The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: Chris_ on January 31, 2014, 08:42:36 PM
-
A Change In The Legal Climate
The suit filed by Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, claims that the National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) libeled him in a pair of articles in which they stated he had manipulated climate data and that the fraud had been covered up by his employer, which said its investigation concluded he had done nothing wrong. To make the point, the CEI writer, Rand Simberg, drew a comparison between Penn State's handling of abuse allegations against Jerry Sandusky - the university's longtime assistant football coach convicted as a child molester - and its review of Mann's work.
"Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except that instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data," Simberg wrote in the article Mann says is libelous.
Mark Steyn, a writer with National Review Online, wrote about the Simberg article and tossed in his own thoughts. While at first openly shying away from the Sandusky metaphor, Steyn called some of Mann's most prominent work "fraudulent" - a graph of historical temperatures showing rapid rises in modern times, which is widely known as the "hockey stick." Then Steyn returned to the references to the child molester.
In 2009, a still unknown hacker took thousands of private emails between climatologists and released 20 of them. The climate skeptics seized upon those documents as proof that scientists were cooking their research results.
The email held up as the most damning was from 1999, which, in regard to Mann, made reference to "Mike's Nature trick," and used the words "hide the decline" in reference to something one of the scientists was preparing that compared different means of reconstructing historical temperatures through proxies like tree rings. This, the skeptics claimed, showed that Mann had devised a dishonest way to disguise historically falling temperatures. They demanded investigations of Mann and the other climatologists on the emails to prove their research was part of a fraudulent scheme to fool the world into believing in climate change.
Newsweek (http://mag.newsweek.com/2014/01/31/change-legal-climate.html)
Something to keep an eye on.
-
Something to keep an eye on.
can't keep an eye out on something if you don't know what you're looking for.
The media consistently put "mental harnesses on people to guide them to specific emotional reactions to information; buzz words designed to subliminally correlate ideas and drive specific emotional responses.
For example, the other day, on another website, there was an article about a threatening twitter or text sent to the little girl who plays Charlie in the Disney tv show, "Good luck Charlie". (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/06/5-year-old-actress-gets-death-threats-over-her-disney-shows-gay-characters/#comment-1234844634)
I pointed out that the author of the article makes the association that the text was gay-bashing. The text itself, does not incorporate or imply any motivation for the threat. ((I was eventually was banned from the discussion, so my posts are no longer there).
99.98% of the people mindlessly reading the article missed this significant mental harness.
Did you see the 'mental harness' already embedded in the article YOU posted? There are two that I see, out of the gate. Can you find it, now that you know to look for it?
-
^No. But perhaps you could enlighten me.
By the way Chris_ this article is going straight over to my other forum. I hope to stir up a few of the most rabid libs over there.
-
^No. But perhaps you could enlighten me.
First off: opening sentence is a run-on sentence, designed to confuse the reader, and the entire article is poorly written. My 10th grade journalism teacher would have red-lined this paragraph up one side and down the other.
2.. claims that the National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) libeled him in a pair of articles in which they stated he had manipulated climate data and that the fraud had been covered up by his employer, which said its investigation concluded he had done nothing wrong.
This is a classic "he said, she said" ruse. The CEI "libeled" him because they disagreed with his employer, who said in their investigation, he had done nothing wrong.
Well, OF COURSE his employer said he did nothing wrong!!!!!!!!!! But there is no information about either "investigation" -- just the "he said, she said" comment.
3.To make the point, the CEI writer, Rand Simberg, drew a comparison between Penn State's handling of abuse allegations against Jerry Sandusky - the university's longtime assistant football coach convicted as a child molester - and its review of Mann's work.
This sort of thing drives me batty: comparing something to child molestation -- one of the worse crimes known to humanity.
The "mental harness" is emotionally provocative -- but intellectually, does NOT hold water. ""Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except that instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data,"
Really? manipulating data is lying; it is manipulative; and it is really crappy science.
But it is as evil as child molestation????????? Puh-lease.
Everyone quoted in this article is pushing their agendas as hard and as emotionally intensely as possible -- and the reader is roped into going along, without realizing HOW s/he is being emotionally manipulated, even though the method is readily identified -- if a person knows for what they are looking.
-
can't keep an eye out on something if you don't know what you're looking for.
I was referring to Mann's lawsuit, but you keep on doing... whatever you're doing.
-
I was referring to Mann's lawsuit, but you keep on doing... whatever you're doing.
Well, then you were looking at one thing, and I was looking at something completely different -- kind of like blind people trying to describe an elephant when they each have only one section
So, could you please elucidate your point of view?
-
Well, then you were looking at one thing, and I was looking at something completely different -- kind of like blind people trying to describe an elephant when they each have only one section
So, could you please elucidate your point of view?
I was simply stating that Mann's lawsuit against National Review was worth paying attention to. Do I really have to spell that out for you?
-
I was simply stating that Mann's lawsuit against National Review was worth paying attention to. Do I really have to spell that out for you?
Why? Why is THIS issue influential in the bigger scope?
-
Why? Why is THIS issue influential in the bigger scope?
I don't think anybody gave any significance to this story above any other story regarding climate change, you did.
When making a comment must we now cover the entire gamut and every facet of the topic?
-
I don't think anybody gave any significance to this story above any other story regarding climate change, you did.
When making a comment must we now cover the entire gamut and every facet of the topic?
Ok! I get it now -- when something is labeled "something to keep an eye on," it is actually irrelevant!
sorry - I'm new to the board; I'm not "jiggy" with the lingo yet.
-
Ok! I get it now -- when something is labeled "something to keep an eye on," it is actually irrelevant!
sorry - I'm new to the board; I'm not "jiggy" with the lingo yet.
Ah yes, you hit the nail right on the head.
Of course when someone mentions a single aspect of a larger issue (that might be interesting to some people) it must be irrelevant.
Thanks for pointing that out.
-
Ah yes, you hit the nail right on the head.
Of course when someone mentions a single aspect of a larger issue (that might be interesting to some people) it must be irrelevant.
Thanks for pointing that out.
You're welcome!
But ... did you do know that a 'single issue' that is, of itself, irrelevant, doesn't actually influence a larger issue...
my point is that unless you can explain WHY this is relevant, or could be relevant -- then it isn't.
And my post actually addressed why this article *might* be relevant -- since it's designed to instigate emotional reactions without actual thought, and without actually SAYING anything of value...
so, you're welcome for that, too. :cheersmate:
-
Why? Why is THIS issue influential in the bigger scope?
Well, see, we don't have a minimum Gravitas Quotient for posting about an issue, and even if we did, it would be chris_ setting it, not you.
:popcorn:
-
You're welcome!
But ... did you do know that a 'single issue' that is, of itself, irrelevant, doesn't actually influence a larger issue...
my point is that unless you can explain WHY this is relevant, or could be relevant -- then it isn't.
And my post actually addressed why this article *might* be relevant -- since it's designed to instigate emotional reactions without actual thought, and without actually SAYING anything of value...
so, you're welcome for that, too. :cheersmate:
Oh, I get it now, you're out to change the entire political landscape from this here little ole message board.
And that you are the arbiter of what is relevant and what is not.
Also, anybody that makes a post must come to you to explain why it might be relevant to the wider issue...or it's not relevant.
I see your problem now, do you see it?
-
You're welcome!
But ... did you do know that a 'single issue' that is, of itself, irrelevant, doesn't actually influence a larger issue...
my point is that unless you can explain WHY this is relevant, or could be relevant -- then it isn't.
And my post actually addressed why this article *might* be relevant -- since it's designed to instigate emotional reactions without actual thought, and without actually SAYING anything of value...
so, you're welcome for that, too. :cheersmate:
Are you always this uptight? Calm down... take a powder... chill out.
-
Well, see, we don't have a minimum Gravitas Quotient for posting about an issue, and even if we did, it would be chris_ setting it, not you.
:popcorn:
so -- it's 'worth keeping an eye on,' but not for any reason anyone else can explain...
so, the unspoken rule of the forum is don't ask questions... and don't think for myself... and if I do, I should be prepared to be either ignored, or belittled - by multiple people!!
got it.
-
so -- it's 'worth keeping an eye on,' but not for any reason anyone else can explain...
Well, I assumed the reader would review the article (not just the four or five paragraphs I posted) and come to their own conclusions about the validity of Mann's lawsuit -- and his underlying data -- and it's effect on Simberg and Steyn's freedom of speech. If you want to change the topic to "mental harnesses" and whatnot, knock yourself out. I posted a portion of the article I thought would generate the most interest here.
I honestly didn't realize I had to make all that so painfully clear as to waste minutes of my time pointing it out.
-
Well, I assumed the reader would review the article (not just the four or five paragraphs I posted) and come to their own conclusions about the validity of Mann's lawsuit -- and his underlying data -- and it's effect on Simberg and Steyn's freedom of speech. If you want to change the topic to "mental harnesses" and whatnot, knock yourself out. I posted a portion of the article I thought would generate the most interest here.
I honestly didn't realize I had to make all that so painfully clear as to waste minutes of my time pointing it out.
Penfold must be a high school English teacher....read between the lines....find the hidden meaning and all that.
-
Why? Why is THIS issue influential in the bigger scope?
What in the ...? Get over yourself.
NRO has been writing hilarious articles on this putz. This is one of the better ones:
http://m.nationalreview.com/corner/331497/nobel-mann-takes-revolting-peasants-mark-steyn
Oooh reference to revolting peasants, I am sooooo emotionally attached now to their agenda.
-
so -- it's 'worth keeping an eye on,' but not for any reason anyone else can explain...
so, the unspoken rule of the forum is don't ask questions... and don't think for myself... and if I do, I should be prepared to be either ignored, or belittled - by multiple people!!
got it.
No, you obviously DON'T get much of anything. Bitching about the relative importance of someone else's post is not original thought, so you obviously aren't dealing with that realm in the first place. It is what is known in intellectual circles as 'Derivative.' Of course, a lot of modern historical and literary work is pretty derivative, which explains why there are so many unemployed history and literature graduates in this country, but that's another story.
So far you've impressed everyone with being just a lippy smart-ass, and as someone who depends on other people to post so you can snipe them, not as someone with interesting or original thoughts and perspectives to contribute. It's early, you can recover from a negative initial impression, and several people in this thread have tried to cut you slack on that, but you've batted those overtures away.
Try saying something you really think instead of just being snarky and potshotting other members. If you don't have anything original or constructive to say in a thread, then just try to restrain yourself from posting in it solely to jack up your post count.
Try saying what you think, instead of telling other people what they should think.
-
Ok! I get it now -- when something is labeled "something to keep an eye on," it is actually irrelevant!
sorry - I'm new to the board; I'm not "jiggy" with the lingo yet.
It is generally considered to be bad form to spam a board you are new to with assholery.
If you were not so pedantic I would waste 2 brain cells in addressing your vapid attempts at argumentation.
In your case: res ipsa loquitur
-
so -- it's 'worth keeping an eye on,' but not for any reason anyone else can explain...
so, the unspoken rule of the forum is don't ask questions... and don't think for myself... and if I do, I should be prepared to be either ignored, or belittled - by multiple people!!
got it.
Tantrums are always welcome on any site.
You could just go and eat worms...
-
Are you always this uptight? Calm down... take a powder... chill out.
The boy needs some pie.
(http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag72/conscave/Spam_pie_zps66ef6c2a.jpg)
It's festive, and fun to make. What more could you ask for?
-
Try saying something you really think instead of just being snarky and potshotting other members. If you don't have anything original or constructive to say in a thread, then just try to restrain yourself from posting in it solely to jack up your post count.
Try saying what you think, instead of telling other people what they should think.
Actually - I did. My second-ish post stated that the article was poorly written, filled with intentionally emotionally provocative comments designed to create specific reactionary responses.
and that is when I was summarily mocked... dismissed... etc.
so, yeah - got that message.
-
Actually - I did. My second-ish post stated that the article was poorly written, filled with intentionally emotionally provocative comments designed to create specific reactionary responses.
and that is when I was summarily mocked... dismissed... etc.
so, yeah - got that message.
There's really no reason to be overly sensitive. Say your peace and move on. No one will "gun" for you here without cause. Just be honest, and respectful. Is that too much to ask ?
-
No one will "gun" for you here without cause. Just be honest, and respectful. Is that too much to ask ?
apparently it is too much to ask, cuz that's what I did - offer an insightful comment and ... voila!
-
can't keep an eye out on something if you don't know what you're looking for.
99.98% of the people mindlessly reading the article missed this significant mental harness.
Did you see the 'mental harness' already embedded in the article YOU posted? There are two that I see, out of the gate. Can you find it, now that you know to look for it?
This? This was your insightful commentary, which had nothing to do with the initial story or had anything to do with global warming, Michael Mann's fraudulent data, or the First Amendment repercussions of his lawsuit.
Care to try again?
-
This? This was your insightful commentary, which had nothing to do with the initial story or had anything to do with global warming, Michael Mann's fraudulent data, or the First Amendment repercussions of his lawsuit.
Care to try again?
No, I'll stick to my original insightful commentary -- which offered a significantly greater amount of commentary than "keep your eye on this."
-
No, I'll stick to my original insightful commentary -- which offered a significantly greater amount of commentary than "keep your eye on this."
The only other thing I took away from your post was that you were banned from another forum. It must have been your charming personality.
-
The only other thing I took away from your post was that you were banned from another forum. It must have been your charming personality.
"charming"?? you mean like the people I've encountered on this site?? Like you?
-
"charming"?? you mean like the people I've encountered on this site?? Like you?
(http://guyism.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Screen-Shot-2012-04-20-at-12.14.16-PM.png)
We have established that you are a crazy cat lady. Do the cats act differently when you're having your menstrual period?
Are they acting that way tonight?
-
"charming"?? you mean like the people I've encountered on this site?? Like you?
You were the one that chose to discuss semantics over substance in this particular discussion. Don't tell me I'm the one with the bug up his ass.
-
(http://guyism.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Screen-Shot-2012-04-20-at-12.14.16-PM.png)
We have established that you are a crazy cat lady. Do the cats act differently when you're having your menstrual period?
Are they acting that way tonight?
so - you went from annoying straight to "juvenile" and pathetic.
Did you REALLY just insult my reproductive system?????????? how old ARE you? 17?????
-
so - you went from annoying straight to "juvenile" and pathetic.
Did you REALLY just insult my reproductive system?????????? how old ARE you? 17?????
Old enough to recognize a crazy cat lady when I see one.
So, back to the unanswered question. You want to be respected. What have you said, or done, to earn respect here?
-
Old enough to recognize a crazy cat lady when I see one.
So, back to the unanswered question. You want to be respected. What have you said, or done, to earn respect here?
What have *I* done to "earn" respect... asks the man who just made fun of my reproductive system. :thatsright: :rofl: :rotf: :mental:
Well, let's see... I HAVEN'T made fun of anyone's reproductive system lately... but if that's what it takes...
-
What have *I* done to "earn" respect... asks the man who just made fun of my reproductive system. :thatsright: :rofl: :rotf: :mental:
Well, let's see... I HAVEN'T made fun of anyone's reproductive system lately... but if that's what it takes...
You wanted to be respected here. What have you said or done to earn the respect you want?
-
You wanted to be respected here. What have you said or done to earn the respect you want?
Well, for starters, I DON'T make fun of people's reproductive systems...
-
Well, for starters, I DON'T make fun of people's reproductive systems...
You're not getting it. It's a simple question with a simple answer.
You want to be respected here. What have you said or done to earn the respect you want?
-
You're not getting it. It's a simple question with a simple answer.
You want to be respected here. What have you said or done to earn the respect you want?
respect: a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements.
I daresay the things I've done in my life would probably not "earn" respect from someone like you.
I'm just a mom, who managed to keep my kids emotionally and spiritually healthy through some amazingly tough times. I've done nothing important, besides raising kids who tell the truth, treat people with respect, and do not argue with one another, or with me.
I'm a compassionate person who spent 20 minutes at the store the other day helping a complete stranger navigate the baking aisle of the store, looking for a cake mix for his wife, cuz he didn't know what she wanted.
And today, I dropped everything I was doing to spend 30 minutes holding my daughter while she cried as she realized that in a few short months, when she graduates high school, the lack of the format of 'school' will likely mean the end of at least half of her friendships..
but you know -- I don't actually *do* anything that deserves respect... not from people like *you*...
-
...insightful...
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
-
I'm just a mom, who managed to keep my kids emotionally and spiritually healthy through some amazingly tough times. I've done nothing important, besides raising kids who tell the truth, treat people with respect, and do not argue with one another, or with me.
but you know -- I don't actually *do* anything that deserves respect... not from people like *you*...
Now see, that first part is halfway what was asked for as part of an introduction. The rest would have entailed expressing where you fall politically.
Arguments can be a healthy thing.
And then you thow in the smug condescending tone at the end.
-
Respect is earned. It is not an entitlement. Conservatives know that. You didn't make the effort to earn anyone's respect here, and now you're reaping what you sowed.
After your first post, Eupher asked you to go to the Introduction thread and introduce yourself, which is part of the culture of this group of people. You replied: "Is this mandatory? I'm not sure I'm going to be here long enough to care if anyone "gets to know me.""
At that point, you were toast. You shot yourself in the foot, and you have aimed progressively higher as the evening progressed.
If you want to stay, I recommend a good mea culpa, a proper introduction, and some time to get to know the people here. Otherwise, you're just another asshole on the Internet.
-
Now see, that first part is halfway what was asked for as part of an introduction. The rest would have entailed expressing where you fall politically.
and here's the other shoe with which you can kick yourself: how do you know anything I said really happened?
-
and here's the other shoe with which you can kick yourself: how do you know anything I said really happened?
Yeah. Crazy cat lady.
-
and here's the other shoe with which you can kick yourself: how do you know anything I said really happened?
That's part of that whole "respect is earned" thing, and you aren't doing it.
-
Respect is earned. It is not an entitlement. Conservatives know that. You didn't make the effort to earn anyone's respect here, and now you're reaping what you sowed.
After your first post, Eupher asked you to go to the Introduction thread and introduce yourself, which is part of the culture of this group of people. You replied: "Is this mandatory? I'm not sure I'm going to be here long enough to care if anyone "gets to know me.""
At that point, you were toast. You shot yourself in the foot, and you have aimed progressively higher as the evening progressed.
If you want to stay, I recommend a good mea culpa, a proper introduction, and some time to get to know the people here. Otherwise, you're just another asshole on the Internet.
Ah, there's the rub!! I didn't do what you WANTED me to do. You wanted me to tell you all about my personal life -- as if somehow that was "proof" I was "like you."
Why should I tell you about my personal life? And for that matter -- how would you know if I was telling the truth in the first place??
I told you exactly what you needed to know about me: I came on this site to "intellectually box" with other people.
Except - not. None of you people know how to "box" you know how to gang up on a person and attempt to beat them senseless, but not respectfully 'spar' in a way that equips, that trains, that helps a person grow intellectually.
That's what I said I wanted to do on this site. Obviously, I came to the wrong place.
-
Ah, there's the rub!! I didn't do what you WANTED me to do. You wanted me to tell you all about my personal life -- as if somehow that was "proof" I was "like you."
Why should I tell you about my personal life? And for that matter -- how would you know if I was telling the truth in the first place??
I told you exactly what you needed to know about me: I came on this site to "intellectually box" with other people.
Except - not. None of you people know how to "box" you know how to gang up on a person and attempt to beat them senseless, but not respectfully 'spar' in a way that equips, that trains, that helps a person grow intellectually.
That's what I said I wanted to do on this site. Obviously, I came to the wrong place.
If that's what you wanted, why not make it clear in AN INTRODUCTION as you were asked. Nobody put a gun to your head and asked for your personal details. Did you even read the forum before signing up?
Take your silly ass someplace else if we're not up to your "standards".
-
and here's the other shoe with which you can kick yourself: how do you know anything I said really happened?
Okay so you're a liar. If you are a woman. Don't come back until you make a sandwich.
-
You're not getting it. It's a simple question with a simple answer.
You want to be respected here. What have you said or done to earn the respect you want?
Hmm.. sensing...
Loop: See Branch
Branch: See Jump
Jump: See Loop
On any other board this obnoxious, ill-informed ignoramus would have not made it past 3 posts.
-
Ah, there's the rub!! I didn't do what you WANTED me to do. You wanted me to tell you all about my personal life -- as if somehow that was "proof" I was "like you."
Why should I tell you about my personal life? And for that matter -- how would you know if I was telling the truth in the first place??
I told you exactly what you needed to know about me: I came on this site to "intellectually box" with other people.
Except - not. None of you people know how to "box" you know how to gang up on a person and attempt to beat them senseless, but not respectfully 'spar' in a way that equips, that trains, that helps a person grow intellectually.
That's what I said I wanted to do on this site. Obviously, I came to the wrong place.
You don't want to "box" you want to kick in the nuts and then accept some sort of congratulations (we can assume it is the DUmp) for "showing them" for how being obnoxious, insulting, vapid, factually incorrect creates some sort of street cred.
Like the "knockout game" only with a Nerf bat and points awarded by yourself to yourself for people glancing in your direction.
-
Ah, there's the rub!! I didn't do what you WANTED me to do. You wanted me to tell you all about my personal life -- as if somehow that was "proof" I was "like you."
Why should I tell you about my personal life? And for that matter -- how would you know if I was telling the truth in the first place??
I told you exactly what you needed to know about me: I came on this site to "intellectually box" with other people.
Except - not. None of you people know how to "box" you know how to gang up on a person and attempt to beat them senseless, but not respectfully 'spar' in a way that equips, that trains, that helps a person grow intellectually.
That's what I said I wanted to do on this site. Obviously, I came to the wrong place.
Who you calling "you people" ?
By the by, this thread shot to 4 pages quickly, but this time it didn't get away from me...heh heh heh heh !
-
Ah, there's the rub!! I didn't do what you WANTED me to do. You wanted me to tell you all about my personal life -- as if somehow that was "proof" I was "like you."
Why should I tell you about my personal life? And for that matter -- how would you know if I was telling the truth in the first place??
I told you exactly what you needed to know about me: I came on this site to "intellectually box" with other people.
Except - not. None of you people know how to "box" you know how to gang up on a person and attempt to beat them senseless, but not respectfully 'spar' in a way that equips, that trains, that helps a person grow intellectually.
That's what I said I wanted to do on this site. Obviously, I came to the wrong place.
Please allow me to be perfectly clear with you. We don't care about, nor do we want to know about your personal life. Pinky swear.
-
Let's recap how we got to this place. Chris posts an article about a lawsuit from a pompous putz nobel prize winning scientist against a columnist. He adds commentary that this may be worth watching. A new poster swoops in to do... I don't know exactly what, other than pissing people off with his/her own pompous ramblings that because the article is poorly written then shame on Chris for daring to not only post it, but add commentary to it - yeah, I think that sums it up. This poster attacks, attacks and then attacks again and is now whining about being ganged up on.
Some folks need parental supervision when using the internet. Check the "doesn't play well with others" box on the newbie review card please.
-
Ah, there's the rub!! I didn't do what you WANTED me to do. You wanted me to tell you all about my personal life -- as if somehow that was "proof" I was "like you."
Why should I tell you about my personal life? And for that matter -- how would you know if I was telling the truth in the first place??
I told you exactly what you needed to know about me: I came on this site to "intellectually box" with other people.
Except - not. None of you people know how to "box" you know how to gang up on a person and attempt to beat them senseless, but not respectfully 'spar' in a way that equips, that trains, that helps a person grow intellectually.
That's what I said I wanted to do on this site. Obviously, I came to the wrong place.
You didn't ask us to play along with you; you assumed we would play along. You didn't get what you want, and now your butt hurts.
Guess what: you don't get to call the tune, toots. Do you go to Burger King and demand pizza?
Now shut the **** up and get started on those sammiches. Make mine a double bacon BLT and cheddar cheese, on toasted sourdough bread with mayo.
-
"charming"?? you mean like the people I've encountered on this site?? Like you?
Honey, you don't know charming until you start making those sammiches. You're late and I'm hungry. I think Big Dog is hungry too, so WTF are you waiting for?
Remember - no mustard for me.
-
I'll take an LGBLT, hold the lesbian.
-
And for that matter -- how would you know if I was telling the truth in the first place??
I'll call bullshit. I don't buy your alleged 140 IQ. You enjoy throwing that number in our faces way to much for someone who is really that smart.
I told you exactly what you needed to know about me: I came on this site to "intellectually box" with other people.
Then let's go. I'm you're Huckleberry.
Except - not. None of you people know how to "box" you know how to gang up on a person and attempt to beat them senseless, but not respectfully 'spar' in a way that equips, that trains, that helps a person grow intellectually.
My apologies for jumping into this late. I've been at school in the states and thesis my first day to have free time to catch up on what's been happening here.
Ready any time you are.
That's what I said I wanted to do on this site. Obviously, I came to the wrong place.
Nope you're in the right place. C'mon...impress me...if you can...with this alleged superior intellect.
-
Did you see the 'mental harness' already embedded in the article YOU posted? There are two that I see, out of the gate. Can you find it, now that you know to look for it?
You see doubts about the hoax of Global Warming as a "mental harness" designed to convince people Global Warming is a sham.
I say the opposite. The untold number of scare stories written and movies produced and shows aired on cable predicting the end of the world as we know it unless we return to a 19th century lifestyle is the real mental harness placed upon people.
And it's reinforced by "experts" who shout down and belittle anyone who disagrees with their theory that man is causing global warming and that a critical key to the production of oxygen and plant life...CO2 need to be eliminated.
THAt is the real mental harness as you say that is being placed on people.
-
Well, then you were looking at one thing, and I was looking at something completely different -- kind of like blind people trying to describe an elephant when they each have only one section
So, could you please elucidate your point of view?
That's because you're implementing a technique called deflection. It's pretty common with Libs. And it's a tactic employed when you want to distract from the original topic because you know there's no hope in defending it.
-
So Pienfold, how do you feel about Ron Paul?
-
So Pienfold, how do you feel about Ron Paul?
:popcorn: