Quote:It's refreshing to see another conservative politician say basically the same things all conservative politicians have been saying?
Most politicians that are considered conservative, even many that deep in their hearts are truly conservative, couldn't have handled that response as well as Ted Cruz did. Including at least one that I have strongly supported on this Forum.
Quote:Most politicians that are considered conservative, even many that deep in their hearts are truly conservative, couldn't have handled that response as well as Ted Cruz did. Including at least one that I have strongly supported on this Forum.
It was a yes or no question that he squirmed around. What on earth are you so proud of?
If you want to know what is ailing american exceptionalism, look no further than at the anti-intellectualism that the republicans have latched on to since Bush was prez.
Quote:Predict my answer on the next few questions.
1. Is there global cooling or an ice age coming?
2. Is there global warming?
3. Is climate change real?
Some baseless, glib remarks that you think makes you appear wise?
Quote:It was a yes or no question that he squirmed around. What on earth are you so proud of?
If you want to know what is ailing american exceptionalism, look no further than at the anti-intellectualism that the republicans have latched on to since Bush was prez.
Actually he handled the question perfectly. The person asking the question clearly had an agenda, and was pretty much owned by Ted Cruz once he gave his answer.
Quote:It was a yes or no question that he squirmed around. What on earth are you so proud of?
If you want to know what is ailing american exceptionalism, look no further than at the anti-intellectualism that the republicans have latched on to since Bush was prez.
I'll gladly take my chance with Ted Cruz in a debate/ on the issues against anyone on the left or on the phony right that you would put up against him.
Quote:Be honest. Did you watch the video clip that D6 posted? I would be interested to hear your thoughts about it.
No, I can't watch vids at work. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and watch it later.
Quote:Are you that dense that you can't see that the best option if he actually believes the gloom and doom he preaches is to just not fly to Alaska? How stupid must one be to give a speech demanding Americans reduce their CO2 footprint after generating more CO2 than an average American creates in his lifetime to get to the place where the speech is given?
So rather than address the question you respond like that? What a tool bag.
Quote:Who is the phony right.
In the United States, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell come to mind immediately. As for the Presidential Candidates, Donald Trump, Ben Carson, and Jeb Bush come to mind. Carly Fiorina is also on the list. But in her case, I'm not able to go into detail because of the COC. Having said this, the only Republican Candidate I have ruled out voting for is Chris Christie. Former President G.W,.Bush and his father G.H. Bush come to mind as well.
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comm...searchers/
That's a link to current question and answer session being conducted by scientists working today on the issue of climate change. D6, Jib, JJ, et al, give em your best shot! Fire away! Join the discussion
Here's a tidbit:
"I just saw an interview with Rick Santorum and he said (1) that there was NO consensus among scientists regarding climate change, and that MOST agreed that coal/oil/gas has little to no impact on climate, (2) that the Pope was wrong on facts, wrong on science, and should not have waded into this "political" fight, and (3) God did not make humans that powerful and it is arrogant for us to believe that our actions can frustrate God's plan.
Two questions: Why do you spend your time researching a solution for a problem (anthropogenic climate change) that does not even exist, and do you believe that Rick Santorum is incorrect?
Thank you."
- localman1972
The response:
"Rick Santorum is 1) not a scientist, 2) not an authority on climate change or any other scientific topic, and 3) wrong on all counts. The earth is warming and humans are responsible, and on that point 97% of climate scientists agree. The US National Academy of Sciences regards these as "settled facts", and you should too. Humans have grown powerful enough to disrupt the life support systems on which we all depend. If you have any doubt about that, think about the possibility of nuclear war, which would destroy civilization and turn earth into a living hell. We can indeed destroy the earth, but if we act wisely we need not do so. For more details on the various misconceptions about climate change, see
http://www.skepticalscience.com. That site describes what the peer reviewed literature says about climate. Don't listen to politicians about climate, listen to the scientists."
Quote:I've posted multiple articles citing legitimate financial and insurance agencies showing just how many billions of dollars we stand to cost ourselves by not acting now.
They've said that for decades, and their hypotheses have been proven wrong again and again.
Mother Nature is in charge.
Not scientists.
That's their fatal flaw. They believe they are gods, and their science is their religion.
Epic fail.
Quote:They've said that for decades, and their hypotheses have been proven wrong again and again.
Mother Nature is in charge.
Not scientists.
That's their fatal flaw. They believe they are gods, and their science is their religion.
Epic fail.
I find it humorous when people attempting to discredit scientists refer to their science as a religion and throw it out as an insult.
Quote:I find it humorous when people attempting to discredit scientists refer to their science as a religion and throw it out as an insult.
And base their argument on their ACTUAL RELIGION.
Whatever happened to being good stewards anyways?
Quote:So their argument is not science at all, just an appeal to authority.
Along with a link to a website where the name itself is a lie.
Thank you again for proving me right for the unpteenth time.
Quote:Why? In the case of Global Warming Climate Change it has more in common with religion than science.
1. They have leaders who are the only ones allowed to discuss the topic. (Priests)
2. They have a call for sacrifice to atone for sins (but not by the priests).
3. They have a disparaging name for those who disagree ("deniers" = heretics = infidels)
4. They stifle or refuse to debate on the subject.
5. They discard or change data that disagrees with dogma, and ignore fundamental discrepancies.
One has basis in science the other does not. It's the attempting to call it a religion as an insult which is humorous (and very telling of how they view there own structures).
Every one of those arguments applies to science deniers of all topics.
Quote:Why? In the case of <del>Global Warming</del> Climate Change it has more in common with religion than science.
1. They have leaders who are the only ones allowed to discuss the topic. (Priests)
2. They have a call for sacrifice to atone for sins (but not by the priests).
3. They have a disparaging name for those who disagree ("deniers" = heretics = infidels)
4. They stifle or refuse to debate on the subject.
5. They discard or change data that disagrees with dogma, and ignore fundamental discrepancies.
Literally none of this is true, unfortunately. I hope you understand how these types of posts make you look. Just sayin