All Activity

I don't have "funny 9/11 beliefs". Just the unanswered questions about inexplicable events surrounding WTC 7. What did I say happened that so concerns you, eyeball? Unlike a left4rd, I didn't make declarative statements about "WHAT ABSOLUTELY HAPPENED BECAUSE SO AND SO SAID IT HAPPENED!!!! EVERYONE WHO DOESN'T BELIEVE WHAT THEY SAID ON CBC IS A RET4RDED RACIST!!!!", I just pointed out things that contradict the official narrative. You, on the other hand, made dozens of declarative statements about covid jabs and the origin of covid that were all wildly stupid, and now thoroughly debunked. You're still on the record as being stuck at "Safe, you won't get sick, and you don't have to worry about giving it to granny." You're so far out in left field that even Fauci feels sorry for you.

So… you did or did not understand the concept of published? No one said an unpublished study means the information inside is negated. The point is that anyone can write a paper. That's why peer review exists in the first place. It's a quality-control process where independent experts try to poke holes in the methodology, statistics, and conclusions before the broader scientific community accepts it. Published doesn't automatically mean true. Unpublished certainly doesn't automatically mean false. But you taking an unpublished manuscript, posting a fancy chart like you did, trying to show it proves vaccines broadly cause chronic disease is absurdity. Extraordinary claims deserve more than, "Here's a PDF."

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature - Astrophysics Data System We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991-2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming.

Thank you for finally seeing this point. Previously, you've been a rabid proponent of "consensus science", often citing some generic "the vast majority of scientists say......" Glad you're finally cluing in.

Less Israel, more talking about these freaking DSA clowns, that are destroying the western world with their disgusting and stupid regressive policies. "Willing children" - that's as deceptive and sick as the term "gender-affirming care".

Nope, but millions of you still know climate change isn't a crisis. How? Because the UN dialled back a couple of predictions? How's that worked out for them? That's right.

By getting involved in their war - giving them our muscle. Trump should've just kept quiet and stayed focused on here. Who was Iran attacking when we started bombing them? The point is, we should have stayed here and let Israel handle it. There is MORE than enough to do here.

I can't add to this. Very well done.

How is Trump kissing their ass? Trump had been holding them back, criticizing their over reach, had been not picking and making demands on their humanitarian aid efforts, threatening military supplies to leverage Israel to do what we want… We had a mutual interest in seeing Iran not obtain nuclear weapons and not threaten the gulf region with their terror proxies. Saying we have accomplished nothing as we systematically destroyed their navy, a crap ton of their military capabilities to the point we could effectively fly bombing runs at will across their country, burying all nuclear weapons production under rubble or destroying it… is simply absurd.

This is one of the best takedowns of Mark Carney I’ve seen. He’s not a businessman. He’s never run a company. He’s never met a payroll. He’s a lifelong bureaucrat who somehow convinced people he’s some kind of economic genius. The guy actually went on TV in Atlantic Canada and downplayed steel tariffs because “we don’t use that much steel.” That’s not just tone-deaf — that’s fundamental ignorance of how manufacturing, auto, and resource sectors actually work in this country. Carney keeps all the worst Trudeau-era policies in place — emissions caps, anti-oil and gas rules, the whole net-zero scam — but now he can personally override them whenever he wants. If those policies were good, why does he need an override button? He’s admitting they’re damaging Canada but refuses to scrap them. He’s concentrating more power in the PMO than ever, acting like the King of Canada while surrounding himself with the same failed Trudeau retreads. His own caucus is still pushing the climate nonsense that’s been proven to waste billions and make life more expensive for regular people. Meanwhile, oil and gas — our single biggest export earner — is still being deliberately held back. Provincial trade barriers are still choking the economy. And the same people who created this mess are still in charge, still pocketing money from the climate grift while average Canadians get squeezed. This government was a failure under Trudeau. Under Carney it’s just a more polished version of the same failure. Less government. Lower taxes. Cut the red tape. Develop our resources. Stop robbing the middle class to enrich insiders. That’s the only reset that actually works.

Okay, so not being officially peer reviewed does not negate the information in the document.

DSA takeover of this crappy party is almost complete.

Well, you believe it's Fauci, so...... In 1931, 100 scientists got together and wrote a paper on how Einstein was wrong. Ooopsy-doodle. Science is not decided by voting.

Do you ever go back to review your funny 9/11 beliefs and news sources? Do you think they contributed positively or negatively to your credibility and how would you know?

I did not ask you for a link. I informed you this was not published or peer reviewed. You claimed it was. I asked you to show where it was published. Do you not understand the concept of “published?” That means it has been placed in a scientific journal and was peer reviewed. Providing a link to where this was submitted to a Senate hearing is not “published” nor peer reviewed. Even is this were true, which it is not, it still doesn’t mean the rebuttal is wrong.

You know someone who screws up their thread title and never fixes it? Do you know what this picture from your cite depicts : It looks like a Xerox copy of a ballot APPLICATION

After all this time and with the level of science at hand, where is this individual, when will they emerge with the evidence that proves there's no crisis? Economically it would be like the 2nd coming of Christ in terms of saving us. And as always, there will be a Nobel...millions in cash...renamed high schools everywhere...Steven Tyler blushing at their mountain of panties. Is this saviour among us now, even as we speak?

I don't watch "CBC News", to find out if it's suddenly news, just like I don't eat rocks to figure out if they're suddenly food. Do you frequently eat rocks to find out if maybe they're food, Barqy? And the fact that I know why CBC 'News' doesn't qualify as actual "news" is what makes me an expert on the subject. I get A LOT of my news from FB. And a lot from Fox News. And then I verify it all before I walk around citing it as if it's carved in stone. You, on the other hand, get all your news from CBC, verify nothing, cite it like gospel, insult anyone who questions your narrative, ignore all facts that go against your programming, and when you finally get to the point where you have to act like an adult and admit that you're wrong, you run off to push CBC's next false narrative. Was Fox wrong about collusion, or were they close to 100% correct while CNN was 100% wrong? Was Fox right about M Brown, the violent criminal, or was CNN right about "M Brown the Gentle Giant"? Was it wrong to force kids to take the jab? Was there ever a single moment in time where that made sense? Was the BSL4 lab leak theory really just a huge conservative joke? Were fiery riots ever "mostly peaceful"? Was Biden really mentally fit that whole time? Did 60% of Florida's population have to move because of flooding? Did I miss it? Was Greta the Dropout really an expert on US race relations and climate change? Is Carney really some kind of awesome, trustworthy, 'elbows up' guy, who's winning trade deals with the US, and who's more popular in Alberta than Poilievre or Smith? And if you wanna try being honest for a sec, doesn't that sound a lot like "Dear leader got 99.3% of the votes in the last election"? OF COURSE I DON'T WATCH THAT FARCICALSHIT, BARQY! I know that it's all lies and BS, so I don't watch it. How does that not make sense to you? Answer this if you're so knowledgeable: do you watch CBC News, and if so, do you think that it is a legitimate "news" show? If your news sources are so valuable, and mine so shitty, then why are you always the one who's stuck looking back on your crushed beliefs, while I'm laughing at you?

No, that's bullshit. Trump has also been kissing Israel's ass, which is why we are also attacking Iran. If Israel can handle this shit by it self, like Ben Shapiro has insisted, why in the hell are we over there in the first place? We have more than enough to do right here in the US. I've heard multiple times that we bombed the shit out of Iran, yet they're still talking smack and calling shots in the Strait. The MOU lasted what, a day? We haven't accomplished a f*cking thing. Iran is run by terrorists. There is no way in hell they should be allowed to have anything but swords and knives - that's it.