Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 09/29/2022 in all areas

  1. Al Gore Commemorates Earth Day By Using Private Jet To Write 'Save The Planet' In The Sky Babylon Bee. Always funny because it sounds so true.
    3 points
  2. The term/words . . . 'genocide' and 'mass graves' do not belong in the residential school narrative. To use those terms/words is disingenuous. Native leaders know this, and use it to trigger the 'white guilt' complex.
    2 points
  3. As per NASA, the earth is not on a turtle's back. But, they are white supremacists who work in an organization rooted in systemic racism so what do they know? Imagine people doing land acknowledgements that recognize " turtle Island"? Sounds like a cult. If you use a wheel or a wheel like product, thank colonialism. The wheel did not exist in pre Colonial Americas. Nor did electricity, roads, hospitals, schools, cars, planes, gas/ectric heated homes, refrigerators. If you are not Indigenous, you are a settler and you are in Canada because you love colonialism. You cannot be a non indigenous person living in Canada and enjoying the wonders of European arrival and claim to be be against colonialism and to be pro Indigenous people. If you are a pro Indigenous settler, leave Canada, hand over your land and stop using Indigenous water, air, and resources. Be honest. If you believe that the earth sits on the back of a turtle, let me sell you the myth of systemic racism and white privilege too! Donate millions to radical violent organizations so they can buy luxury houses! And, you can virtue signal on social media what a hero you are! If you want to honour the pre Colonial way, like the Aztecs and human sacrifices and slavery. Slavery in the Pacific Northwest developed at some point between 500 B.C. and A.D. 500, long before European contact, and at contact, slaves were clearly set apart from the existing tribal ranking system and prestige-seeking in the region. Early indigenous peoples also possessed other practices that predated contact with the British and Europeans: cannibalism and the killing of slaves, the latter of which also occurred and for a variety of reasons: funeral feasts, the building of a new home, a new title, the erection of a totem pole, or as part of the ceremony at potlatches. A Russian Orthodox priest recounted how in one Sitka ceremony where a new clan chief was appointed, four slaves were strangled as part of the ritual. Ah...the good ole days. Migwetch
    1 point
  4. Same attempts are made today by the religion of woke, telling white people they are inherently racist and going all cancel culture any time you want to support white heritage.. White culture is apparently the only culture where its racist to celebrate it. You can celebrate black culture, Asian culture, Latino culture just not white culture.
    1 point
  5. I made a list with lots of names. And there are a lot of people who don't want to speak up because their careers are on the line. Everyone loves Galileo, but no one wants to end up like him. It's not unrelated. People who were sucked in by covid vaccines and Santa Claus and MMGW are all the same. People of your ilk still say "The gesundheitspass served a greater purpose" and "Calling unvaxxed people racists and misogynists was ok" and "The vaccines work and they're safe" and you know what? It's getting old, fast. Someone waited too long to tell you that Santa wasn't real and you grew up willing to believe that "nothing has to make sense, it just has to be on TV". FYI your takeaway from the Forbes articles shouldn't be "strong consensus" imo. If I was in your boots, I'd be more worried about the fact that I had been spewing bullshit all this time. I know that I at least helped you see some truth, so it was a start. Cheerioooo.
    1 point
  6. Right... you are correct when you point to media hysteria and I won't argue that.
    1 point
  7. We can sum up by paying attention to the fact that every leading physicist I am aware of, especially Professor Steven Hawking before he passed away, say we need to do everything possible to dramatically reduce our carbon emissions. If you are a climate change denier, unless you are a better physicist than Professor Hawking, you don't know what you are talking about. If you disagree, let us know what your credentials are.
    1 point
  8. I love it when Greenies here say "Canada can replace the money from the fossil fuel industry by leading the technological charge towards green energy ?". Even if we did lead in technology, China will steal our patents and build whatever the F they want anyways, and we will never be able to compete. The people who stand to gain the most from killing the Alberta energy sector are small-time players like oil producers in Saudi Arabia, Russia, the US, Iraq, and Iran, plus the Chinese who want our coal, and the Chinese and others who want us to buy their expensive and nearly useless green tech. I'm sure that Trudeau will stand his ground, and ignore all of those low-powered lobbyists.
    1 point
  9. And is currently building 200 coal plants with hundreds more on the drawing boards.
    1 point
  10. That's a strange part of the debate. One side is not against immigration, but mass illegal immigration is a different thing. The other side wants mass immigration from other cultures that typically have very high birth rates. So, there will be way more people in developed nations which presumably will grow the carbon footprint in those nations.?
    1 point
  11. Sure. It doesn't matter if millions starve as long as you're fat dumb and happy, right?
    1 point
  12. Here is a legitimate quote from your last cite: Do you UNDERSTAND WHY that DIDN'T happen? ㊙️ MAN dealt with that problem and CUT the particulate pollution DRAMATICALLY. NOW we have to FIX the CO2 pollution.
    1 point
  13. I'm a Canadian citizen and not a member of the Republican party. You point out that John Robson has a degree in history and that's correct. But there are tons of prominent people out there that are not climate scientists that are lecturing and fearmongering. Many celebrities and politicians and Youtube influencers alike. Most of these people have lifestyles that run 100% counter to what they are telling us, and you buy into it. They cannot be concerned about climate change otherwise they would actually be changing their lifestyles. The “science" makes a lot of different claims based on a lot of different lines of evidence. You can't "believe" all of it because it's full of inconsistencies. Do you believe the scientific data that shows less warming than predicted by climate models? Or the science that shows hurricanes aren't more frequent or more severe? I certainly don't believe alarmist interpretations of the science that cherry-pick computer simulations and try to frighten us with implausible worst-case scenarios. A better question is whether you mainly believe the models or the data, because in a lot of key areas they disagree with each other.
    1 point
  14. Gas prices have jumped up 40 cents in 4 days in BC Lower mainland. News outlets here are contentedly reporting it as the new normal. This is what happens when environmental ideology overtakes common sense.
    1 point
  15. I love how Republicans seek out bullshit nonsense PAC-funded website full of lies instead of seeking actual facts. That website you’re citing is run by a man with a PhD in History. WTF does he know about climate science? Absolutely nothing. There is nothing scientific about that website; its purpose is to publish anti climate change lies. Why are you allergic to plain facts and the truth? If you give a damn about anything, then go to noaa.gov. They publish the actual data on climate and on hurricanes and the reach of the polar ice caps and all that. Actual data, not some oil industry, Koch brothers funded nonsense. Examples: “Over the past 15 years (2005-2019), there have been 156 separate billion-dollar weather or climate disasters in the U.S that have cost a combined $1.16 trillion in damages.” https://www.noaa.gov/news/us-sweltered-through-third-hottest-summer-on-record https://www.noaa.gov/explainers/understanding-climate-normals https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/51c41fd3f78c4939a28b016e0ddb5109
    1 point
  16. I've gotten restricted repeatedly on Facebook for posting actual peer-reviewed medical studies. No commentary - just the studies - flagged as "disinformation." I think EVERYONE knows Facebook is full of caca by now. Except Moonie.?
    1 point
  17. There have been lots of predictions in the past. Climate predictions gone badly astray - Climate Discussion Nexus Speaking of predictions - Climate Discussion Nexus And again - Climate Discussion Nexus As to your assertion that nobody was talking about a coming ice age in the 1970s: The '70s Cooling Scare Was Real - Climate Discussion Nexus
    1 point
  18. I get the latest studies from the doctors and scientists I follow. While they ARE on sites you would consider alternative, I think you know that Facebook has censored any and all dissent from the narrative for quite a long time now. I myself am restricted there more than I can post.? Most of the censored professionals have their own websites now or substacks that you can subscribe to. That's where they post the studies and data that is coming in. There hasn't been any real doctors or scientists or information on that site for a long time now. So your constant accusation of Facebook actually makes YOU the ?. There are actually few groups anywhere except the alternative sites, The groups of 250,000 always attract attention, especially when they amass that many people in days. Groups for vaccine injured, groups for vaccine deaths, groups for women experiencing menstrual issues - all have been banned and deleted and are now on alternative sites. "Someone" doesn't want you guys to know stuff.
    1 point
  19. Huh. If he was such a f&*%k up of a doctor, it's odd that he would be trotted out on British television so many times to encourage vaccination, like the US's Sanjay Gupta. Don't you think? I did hear of him before this, but like all the other public health authorities and doctors and scientists interviewed by the media, he never provided any proof of what he was saying. I guess he finally realized the same thing. And started doing some digging. I think his experience with losing his father to the vax also proves to me something I've learned in life about human nature - we often do not have empathy or understand a situation until we've gone through it ourselves. This whole thing smacks more and more to me of a cult, which I have a lot of experience with, having escaped one with my children. Cult members who are true believers cannot be swayed by facts. And when their predictions and prophesies do not come true, the true believers often double down on their beliefs, failure doesn't faze them at all. It's the same with the Branch Covidians. The inoculations are nothing that was promised - they don't prevent infection, they don't prevent spread, we were told they were safe, we were told they were effective, we were told 2 shots, now we're up to 5 and you have to get jabbed up every 3-6 months. I think everyone knows none of what we were told was true. So instead of admitting, many are doubling down - saying they at least prevent hospitalization and death. We're well into the phase now where even that is being disproven. So the last thing you and others can do is follow me around the board lobbing personal attacks. I think (hope) this means we're nearing the end of this farce.
    1 point
  20. We would have no ozone layer and we may all be dead now if CFC’s had not been banned.
    1 point
  21. quote The False Prophets of Climate Change JANE CLARK SCHARL The unjustified moral panic over the Amazon fires is not unique. The last five decades are full of climate doomsday predictions that have been proven false. Some—like the 1970 proclamation that, by 2000, the world would be gripped in a new Ice Age—are exactly the opposite of current climate panics. Of course, this information should not be used to say that we have no responsibility for the environment. Modern industry has introduced new environmental challenges that, as stewards of Creation, we have a responsibility to address, such as the horrifying levels of pollution in the Ganges River in India and the mountains of garbage in cities like Manila. But the last fifty years have shown with certainty that simply because climate change activists say that the end of the world is coming does not mean they are right. The facts show that the environment is much more resilient than we give it credit for being, and that worldwide climate systems tend to fluctuate around an average sustainable temperature. For climate change activists, these facts simply don’t matter. What matters is that they see an impending climate disaster—a disaster which they believe justifies distorting the truth. This is exactly the same kind of prevarication Catholics must watch out for. Because many leaders in the Church—including the Holy Father—have come to believe that there is an impending climate disaster, we shouldn’t be surprised if we see doctrinal distortions as a result. ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW Consider, for example, the looming moral disaster of the Amazon synod. In the wake of Laudato Si and other doomsday declarations by Pope Francis, the synod appears poised to adopt such a laudatory tone towards the environment that it threatens to veer into neo-paganism, denigrate the special role of humanity in creation, and subvert the Church’s primary function of bringing souls to salvation. The working document of the Amazon Synod implies that moral superiority is equivalent with living in harmony with the environment. For example, the document elevates the indigenous people of Guaviare as moral arbiters because of their closeness to the environment. Unfortunately, these peoples include tribes that participate in shamanism, which is often a form of demon worship. The document says nothing about entering into an evangelical conversation with these tribes. It may have (for instance) simultaneously encouraged them to worship Jesus Christ while inviting the rest of us to learn from their love of nature. Instead, it merely scolds Western Christian cultures while unequivocally lauding neo-pagan cultures. A Catholic exorcist once related to me a conversation he had with a demon during an exorcism, in which the demon told him that the Satanic forces will use anything—even inherently good things like work, human love, and family—to distract a soul from God. “Anything but God,” the demon said. That has sobering implications for the contemporary conversation about the environment within the Catholic Church. Today, that conversation is so dominated by fear that it is indeed distracting us from God. By insisting on an impending environmental collapse without acknowledging that the climate regularly fluctuates, Catholic environmentalists have cut themselves off from reasonable conversations about what proper stewardship of the environment looks like. unquote For rest of article: The False Prophets of Climate Change (crisismagazine.com) quote Modern doomsayers have been predicting climate and environmental disaster since the 1960s. They continue to do so today. None of the apocalyptic predictions with due dates as of today have come true. What follows is a collection of notably wild predictions from notable people in government and science. More than merely spotlighting the failed predictions, this collection shows that the makers of failed apocalyptic predictions often are individuals holding respected positions in government and science. While such predictions have been and continue to be enthusiastically reported by a media eager for sensational headlines, the failures are typically not revisited. 1967: ‘Dire famine by 1975.’ unquote Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions - Competitive Enterprise Institute (cei.org)
    1 point
  22. With climate change, you mean? Nothing. Climate's always changing. With human caused climate catastrophism however the problem with that is there's no reason to believe it can't be BS so how bad do you want to support the destruction of civilization and the enslavement of its population on the chance there might be something to it? Why? Which one are you pushing?
    1 point
  23. Awesome quote from this link: "Gore blows more smoke from his private jet on just one trip from Martha's Vineyard to the family tobacco plantation in Tennessee, than I could with my car in 500 years." Assholes like Trudeau, Gore, Kerry, etc think that they can fly around on private jets, "buy some carbon offsets", and then pontificate to us. Yay, you planted some trees at one of your mansions, you're saving the world! The fact you just believe every. stupid. thing. that. these. clowns. say. amuses me to no end.
    1 point
  24. Where does affordable energy fit into the equation? Reliability is important too and proponents of wind and solar don't bring this up too much. The US has been doing pretty well with lowering emissions in the last number of years thanks in large part to the use of natural gas.
    1 point
  25. Do you need me to make airplane noises while I spoon-feed you? Read it or don't. Educate yourself or don't. IDGAF
    1 point
  26. the Republican Party freed the slaves brought the Gilded Age robber barons to heel sent the troops in to defend Civil Rights defeated the Soviet Union and now are the only bulwark against the Globalist elites anywhere in the world the Conservative Party of Canada meanwhile, are just lick spittle cronies to the Liberals you deserve the governance you get in Canada MAGA
    1 point
  27. Oh, I'm sorry. Did you finally post the names of the scientists and the links to the peer-reviewed medical articles that you are following that I asked for months ago, and I missed it?
    1 point
  28. Crying out "conspiracy theory!!" every time you encounter a complex subject, isn't going to cut it in intellectual discourse anymore. This is not a conspiracy theory. It's very serious problem that has been brewing for decades. See below: How Bill Gates and his partners took over the global Covid pandemic response - POLITICO And here's a commentary on the article, in case it's over your head:
    1 point
  29. 1. Well I think it's kind of untenable to trash the approaches that took years to develop without offering an alternative, but then again you are right: it's not our job to come up with solutions.
    1 point
  30. Kushner is NOT ALLOWED to be paid by a foreign government for his US government employee services. You should KNOW THAT.
    1 point
  31. The goal is to develop more renewable sources of electricity generation, and to transition to electric cars. There is no foreseeable future of zero carbon emission, nor do we need to achieve that. Personally, I think wind is the best solution. But Florida, California and other southern states can take more advantage of solar, which is probably more resilient to hurricanes, for instance.
    1 point
  32. Only if you think Krupp ovens must be part of the definition of genocide. It was a concerted effort to extinguish the native culture, not to murder the people.
    1 point
  33. There was no "conspiracy theory" formed at all. There's just a Santa's list of lies and things that our governments and the WHO did that seemed counterintuitive at the time, which just turned out to be as dumb as they looked. WHO & Dems: "Let's just assume that this particular coronavirus bucks the trend, and it's not airborne. We'll let people fly out of Wuhan and go all over the world, and if anyone tries to stop them we'll cry "racism". They can go anywhere and do anything that they want in those countries." Dems: "Covid isn't important right now, we're focusing all of our attention on Ukrainian collusion. For the time being, let's just ride the subway like normal and hug people we don't know in massive crowds on the street. OMFG DON'T TAKE HCQ YOU'LL GO BLIND OR YOU'LL DIE!!!! IT'S JUST A TRUMP SCAM TO MAKE MONEY! IT CAN'T POSSIBLY WORK! TESTING IT IS STUPID! WAIT FOR THE VAX THAT WON'T GO THROUGH PROPER TRIALS! WE KNOW THAT IT WILL BE SAFE AND EFFECTIVE SOMEHOW!!!" Trudeau: "Covid probably isn't going to have much of an effect on Canadians. There's no need to avoid it like the plague. We're giving all of our PPE to China, and letting the fine people of Wuhan go where they want upon arrival here." Trudeau 6 weeks later: "It's unsafe for Canadians to walk outside in public parks. I can't forsee any future where there's a covid vaccine mandate." Trudeau 3 months later: "Take the vaccines or you lose your job." Fauci: 1- The vaccines will be safe and effective. They'll get us to herd immunity 2- You won't get infected covid if you vax 3- OK you'll get it, you just won't get as sick. Some young people get myocarditis, who gives a shit 4- You'll get sick, you just won't go to the hospital. 5- Hospital but not ICU 6- ICU but not dead 7- Vaxed people are dying, but they're mostly old people with co-morbidities (inside voice - "just like in 2020 when there was no vax"), and it's not as often 8- Inside voice again "The death rate among vaxed is slightly higher than among unvaxed, but thats probably because more at-risk people are vaxed. We're still gonna keep the pressure on to vax." Is it really that much easier to say that "Everyone in positions of power whose job it is to keep us safe was just incredibly stupid, and they told us nothing but really big white lies", than it is to say "Something's fishy"? I say something's fishy. If you don't like it, IDGAF, because I think your head is lodged so far up your ass that you taste your food twice before it hits your duodenum. Don't ask me how that's possible, it's like a time travel thing I guess.
    1 point
  34. Let's go through that paragraph by paragraph. There's so much BS that's the only way to do it. First of all when you're talking about some imagined necessity of reducing CO2 (good for you for not saying carbon) you're not talking about climate change. You're talking about climate catastrophism. That's the believe the world is coming to end at some unknown time perhaps hundreds of years into the future because we humans have been too successful burning fossil fuels for energy. Oh, and why do Warmiacs never want to mention nuclear or the fact their environmental arm won't let them flood any more of the natural world for hydro. Those two alternatives might actually work. Al Gore is an incompetent, boob who had the gift of gab, the right connections and got lucky in his bank account. However almost every claim he's ever made on a coming climate catastrophe has been proven to be incorrect. Do you really want to get into Al Gore? I'm thinking maybe you don't. But if you do maybe we can discuss Greta too. If you're talking wind and solar you can't compete with China for the tech. They own or control almost all the earth's rare earth minerals wind and solar rely on. They also have a cheaper work force. Your connections can make a few illusory bucks on the side if the government offers enough tax breaks and subsidies. There's no evidence the move to alternative energy is improving western economy. That's because it's not. You lasso little Denmark out of the herd of facts and suggest that shows something. Very well, now do Germany. Tell the Germans why they should be happy about freezing in the dark this winter after their boondoggle of a massive and unsuccessful attempt to move to alternative energy. Then we can discuss France, the UK and the rest of them. Giorgia Meloni thanks you for another plank to her platform of things that turned to catastrophes under the old government. She was able to defeat them because of their screw-ups. I'm not even sure Denmark is that happy with where they are as far as energy goes but that's another advantage to using little Denmark. Who's going to spend the rest of the day checking? Climate catastrophism is about politics. Alternatives at this point are different. They aren't "better." Possibly some time in the future but at this time they are inferior to fossil fuels by any useful metric. Oh, and I would say the elephant in the room is even if you do succeed in impoverishing the west by scaring them into subservience under the cloak of some sort of imagined future catastrophe caused by too much CO2 it wouldn't matter. India and China won't get off the fossil fuels. They're too useful.
    1 point
  35. Any conversation by the left on climate change ignores the elephant in the room. Sadly, so does post one of this thread, which sounds more like propaganda than anything else.
    1 point
  36. Obama's low tax rates and Clintons welfare cuts would have made them extreme right wing heroes in the age of Goldwater. But don't ask Trumpians and people who call Romney a Marxist about history.
    1 point
  37. They don't represent votes...no sir.
    1 point
  38. Ok so not sure why you think that your point still stands?
    1 point
  39. That's just the opposite of what is true. The three main parties converged decades ago.
    1 point
  40. So the travel mandates are lifted Saturday. Now IF you can get into the USA unvaxxed, you can come back. Unlike the dummies who complained they couldn't come back from a place they couldn't go. And Trudeau had to consult first with his MPs and Health Officials, he didn't just snap his fingers and personally make them law like they all claim he did imposing restrictions. And all those unvaxxed people who were supposedly forced to be, still aren't. Stlil whining, though. Poor little victims.... There's even a new King and GG that won't snap their fingers and dismiss the gov't because a bunch of sovereign people who can only imagine how things work signed a petition.
    1 point
  41. Bill Maher was talking about this chick/dude. It really speaks to a bit of a sticky issue with Transgendered. Is it a Mental Health Issue or normal. Putting on giant fake boobs on for work is not something a rational person would do. As Maher commented. What if she came to school with a big cock exposed? Gender Normals don't have to bee 100% normalized but decency normals can certainly be established.
    1 point
  42. Michael is a typical Liberal who likes to say progressive sounding things that are only partly true because then when he actually lives his life benefitting from all the great aspects of “settler” culture, he can tell himself he’s a good person. Of course his views mostly just reaffirm typical ignorant young activist misconceptions that lack historical context, but they sound flowery so we should all pretend they’re truth and slam they guy who started this threat as Mike did, even though that poster said nothing inaccurate. It’s not about the truth or trying to discern it, it’s about saying progressive sounding stuff no matter whether your life really reflects it or you really believe it, because then you get to call others retrograde and pretend you’re especially noble. It’s actually the main reason we’re lost as a society now and very divided: lack of honest conversation and refusal to question half-truths.
    1 point
  43. In 1492 there was no international law, no UN, no Geneva Conventions, and state sovereignty (borders) weren't even recognized among European countries until 1648. It was an all-out war of all against all, everyone trying to expand territory so a rival country wouldn't become more rich and powerful and conquer them. The indigenous did it amongst themselves pre-Columbus. It was a brutal worldwide situation of warfare and survival and it slowed down after WWII, empires decolonized rapidly, international law was implemented, the UN created. This is Hobbes' "state of nature" on an international scale. And it still exists (no global government) except there's no more territory to expand, and borders are more or less settled for the most part, so peace is more common, but civil war is still common. I don't feel guilty for the British/Canada being stronger than others, because if Africa or indigenous had invented guns and ocean-faring ships etc before Europe they would have done the exact same thing. Those societies were horribly brutal also, and West Africans took war prisoners amongst other African tribes to sell as slaves to Europeans. You have to read history books to learn this stuff, they won't tell you on TV. However, we should have known better about residential schools etc., there's no excuse for that cruelty.
    1 point
  44. History is one of narratives. A narrative holds a set of truths and perspectives that tell a story, but a story that is incomplete, because it leaves out other facts and perspectives. The left will tell one set of narratives, typically focusing on the bad things the powerful have done and showing the weak to be victims of that power. The right will tell another set of narratives, focusing more on the good things the powerful have done or how the weak have made poor choices that have contributed to their situation etc. For instance: the left will say the rich are greedy, horde their wealth, and take advantage of workers. The right will say the rich create businesses that provide goods/services we all use, create jobs and wealth for society etc. There is truth in both of these perspectives, but the left seems compassionate while the right seem like a-holes. It's easier to seem moral when you're standing up for the weak rather than the powerful. With the indigenous we typically only hear 1 set of narratives. We don't hear how the West brought them medicine and modern healthcare, modern agriculture/nutrition, longer lifespans, tools, literacy etc. We don't as often here that indigenous people pre-Columbus warred, raped, murdered, ensalved, looted, scalped/tortured each other etc at rights far higher than today, or how they had their own violent expansionist empires (Aztec, Incas). Focusing on 1 set of narratives over another is called politics. The guilt for our wrongs is why we focus on 1 set over the other (understandable), while the rest of the truth is inconvenient and therefore downplayed. If you point out other facts/narratives you are silenced and called a racist because these narratives are political & push a certain agenda & policy, which is why you're angry with the OP & want him to leave. It's a conservative's job to tell us what the progressives conveniently leave out, and vice versa. A self-correcting system. Don't fear other facts and narratives Michael, if we listen to them we might find some truth amongst the bullsh!t.
    1 point
  45. Well that's a pretty safe bet as ancient old geezers and young people don't tend to even be on the ballot. All the young 'uns I know love to shoot their mouth off as much as anyone but don't seem motivated to get into anything where they can actually DO something about stuff. We're losing community organizations (as well as volunteer groups, shops and businesses) here as boomers retire and no one's willing to take over.
    1 point
  46. The pic is such a great illustration of the etat d'affaires in Canada. What inflation? What systemic crisis upon another crisis? Where? The party has to go on.. like there's no limits and no tomorrow!
    1 point
  47. Are all politicians not LGBTQ by definition ???? They are ready to go to bed with anyone of any color, age or sexual preference, with horns on the head or without.
    1 point
  48. this is a Westminster Parliament so I do not elect a Prime Minister only an MP in my riding thus I don't even bother to vote in Canada anymore as they are all filthy disgusting cowards, sycophants, cronies & traitors Canada will only be altered at the cultural level upstream from poltics by a catastrophic financial & economic crisis then the entire political class in Canada will be wiped out in one fell swoop what comes in the wake, I cannot say, there's too many variables
    1 point
  49. Asking questions is great and healthy. Not listening to the answers that are provided is less so. If you don't have any ability to conduct climate science yourself (applies to any specialty), then you turn to the experts for answers, right? And when every climate scientist is telling you that yes, mankind is driving climate change, that's your answer. It's not "drinking koolaid" to listen to experts who are doing the work that you can't or don't do yourself. It's just basic, rational behavior. If you don't have any qualification or capability as a cardiologist, but 100 of 100 cardiologists tell you fried foods are killing you, and you say "Hm, I'm not convinced," what is that? Or flip it around. I'm assuming you are an expert in something. If a layperson came and asked you and 99 of your peers about some basic fact of your expertise, and you all gave the same answer, but. instead of taking in the information and adjusting their worldview the layperson said "Nah, I don't think you guys know what you're talking about." You'd think that person was an idiot, no? Healthy skepticism is great, but at a certain point, in the face of overwhelming evidence and expert consensus, it's not skepticism, but contrarianism or something similarly counterproductive. It's not driven by reason or rationality. I mean that literally. It is not clearly is entangled with love or money or political identity or some other baser alignment that is suppressing reason. I don't know what your particular entanglement is, but it's simply no longer rational to dismiss what is virtually unanimous acknowledgement in the climate science community.
    0 points
×
×
  • Create New...