my mind based on facts:

Curry's testimony contains her opinions with no supporting documents.
Mann's testimony contains dozens of references to the sources supporting his arguments.

Curry could not support her views.

Curry's bio from your link:
Education B.Sc. in geography, Ph.D. in geophysical sciences

Mann's bio from Michael E. Mann — Penn State Meteorology and Atmospheric Science

• Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science Penn State
• Joint Appointment with the Department of Geosciences
• Director, Earth System Science Center

Education:

1. PhD -- Yale University

Research Specialties:
Atmospheric Business and Policy:
Atmospheric Dynamics:
Climate:
Earth-Atmosphere Interactions:
Oceanography:
Statistical Meteorology:

One additional consideration as I mentioned before, Curry is a lone voice with biased financial backers. Just like the "scientists" that testifies before Congress that tobacco was not addictive.

 

[Wandering Monk]

I suppose the flat earth debate is something we can look forward too.

Anything to avoid the reality the Trump is a rapist.

Not according to the law. All you've got are allegation. No police report, no witnesses to the alleged rape, no videos, no forensic evidence.

But in your mind he is already tried and convicted.

 

[ecco]

Here is a coverage of a Senate hearing, make up your own mind as to who actually understands how science is meant to be conducted, ie., questioning the agw claims against reality, and who is just a talking head repeating media claims...denier, denier, doom, gloom..

I have no idea why you would link that video. It does nothing to support your argument and everything to disparage it. It clearly shows Curry talking about her opinionated ideas and Mann relating demonstrable facts.

But the most telling part is the segment where Mann is recounting information about the area around Boston. The science denying, pro Curry Congressman interrupts with a question that clearly shows his ignorance: "Do you know what the weather was like when the pilgrims landed?" This is the level of the debate - willful arrogant ignorance vs science.

 

[ecco]

I've already provided a link to show the wide spread msm coverage in a previous comment in reply to Subduction Zone.

ecco:
ETA: I've backlinked but cannot find any link by you that shows "wide spread msm coverage".

Your observational skills are deficient, why am I even doing this. Like metis I suppose, someone has to walk the walk.


Writer claims Trump raped her

Seriously? You have the audacity to post a snide comment stating that my "observational skills are deficient"!
I asked, repeatedly, for the link that you asserted, repeatedly, you had posted

I've already provided a link to show the wide spread msm coverage in a previous comment in reply to Subduction Zone.

With my deficient observational skills, I need to remind you that we were discussing ...

• Climate
• scientific credentials
• msm coverage

He is referred to as a climate researcher and heads the National Centre for Climate Restoration, but I can't see any science credentials. One wonders why the msm gave this paper such broad coverage, including New Scientist, and why climate scientists, apart from the skeptics, have not come out to rubbish it for its nonsense.

We were not discussing TRUMP. Since we were not discussing TRUMP why did you post...

Like metis I suppose, someone has to walk the walk.
Writer claims Trump raped her

Since you clearly have problems following the thread of your own posts, perhaps it is you who has mental deficiencies.

But I can be patient with all kinds of people. So, I'll ask patiently again: What broad coverage did the msm give?

 

[ecco]

See on that same link above, it said he was "a researcher into climate change".
Btw, I consider this never ending game of "gotcha" that you appear to be playing is not adding to furthering understanding, and is a time waster, it would be more productive if you do less of it. I will try to do less too.

The same link about trump raping someone? If you could just address the question honestly and directly, there would be no need for any "gotcha".

 

[ecco]

I've replied to to the question on creation and evolution.

See, there you go again. You duck and dodge and then say "I already answered that".

No, you haven't. Just like you could not provide support for widespread msm coverage. Just like you didn't respond to the simple straightforward question about whether you disbelieve Evolution just as you disbelieve AGW.

If you don't want people asking you to support your assertions, don't make unsupportable assertions.

If you don't want to answer questions about potentially embarrassing positions, just say "I don't want to answer".

 

[SkepticThinker]

Perhaps it would have been easier to just say it as you have in this post, the attempt at black humor did not work for me....never mind.

Okay, so it was just a joke?

 

[Subduction Zone]

ecco:
ETA: I've backlinked but cannot find any link by you that shows "wide spread msm coverage".

He did find a few news stories that reported on those two. But as I pointed out they were not climate scientists. They were not even scientists at all. One is an accountant and one used to be an executive in one of the fossil fuel corporations. They may know some of the ways that corporations tried to deny science, but they are not valid sources to go to for the result of AGW. Yes, there actually are AGW "alarmists" the problem for him is that they are not scientists. Sometimes an alarmist is necessary. Without them some people will not react until far too late. I would call Al Gore an alarmist. He tried to make the threat of AGW appear as doom for the entire Earth in our lifetimes. What people do not see is that the true cost of it will be paid by later generations. There will be areas made uninhabitable by AGW.

It was a fail of his on multiple levels. Yes, the mainstream media made an error and gave their story too much credibility. That does not mean that the basic science is wrong. It is not a matter of "if it will happen" if we do not change our ways, or even for what we have already done. It is a matter of "when it will happen".

I have noticed that the very selfish, aka Trumpettes, that do not care about how their children or grandchildren do, tend to deny AGW since a slight increase in fossil fuels is something that they do not want to deal with.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You just have no sense of humor. Nothing more.

Oh I'm sorry, is raped supposed to be funny?

Wrong. I pointed out your claim was wrong. I pointed out it was a joke. Try again.

My claim about what?

More fiction in your head. Your claim was wrong. Try again .

What fiction? You actually did not answer the question, nor did you attempt to. Are you trying to pull a Trumpian "fake news" on me here?

Face it you have TDS. Nothing Trump does will change your mind hence why you have to ignore principles regarding guilt or had none to begin with

Whenever you feel like actually addressing the point, then get back to me.

I have Bill Cosby derangement syndrome too then, I guess. Dozens of women also claimed that he sexually assaulted them, and just like in this case, there are a bunch of people questioning and vilifying the women while giving the guy a free pass, without ever honestly considering what the women have to say. Plus in Trump's case, we've got him on tape talking about how he assaults women. Then when asked he's claimed "she's not my type" or she's not attractive enough or any number of ridiculously stupid answers that make him appear guilty. And still his followers don't believe the women. But I'm the crazy one. It's absurd.