The No Fly Fraud, The Donald and the Death of Civil Liberties

In this corner, we present the Democratic Party. Fresh off of Obama’s lackluster Oval Office speech, they are pushing to ban people on the federal no-fly list from buying guns. Never mind that the list is arbitrary and secretive. Never mind that it’s difficult to find out why you’re on the list and almost impossible to get off of it. Never mind that there are several hundred thousand people on the list, including the odd PhD Candidate and the occasional 4-year old. Never mind that this would deprive people of a basic civil liberty without due process. Never mind that terrorists will simply get their guns illegally. There’s an election coming up. Time to sow some panic!

And in this corner, we have the Republican frontrunner. Fresh off making false claims that he saw video of thousands of American Muslims celebrating 9/11, calling for Muslims to be registered and saying that some mosques should be closed, today he said that we should just stop letting Muslims come into the country. He clarified later that this would include US citizens currently abroad although he didn’t clarify if this meant military personnel. In support of this, he cited a bunch of unscientific online polls from anti-Islamic groups. Never mind that we’ve had a total of 40 people killed on American soil by anything remotely Islamic in the last five years (against five million American Muslims and 70,000 total murders in that time). Never mind that it would be unconstitutional. Never mind that there would be no practical way to do it without forcing everyone to declare their religion to the government. Never mind that his campaign is drifting further and further into something that can only be called fascism. There’s panic to sow!

So one party wants to take away civil liberties based on secret lists. The other wants to bar people from the country based on their religion.

And people wonder why I vote libertarian.

Comments are closed.

  1. repmom

    Glad to see your post, Hal.

    No fly list – ridiculous if it includes 4 year olds, but no surprise Obama focused on it in his constant effort to take our guns away, never passing up a tragedy to push this agenda.

    Trump – I don’t understand his popularity with Republicans, but clearly he does not represent me or any conservatives I know. We all find him disgusting and an embarrassment. But he does not turn us against our party. There are plenty of others to support.

    Just because CM says the GOP is too far gone doesnt make it so. How anyone can support Obama and anything he, or Hillary Clinton, stand for is beyond my imagination.

    Thumb up 0

  2. richtaylor365

    The GOP is so far gone

    Given your stance on free speech, you have zero credibility on any comment regarding posts on  civil liberties. Even Loretta Lynch saw the error of her ways and backtracked on the stupid.

    And people wonder why I vote libertarian.

    The only thing they wonder at is how you consider yourself fair and balanced when you present Donald Trump as “a party”.

    One side you have the gun grabbers, the enemies of both the First and Second Amendment and on the other you have one man, Trump, who does not speak for anyone but Trump. You have Lynch, who wants to prosecute folks for free speech, you have Omalley (and the NY Times) who wants an executive order to confiscate all guns in the hands of private citizens, and you have Clinton who  wants a government grab of private assets by making tax inversions illegal.

    And on the other side you have one man, a private citizen powerless to do anything, a guy who prides himself on going against the grain. You tell me, which side should we fear the most? And btw, have you seen the latest Iowa poll? But something tells me you were voting libertarian way before you saw Trump hiding under your bed.

    Never mind that we’ve had a total of 40 people killed on American soil 

    Never mind that there are active investigations on radical jihadists in all fifty states and even the FBI says they are stretched too thin and can’t keep track of them all. If 40 dead is too small of a figure, what number works for you? We are now seeing European nations, one after another, falling in line, deciding enough is enough and radically changing their immigration policies when it comes to Muslims. Did you see that France is now closing Mosques. Until these refugees can be properly vetted, something the FBI says they can’t do, a pause, a rethinking of our immigration policy is wise, prudent, and necessary for our own safety.

     

     

     

    Thumb up 3

  3. RonK

    always love reading this kinda of posts, everyone flaying away at some, have to hit that pesky fly, everyone so anchored in their personal believes they can’t see the forest through the trees.  Ask yourselves something, why isn’t  being on the no fly list flag anyway when you purchase a gun, would think that would be one of the first things they would check.  they keep saying they got them legally but how.

    what dingbat congress critter from California said their control work, got a news flash for you it didn’t, in the space of what 4 minutes 31 casualties occurred(14 dead 17 wounded), what about Ft Hood, 18 casualties(7 dead 13 wounded)  in a gun free area.  four minutes think about that, what if they used IED what would the causalities have been, since I brought up IED, what makes anyone think they were going to have a second attack, what it others were going to use them.

    Thumb up 0

  4. Hal_10000 *

    Never mind that there are active investigations on radical jihadists in all fifty states and even the FBI says they are stretched too thin and can’t keep track of them all. If 40 dead is too small of a figure, what number works for you?

    The danger is real. It is not existential. And it does not warrant burning down the Constitution.

    Thumb up 0

  5. richtaylor365

    So one party wants to take away civil liberties based on secret lists. The other wants to bar people from the country based on their religion.

    More evidence today to invalidate this ridiculous comparison. The entire Democratic party has lined up behind their leaders on these issues, but Trump stands by himself.

     And it does not warrant burning down the Constitution.

    Tell that to those that have the matches in their hands and have already shown a history of doing just that.

    Thumb up 1

  6. CM

    Although “the poll was conducted almost entirely before Trump issued a policy statement calling for a temporary ban on allowing Muslims who are not U.S. citizens to enter the country“. We’ll have to see if anything changes.

    Thumb up 0

  7. richtaylor365

    He has a huge number of regular Republicans standing with him.

    Did you not see my link that reported all the other candidates repudiating Trump on this?

    Trump is not a stupid man, no doubt he understands what he is proposing is unconstitutional and if you want to accuse him of pandering or playing on the emotions of the times, fine, but Carter tried the same thing during the hostage crisis, a time where we were not at war and suffered far fewer casualties then present.

    Given what we have witnessed in Europe, what Obama wants to do here, and the clear danger of both,  if Trump wants to remind us of this folly and the need to step back and re-assess the current immigration stance wrt Syrian refugees, I applaud him for that. Protect the homeland first and foremost, that is my (and apparently his) first priority.

    Thumb up 0

  8. JimK

    Trump is being Trump. By which I mean he said something that is three times more strong than he believes so that when you walk him back, he ends up in the place he wanted to begin with and you feel like you got something out of him. Read The Art of the Deal if you want to understand why he says and does anything. He’s always negotiating, in every aspect of his life.

    That said, he’s a fucking cancer to politics. But I would be lying if I said I didn’t get why he’s getting traction. Many people are tired of the same old shit on both sides of the aisle.

    Thumb up 1

  9. Section8

    “TRUMP: We put out a statement today. It’s impossible to watch this gross incompetence that I watched last night. And we put out a statement a little while ago and these people (the media) went crazy… Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on!

    link

    Hal, you used a half quote to base your response, and while that half quote makes a good base for a narrative, it also makes for a bad half  truth. Fact is and what Trump was pointing out is that we have leadership that is clueless. One that claims ISIS is contained, when everyone knew they were not. We’re told our screening process is great, but it looks like this latest bunch slipped right through the cracks, and the call is to open the door even more. Of course nothing is perfect and it would be impossible to do a perfect job in screening regardless, but the reality is this administration along with the GOP establishment is clueless and there’s no point in waiting around for 50 more of these events before we admit to it. So are Trump’s comments a little extreme? Sure, but not all that out of line given the environment our inept and arrogant government has created over the years on a multitude of issues. The call was to ban until we can be sure the GOVERNMENT LEADERSHIP has its shit together. It was NOT about no Muslims ever. Nice leftist spin though to push the GOP=Hitler bandwagon in between posts about how you’re against these kinds of spins. I wouldn’t expect anything less.

    “Trump – I don’t understand his popularity with Republicans, but clearly he does not represent me or any conservatives I know”

    Answer is pretty simple Repmom. In short, the GOP establishment, just like the leftist establishment is arrogant, clueless, and more interested in preservation of power than accomplishing anything. They kick the can down the road, campaign on one platform and rule under another, and turn on their own voters who say knock it off and fight for something. All they do is fight their own voter base, and Trump is a way of saying F-you to this. Between the left and their media wing shaming everyone into silence, and the GOP going right along with it, the pendulum has swung way out to absurdity. All that Trump did was give it a nudge, and in doing so he’s going to be given a wide berth because his one redeeming quality is that he was one of a few with balls (Cruz tried) to even dare give the pendulum a nudge. That is a big quality given the environment that has been created not just by the left, but also the GOP.

    The left, media, GOP establishment and Hals of the world want to marginalize many issues such as the out of control illegal immigration problem, but the problem isn’t just simply “brown people” which is the favorite way of shutting down any debate. Reagan agreed to amnesty with the understanding that something would be done to stop illegal immigration from that point forward. In true fashion, the power brokers got what they wanted and delivered nothing in return. You even had California voters trying to stop handouts to illegal immigrants only a few years ago and were ignored. Now any talk of this is considered Nazism by the power brokers. You have people like Bush and Kasich who did nothing after the first round of amnesty to live up to their agreement saying, well let’s let this latest batch in, and then we’ll do something this time, we promise. Well most people are wisely laughing that off  knowing full well what that means is that 20 years from now we’ll be talking about amnesty for 30 million more illegals, and then they’ll do something, they’ll promise. Of course there’s more policies than immigration this is just one example, but the pattern of lies about doing anything after they get what they want first is basically the same. People are backing Trump as a big f-you to this pattern, and it’s the pattern that is key here. It’s not because he’s wonderful. He may end up following the same pattern, but we know that pattern is a guarantee with most of the other knuckleheads in the running. In fact, no matter how bad he may be, people are basically saying this ongoing pattern we have now is even worse, and the power brokers are STILL too clueless to figure it out because they live in a bubble and they need to go. Like it or not, Trump is the popular pin to pop that bubble because right now he’s the only pin, although I’d like to see Cruz actually get the nod because he did try and is trying, but was more restrained by the establishment at the time. The only way Trump will get hit hard is if someone can prove he’ll follow the same pattern as the power brokers. Until then he has lots of room to roam due to the ineptness and arrogance that the “respectable” power brokers have provided.

    Thumb up 1

  10. CM

    “The more time that passes, and especially if he maintains his lead in the polls and heaven forbid becomes our Party’s presidential nominee, there will be no way to effectively separate Trump’s irresponsible demagoguery from the brand and identity of the GOP as a whole. Donald Trump will become the face of the Republican Party,” said Ryan Call, the former Colorado GOP chairman who made minority outreach a top priority.
    “If Donald Trump becomes our Party’s nominee for President, not only will have a devastating effect on down-ticket races for Congress and the state legislature throughout the country in 2016, it will taint the brand, party platform and perception of the GOP among Hispanics, young people, women, and other religious and ethnic minorities for years to come”

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/donald-trump-gop-reaction-nomination-pledge-216556#ixzz3toIlAHDm

    So basically the GOP would have taken those findings and recommendations from 2012 and done the exact opposite, to the nth degree.

    Thumb up 1

  11. trade_pro

    Hmmm….Why does Trump have traction?

    Senate 53% Republican

    House 56.7% Republican

    We gave them the power and they have done nothing with it.  I would have rather lost the Senate and the House to the Dems then have the Republicans do nothing but kiss the King’s ass. I haven’t seen this much genuflecting since I was an altar boy.

    I think, if Trump doesn’t get the nomination, the GOP will not learn from their mistakes but instead let out a big, “Whew, that was close.”

    If he does get the nomination, maybe, just maybe, he can change the landscape of politics.  Maybe for the worse, maybe for the better.  But currently, despite what most of the Republicans think here, they have no representation.  How much worse can it get than that?

     

    Thumb up 1

  12. grady

    Lotsa articles on this subject today.  Looks like restricting muslims entry to the US is legal.  Carter was the last president to do it (no Iranians during the hostage crisis).  Citizenship vs religion isn’t considered a dealbreaker.

    Trump says no Muslims (thanks Section8 for letting everyone know about the temporary part of that).  Obama says lets bring in ?00,000 “Syrian refugees”.  Which one is more scary?  Even if they are only women (San Bernardino) and children (Boston marathon bombing), the US has a reason to be concerned.  For those who can’t see why people would relate more to Trump, I probably can’t explain it to you.

    Scott Adams had an interesting thought experiment.  How many American deaths are you willing to accept over the next 10 years to maintain religious freedom?  His number was 1,000.  What is yours?

    Thumb up 1

  13. AlexInCT

    Cruz is just another Republican anti-science loon.

    As opposed to the idiots on the left that still peddle the AGW cult as something scientific because of consensus? Heh…

     

    Thumb up 2

  14. CM

    You mean because there is a very strong consensus among scientists and almost complete agreement among climate scientists, as opposed to…..hilariously lame ‘arguments’ like ‘1998’? It’s no wonder morons like that get elected though, with people like you around.

    Thumb up 0

  15. Section8

    CM if this concerns you so much, maybe press your leaders to come up with a clean and cheap fuel alternative which we’ll gladly buy regardless of who is our president. Our country doesn’t have to solve all your worries for you. You could also do other things as well. You have the geography to utilize hydropower for electricity, and not all areas do. Perhaps lobby to have a tax levied against your country to help other areas pay the expense of cleaner alternatives who aren’t geography “lottery winners”, and so “privileged”. You like those kind of taxes, so hop on it sport and save the planet.

    Thumb up 0

  16. AlexInCT

    You mean because there is a very strong consensus among scientists

    Only someone that doesn’t understand science, the scientific process, and that real science is never defined by consensus but by facts, logic, and the ability to stand up to scrutiny, no matter how brutal, would make this idiotic statement and think it gives them credence or gravitas while all it does is expose their ignorance.

    and almost complete agreement among climate scientists

    So now we are flat out fucking lying or playing to the ignorance of people that have no clue. I guess I should start by asking WTF you think a “climate scientist” is. Because real scientists and engineers – the ones that are in the fields of physics, math, and actually have to deal with the real world, can’t fake their data, models, or theorems, and make predictions that never pan out only to then move the goal posts hoping nobody catches on, without being laughed out of the scientific community – seem to be very devided on the subject, with most of them pointing out that the system is so poorly understood that any of these doomsday claims made by the cultsts are absolutely ludicrous if not outright bullshit.

    BTW, people paid by a political machine with and agenda to scare citizens into allowing them to rob us of our freedoms and money to keep perpetrating this greatest lie on humanity, are far, far, worse than those evil people you claim should not be paid attention to because they get funded by big oil, or whatever. Idiots like you are counting on the fact the common man is too busy or stupid to see the cultish behavior by you marxist watermelons, but lucky for people like me too many are wizening up to the greatest lie of the century.

    It’s no wonder morons like that get elected though, with people like you around.

    Priceless. After a bamboozled American people elected and reelected the biggest moron ever to the WH – based on a well-orchestrated campaign of obfuscation, abuses of power, downright criminal activity to deny the opposition its ability to counter the campaign of lies and abuses – and are now watching these people destroy the once most prosperous and uniquely capable nation in the history of this planet, in a way that has made Jimmy Carter look good, you make an idiotic statement like this one. And here you are telling us we should ignore everyone else and pick the embodyment of someone that would fllow right in the footsteps of the worst president ever. Keep it up bud. You are the best advertisement for the idiocy of the collectivist movement.

    Thumb up 2

  17. richtaylor365

    Priceless

    Yeah, I got a chuckle out of that as well.

    CM, I just gave Alex a thumbs up because everything he said is right. As a climate skeptic (not denier) I keep try to keep an open mind and weigh the evidence as it comes, but nothing is settled. And for you to go to “consensus” is laughable. Not too long ago there existed a consensus within the scientific community that the earth was flat and that the sun rotated around the earth. We also saw that same consensus predicting the coming ice age.  And none of these folks had the hidden (OK, with you guys it’s right there on your sleeve) agenda of monetary or political gain to cloud their judgement.

    Thumb up 1

  18. AlexInCT

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_CLIMATE_COUNTDOWN_FUNNY_MONEY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-12-11-08-29-24

    LE BOURGET, France (AP) — There’s a lot of money in climate financing. Six years ago, rich nations pledged that by 2020 they would provide $100 billion a year in aid, loans and private money to help poorer nations cope with climate change and wean themselves off fossil fuels. This week in Paris, they’re pledging even more, and discussing whether developing nations like China need to pony up, too.

    But what exactly are they paying for? In the wild west of climate finance, the funding includes things like a “love movie festival,” research on elephant sounds and even new coal plants.

     

    When it comes to climate money, expert after expert says, don’t believe most figures.

     

    No one is saying money is being misspent, but they are saying it is being misreported, making it sound bigger than it really is.

    Yeah sure, they are only misreporting this massive scam..

    Of course, nothing will ever satisfy to shake your faith in AGW CM, because a marxist like you will never let facts, logic, or common sense get in the way of your dogma. And yet, you pretend like I am the dumb one. As I already said: fucking priceless!

    Thumb up 0

  19. richtaylor365

    Just the usual unfounded accusations of conspiracy and fraud then. And more misrepresentation.
    It doesn’t get dumber than that.

     

    Just the usual ignore everything, dodge, then lamely claim you are being misrepresented.

    It doesn’t get any dumber than that.

     

     

    Thumb up 0

  20. CM

    You’re mistaken, it’s about blind political ideology, intellectual dishonesty, and a complete lack of personal standards. Alex and Rich clearly have no interest in the actual science. Don’t you love how it’s all about evidence, except for the fact that none is needed to dismiss the entire thing as a massive communist conspiracy? And somehow these people are puzzled why they’re just mocked now, and have no seat at the table.

    Thumb up 0

  21. richtaylor365

    it’s about blind political ideology, intellectual dishonesty, and a complete lack of personal standards

    Exactly correct and I really wish you guys would knock it off.

     Alex and Rich clearly have no interest in the actual science.

    If this is clear to you then you really are dumber than a box of rocks. I specifically say that I keep an open mind and am willing to be persuaded but so far the evidence is not all that convincing, but keep trying, and you somehow unplug your brain and interpret that honest claim as a refusal to look at the evidence. Quit being a troll and debate honestly, if you even have it in you.

     And somehow these people are puzzled why they’re just mocked now

    Oh please, you guys are so predictable and simple there is no puzzlement, confusion or ambiguity, except maybe how seemingly thinking people can be so easily fooled with little more than an offer to sit with the cool kids.

     and have no seat at the table.

    Thanks, but I will avoid the clown table, you guys are just too religious for me.

     

     

    Thumb up 0

  22. richtaylor365

    For all your accusations thrown around about binary this and binary that, is there anyone more binary than you and your radical AGW adherents? Don’t think, don’t question, just accept the party line, all of it hook, line and sinker, and for those that don’t accept ALL of it, they are ostracized, ridiculed, and branded as anti science. You guys are as bad as those Quran followers who condemn non believers as sub human, just as radical, just as intolerant and just as myopic.

     

    Thumb up 1

  23. CM

    Only someone that doesn’t understand science, the scientific process, and that real science is never defined by consensus but by facts, logic, and the ability to stand up to scrutiny, no matter how brutal, would make this idiotic statement and think it gives them credence or gravitas while all it does is expose their ignorance.

    But there IS a strong consensus among scientists who study the climate. That’s inarguable. Your response is a complete non-sequitur.

    I guess I should start by asking WTF you think a “climate scientist” is. 

    A scientist who’s work wholly or mostly involves studying climate.

    Because real scientists and engineers – the ones that are in the fields of physics, math, and actually have to deal with the real world, can’t fake their data, models, or theorems, and make predictions that never pan out only to then move the goal posts hoping nobody catches on, without being laughed out of the scientific community – seem to be very devided on the subject, with most of them pointing out that the system is so poorly understood that any of these doomsday claims made by the cultsts are absolutely ludicrous if not outright bullshit.

    There is a whole lot to unpack there. First you’ll have to identify all those who are doing what you accuse them of doing and show evidence of it. And then demonstrate how the remaining are actually genuinely divided (i.e. it’s not just a handful amongst thousands). But of course you won’t do either, even though you’re apparently all about ‘evidence’. It’s easy to make claims when you never feel the need to justify them.

    BTW, people paid by a political machine with and agenda to scare citizens into allowing them to rob us of our freedoms and money to keep perpetrating this greatest lie on humanity,

    Evidence? This would require corruption and fraud (and conspiracy) of which the world has never seen. You’re inherently accusing thousands of scientists of being corrupt. How do you get to do that without evidence? Unless you have no personal standards….

    are far, far, worse than those evil people you claim should not be paid attention to because they get funded by big oil, or whatever.

    Where did I claim that? Put up some evidence to support your claims.

    Idiots like you are counting on the fact the common man is too busy or stupid to see the cultish behavior by you marxist watermelons, but lucky for people like me too many are wizening up to the greatest lie of the century.

    My behaviour? I’m not the one carrying out the science Alex. I’m merely reading about it – the thousands of overlapping strands which paint an overall picture. You appear to be living on an entirely different planet.

    And here you are telling us we should ignore everyone else and pick the embodyment of someone that would fllow right in the footsteps of the worst president ever. 

    I never told you any such thing.

    You are the best advertisement for the idiocy of the collectivist movement.

    You are the worst advertisement for anything conservative. Some on the right work hard to try and pull it all together and explain their beliefs in a reasonable way using logic and reason, and there you are permanently flushing it all down the toilet and doing the exact opposite.

    CM, I just gave Alex a thumbs up because everything he said is right.

    I’m sorry but I struggle to see how you can have “an open mind” if at the same time you agree with everything Alex said. It goes beyond that though, you’re aligned yourself with non-sequiturs, whack-job conspiracy theories, a mass of unfounded accusations against professionals that neither of you even know, and obvious lies.  You can’t sign up to that shit (a denier’s charter) and then claim you’re ‘open’. How does that work? If you start seeing something that’s convincing, does the conspiracy just all of a sudden disappear? Or was it never one in the first place?

    As a climate skeptic (not denier) I keep try to keep an open mind and weigh the evidence as it comes, but nothing is settled.

    “Nothing is settled” is such a typical cop-out statement. We’re talking likelihoods and probabilities, not ‘proof’ (this is science not math). If you take the approach that nothing should ever happen until everything is 100% proven then we’d need to wind back all that scientific progress. We wouldn’t even be flying in planes.

    And you’ve signed up to what is essentially a ‘denier’s charter’ there, so you can’t have it both ways.

    And for you to go to “consensus” is laughable

    That you and Alex have instantly gone for the same old obvious misrepresentation about ‘consensus’ on this is so predictable. Why are you being so unbelievably lazy?

    Not too long ago there existed a consensus within the scientific community that the earth was flat and that the sun rotated around the earth.

    Which scientific community was this? Was their consensus based on basic but firm scientific principles, understanding of what has historically taken place, and thousands upon thousands of overlapping pieces of peer-reviewed scientific research. No. Your analogy is just so patently ridiculous that you should be embarrassed to even attempt it.

    We also saw that same consensus predicting the coming ice age. 

    Same again. What ice age? Which scientific community was that? What were they basing it on?

    And none of these folks had the hidden (OK, with you guys it’s right there on your sleeve) agenda of monetary or political gain to cloud their judgement.

    Ah right, but you’re “open”, right….

    How can you be “open” if it’s all so obviously corrupt (based on evidence that you cannot share with us, but which must be compelling because you’re all about the evidence)?

    Yeah sure, they are only misreporting this massive scam..

    That you are drawing our attention to the fact that money might be inappropriately allocated further proves my point that you’re about the political ideology, not the science. The science you accept must align to the political ideology, because that comes first.

    Of course, nothing will ever satisfy to shake your faith in AGW CM

    I don’t require faith, I’m just following what the science is telling all of us. I’m sorry that you hate the science so much that you have to keep telling a story about faith which makes no logical sense. It takes deep deep faith to keep believing in grand conspiracy and that virtually all climate scientists are corrupt etc etc. You and Rich must be in a constant state of cognitive dissonance, which cannot be pleasant.

    because a marxist like you 

    Except I’m not a marxist. There are plenty of marxists who accept hte science. Is Hal a marxist then?

    will never let facts, logic, or common sense get in the way of your dogma

    I have facts, logic, common sense, AND a considerable amount of scientific evidence. You have……accusations, lies, misrepresentations, and grand conspiracy based on nothing.

    And yet, you pretend like I am the dumb one. As I already said: fucking priceless!

    I don’t pretend – it’s here in black and white for all to see. As Nobody/Iconoclast would say; I’m simply observing.

    Just the usual ignore everything, dodge, then lamely claim you are being misrepresented.

    What did I ‘ignore’ that was worthy of a response? What did I ‘dodge’ because it would have presumably been uncomfortable to discuss? The state of the science was being misrepresented as much as I was.

    Exactly correct and I really wish you guys would knock it off.

    That would make sense if you could accept what the science tells us. But you don’t, and you buy into the whole ‘communists’ and conspiracy nonsense. So it doesn’t make sense at all.

    If this is clear to you then you really are dumber than a box of rocks. I specifically say that I keep an open mind and am willing to be persuaded but so far the evidence is not all that convincing, but keep trying, and you somehow unplug your brain and interpret that honest claim as a refusal to look at the evidence.

    You’re signed up to Alex’s diatribe which is essentially a denier’s mantra.

    Quit being a troll and debate honestly, if you even have it in you.

    Right back at you Rich (I did it for years at Moorewatch, even trying hard with those who refused to). You can’t sign up to Alex’s diatribe (full of personal and general accusations and abuse) and yet pretend to be someone who wants to debate honestly. Nor can you claim to be ‘open’ when you are signing up to these sorts of accusations and conspiracies. Would have have expected people (who didn’t know you personally) to have genuinely assumed that you were a corrupt cop, and so long as they ‘kept an open mind’ (that you might not be), that was cool? I highly doubt it. So then how is it ok for you to do the same?

    to sit with the cool kids.

    There we go, further misrepresentation. I have accepted what the science is telling me because I just want to be with the cool kids. How you expect to have any genuine credibility, or be part of any rational discussion, when you make that sort of statement is bizarre.

    Thanks, but I will avoid the clown table, you guys are just too religious for me.

    Again, it doesn’t make sense that way. It does make sense the other way though.

    For all your accusations thrown around about binary this and binary that, is there anyone more binary than you and your radical AGW adherents?

    A basic acceptance of what the science is telling us is in no way binary. I can’t speak for others (why do you suggest that I can?).

    Don’t think, don’t question, just accept the party line, all of it hook, line and sinker,

    Except being on the ‘science side’ means doing the exact opposite. The scientists are the genuine natural skeptics. That what science is. And I’ve spent probably over a thousand hours over the years reading the main denier/skeptic arguments in detail and then looking at the responses across a number of sources. But hey it’s much easier to just throw around baseless allegations and question the professionalism of people you don’t know though, right. Well, that is if you just don’t give a shit and have no personal standards. Maybe you do offline, and it’s easier to not bother online, I don’t know.

    and for those that don’t accept ALL of it, they are ostracized, ridiculed, and branded as anti science

    If you sign up to Alex’s diatribe, you can’t really accept any of it. So let’s stop pretending huh Rich. I’d only ‘brand’ people as idiots or ridicule them if they say or do something idiotic. Like Cruz.

    You guys are as bad as those Quran followers who condemn non believers as sub human, just as radical, just as intolerant and just as myopic.

    Again, the religious comparison only works in the opposite direction. You guys are the ones just howling at the moon.

     

     

    Thumb up 2

  24. CM

    Best description of the circus that went on in Paris:

    http://cfif.org/v/index.php/commentary/44-energy-and-environment/2887-climate-talks-reveal-progressivisms-true-hypocrisy

    ‘Center For Individual Freedom’. Nice. That piece doesn’t appear to have a shred of objectivity (e.g. climate alarmists are saying that 0.1 degree warming in the next decade is the biggest crisis facing mankind – um no they’re not). Again, it’s no wonder that you believe what you do if this is representative of the shit you read. You’re seemingly addicted to misinformation and misrepresentation.

    You just KEEP ON proving my point Alex.

    Thumb up 0

  25. AlexInCT

    ‘Center For Individual Freedom’. Nice.

    At this point I find them far more credible than the UN and anything tied to that freak show.

    That piece doesn’t appear to have a shred of objectivity (e.g. climate alarmists are saying that 0.1 degree warming in the next decade is the biggest crisis facing mankind

    Pull your head out of your ass you fucking moron. The priests and acolytes of watermelon cult have made ex-fucking-actly that argument, and not once but repeatedly, not just in words, but in action. If they put but a fraction of the effort they are putting in selling people this giant shit sandwich that is based on pure nonsense and false science, they would have these Islamic scumbags on the run.

     Again, it’s no wonder that you believe what you do

    Finally something we agree upon. As someone with an engineering and technical/scientific background, one that has worked out in the real world no less, I take the bastardization of the scientific process by a bunch of politically motivated hacks very seriously. I despise the evil collectivist movement and its attempt to manufacture a crisis to fuck people like me that value their freedoms and their pursuit of happiness. over You on the other hand are driven by your faith in the collectivist ideology and are ready to gobble any cock the AGW priesthood presents you with as long as it serves that evil ideology.

    if this is representative of the shit you read.

    Like I said: I would take what a no good bum off the street has to say about AGW more seriously than I would take anything by the cultists and their agents. At least the bum isn’t pretending that he has any legitimate ground to stand on by claiming “scientific consensus” like the bunch of hacks that produce models that never work and manipulate their data and measurements to suit the end results they want. Fuck the lot of you.

    You just KEEP ON proving my point Alex.

    If your point is that you are an ideological collectivist moron with no shred of decency and lacking in mental capacity, then yes, I do CM.

    Thumb up 0

  26. blameme

    Again, you guys are being trolled to the max. This was a post has turned into a crap stream of climate change, again, when the original post had nothing to do with it.

    Perhaps we should just have a running climate change post pinned at the top so that the usual folks can use that thread to hammer on each other instead of taking over unrelated threads.

    Apparently, not only is climate change killing all of us slowly, it’s killing this blog quickly.

    Thumb up 1

  27. blameme

    This is what you call engagement? Talking off topic, screaming the same points at each over and over again and no one changing their mind? You and I have very different ideas about engaging means.

    And yes, these exact types of interactions are one of the main reasons people have left this blog.

    Thumb up 1

  28. CM

    I know what you mean but my guess is that more would leave (or not bother joining) because of boredom because yet again there are zero comnents. Or because discussion is impossible because of obvious dishonesty.

    Thumb up 0

  29. blameme

    I never said anyone was making points. Actually, everyone makes points – they are just the same ones on this “engagement” as they have been for years.

    Thumb up 0

  30. Nobody

    John Kerry’s Surprising Comments on International Regulations and Climate Change

    The fact is that even if every American citizen biked to work, carpooled to school, used only solar panels to power their homes, if we each planted a dozen trees, if we somehow eliminated all of our domestic greenhouse gas emissions, guess what – that still wouldn’t be enough to offset the carbon pollution coming from the rest of the world.

    If all the industrial nations went down to zero emissions – remember what I just said, all the industrial emissions went down to zero emissions – it wouldn’t be enough, not when more than 65 percent of the world’s carbon pollution comes from the developing world.

    This is why I refuse to take AGW seriously, no matter what nonsense the AGW fascists toss out.  I don’t care what “The Science” allegedly says.  Even if everyone else on the planet buys into it, even if it makes me “look delusional/unhinged/out of touch/marginalized/whatever”, I just don’t care.  And I don’t care how much my apathy kills people like CM.  I really don’t.

    If this “problem” gets solved, it’ll be by some visionary creating new technology, not by asshat bureaucrats and politicians seeking to consolidate power.

    Thumb up 1

  31. CM

    I can see what you were trying to do there. Unfortunately though, that’s a satire site. Exaggeration is part of the whole shtick.

    But yeah, going back to actual reality, it doesn’t ‘kill me’ because it’s no surprise at all that you guys hold these views given the places you appear to get your ‘information’. I’m certainly constantly fascinated and intrigued as to why you’d want to keep misinforming yourself though. You’re bright enough to know what you’re doing.

    As someone with an engineering and technical/scientific background

    Alex, as a professional you should be even less prone to lazily accusing professionals of fraud and corruption without solid evidence.

    I don’t actually know the best way to address climate change. Nobody, you may well be right that we can “solve” it by ‘some visionary creating new technology’. I guess we we need to do now though is engage in risk management. There is certainly no guarantee that a visionary will do that, or that the visionary will be working in the private sector.

    Thumb up 0

  32. Nobody

    But yeah, going back to actual reality, it doesn’t ‘kill me’ because it’s no surprise at all that you guys hold these views given the places you appear to get your ‘information’. 

    Funny how you put “information” in quotes, like it’s somehow false.  The information I presented was John Kerry’s comments while attending the latest AGW Gala in Paris, and it was that information that was the basis of my commentary.

    Unless you can show that Kerry didn’t actually make those comments, you have no argument here.

     

    Thumb up 0

  33. CM

    Funny how you put “information” in quotes, like it’s somehow false.  

    Well a lot of it is. Patently. You don’t need to read much of the actual science to start realising that much of what you guys read is pure ideologically-driven misinformation.

    The information I presented was John Kerry’s comments while attending the latest AGW Gala in Paris, and it was that information that was the basis of my commentary.

    Sure, but the place you got it was The Heritage Foundation, one of the main denier places for deniers to get their misinformation. That doesn’t mean that 100% of what they have on their ‘Daily Signal’ site is incorrect. Especially when it’s a video of someone saying something. But obviously they’re not ever going to take kindly to 99% of what Gore has to say, because they are ideologically opposed to science that isn’t convenient.

    Unless you can show that Kerry didn’t actually make those comments, you have no argument here.

    Unless you can show that I was referring specifically to Kerry’s comments, you have no argument.

    Thumb up 0

  34. Nobody

    Unless you can show that I was referring specifically to Kerry’s comments, you have no argument.

    You made a reference to “kill me”, which tells me that you were responding to my post specifically, and I referenced Kerry in my post.  Whether I can “show” that “you were referring specifically to Kerry’s comments” is irrelevant.  You responded to my post and implied that my information was somehow suspect.  You even followed up with a stab at the source (Heritage Foundation) in your attempt to invalidate my information.

    But you probably already know all that and are just being obtuse, since you obviously have no argument.  Par for the course it seems.

    Thumb up 0

  35. CM

    The only references I made to “killing” in this thread was where I wrote”Yeah people engaging with other is killing this blog” way earlier, and when I wrote “it doesn’t ‘kill me’ because it’s no surprise at all that you guys hold these views given the places you appear to get your ‘information’.”. Neither of which are to with what Kerry said specifically, or your reaction to it. I didn’t even respond to your Kerry post at all (I don’t even really have a response – I’m not quite sure what you mean, he didn’t say anything remotely ‘surprising’ or controversial). But yes the source is an off-shoot of the Heritage Foundation, a major player in climate misinformation which leads directly to denialism.

    Thumb up 0