gatomontes99

The NYP isn't teusted? What about MSNBC? CNN? Huffington POST? https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/49552-trust-in-media-2024-which-news-outlets-americans-trust Looks like the NYP is far more trusted than your favorite propaganda sources.

Lol...you can't handle it, can you? I showed you the lie you posted and you are trying to make it about someone else. K.I.S.S. Waltz was given a phone programmed with important numbers to be used in his official capacity. Waltz said he added the number using someone else's name (presumably Jameison Greer https://www.ibtimes.sg/was-jeffrey-goldberg-mistakenly-added-instead-jamieson-greer-signal-chat-group-discussing-war-79200 ). The simplest explanation, that requires the fewest assumptions, is that the intern (or whomever) that programmed the phone numbers, copied the number from the wrong line in the database. Hence Jeffery Goldbloom got the messages when Jameison Greer was the intended recipient Now, had this happened under Joe, we wouldn't have heard about it. But we know that you and your ilk made all the excuses in the world for the disasterous withdrawal from Afghanistan. So which would you rather have? Disaster with no leaks or victory with minor leaks? Or hell, major leaks. As far as I am concerned this discussion is over. The adults are in charge and have indulged the children for far to long.

Attack me all you want. I gave you both sides. You could have debated either side. You chose to attack me. I would think that most, with the intellectual acuity to do so, would have picked a side and argued that. But, those that are more astute would have seen that I was able to get the tailored results by how I phrased my query. That would have brought about a deeper discussion as to where AI gets it's data and who trims the data to manageable blocks. But, you are more interested in pretending to be a keyboard warrier and wannabe bully. Carry on.

Well, as I proved with the first two posts, there is scientific information that supports both sides. So your assertion that AGW hasn't faltered isn't factual. In fact, the counter argument is based on past observations and continued patterns. AGW is based on assumptions and fuzzy math. Fuzzy math, that has led to countless doomsday predictions that never came to pass.

You posted the lie that Hegseth never denied that there was classified information. He had. On multiple occasions. That's just the one I could find.

Lmao...oh please let it die. This whack job has no intention on real debate. He came up with a childish insult and tried to make it into some sort of proof of something. The reality is he's just a Canuck with an inferiority complex and unimaginative insults.

It's a good thing nothing classified was released then. Joe Biden gave the order. Yet, you reapond to me more now than before you ignored me. I mean, you triple quoted me.

Maybe you'll figure it out some day.

There was no classified information.

Ah. So you don't want to talk about how you posted a lie. Instead, you employ Rule #2 because you got caught and had no other recourse. Well, you did. You just can't get there.

Posting lies again? My gawd man, have some dignity. Here is the language from the Biden era memo that encouraged the use of Signal specifically. My military friends are all talking about how they were ordered to use Signal after this memo came out. WhatsApp had been their previously favored app. You have everyone on ignore because you can't handle dissenting opinions.

All you guys do is post lie after lie:

You didn't even read the second post did you?

And the opposing view: The Role of CO2 Emissions in Driving Global Warming Global warming, the observed rise in Earth’s average surface temperature over recent centuries, is predominantly driven by human-induced carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. While natural factors have historically influenced climate, the current warming trend correlates strongly with the release of CO2 from burning fossil fuels, deforestation, and industrial processes. This paper argues that CO2 emissions are the primary cause of global warming, supported by evidence from greenhouse gas physics, historical temperature records, and the scale of human contributions to atmospheric CO2 levels. First, CO2 is a well-established greenhouse gas that traps heat in Earth’s atmosphere. When solar radiation reaches the planet, some is reflected back into space, while the rest is absorbed and re-emitted as infrared radiation. CO2 molecules absorb this infrared energy, preventing its escape and warming the atmosphere. This greenhouse effect is a natural process, but its intensification is not. Since the Industrial Revolution began in the late 18th century, atmospheric CO2 concentrations have risen from approximately 280 parts per million (ppm) to over 420 ppm by 2025, according to measurements from Mauna Loa and other monitoring stations. This increase, driven by human combustion of coal, oil, and gas, amplifies the greenhouse effect, raising global temperatures. Second, the correlation between CO2 emissions and temperature rise is evident in both modern and historical data. Instrumental records since the 19th century show a global temperature increase of about 1.1°C above pre-industrial levels, aligning with the exponential growth of fossil fuel use. Ice core data, spanning hundreds of thousands of years, reveal that past CO2 increases—such as during interglacial warm periods—corresponded with temperature rises, though at slower rates. The current warming, however, is anomalously rapid, with a rate of approximately 0.2°C per decade since the 1980s, a pace unmatched in natural records and consistent with models attributing it to anthropogenic CO2. Third, the scale of human CO2 emissions dwarfs natural sources in the modern era. Annual emissions from fossil fuels and land-use changes exceed 35 billion metric tons, compared to natural fluxes (e.g., volcanic outgassing) estimated at less than 1 billion tons. This influx overwhelms the Earth’s carbon sinks—oceans, forests, and soils—which absorb only about half of human emissions. The remainder accumulates in the atmosphere, elevating CO2 levels and driving a radiative forcing of approximately 2.1 watts per square meter, a key metric of warming potential. No natural process matches this magnitude or speed, reinforcing the causal link to human activity. Opponents may argue that natural factors, such as solar variability or volcanic activity, could explain warming. However, solar output has remained stable or slightly declined since the mid-20th century, while warming has accelerated. Volcanic eruptions, though capable of temporary cooling via aerosol emissions, have been insufficient to offset the sustained CO2-driven trend. Climate models excluding human CO2 emissions fail to replicate observed warming, whereas those incorporating them accurately track the rise, bolstering the case for CO2 as the dominant driver. In conclusion, global warming is primarily caused by CO2 emissions from human activity. The physics of the greenhouse effect, the tight correlation between CO2 levels and temperature, and the overwhelming contribution of anthropogenic emissions provide a robust foundation for this conclusion. While natural factors influence climate, their role in the current warming is secondary to the unprecedented impact of CO2, making it the central force behind Earth’s rising temperatures.

The Natural Basis of Global Climate Change Global climate change, often framed as a modern crisis driven by human activity, is fundamentally a natural process that has shaped Earth’s environment for billions of years. While contemporary discussions emphasize anthropogenic contributions like carbon dioxide emissions, a broader examination of geological and climatic history reveals that climate variability is an inherent feature of the planet’s systems. This paper argues that global climate change is primarily a natural phenomenon, supported by evidence of past climate shifts, natural drivers like solar activity and volcanic eruptions, and the Earth’s long-term climatic cycles. First, Earth’s climate has undergone dramatic changes long before human industrialization. The geological record shows periods like the Ice Ages, with the Last Glacial Maximum around 26,000 to 19,000 years ago, when vast ice sheets covered North America and Eurasia. Conversely, the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), approximately 56 million years ago, saw global temperatures spike by 5-8°C due to natural greenhouse gas releases, likely from volcanic activity or methane clathrate destabilization. These events, driven by natural processes such as orbital variations (Milankovitch cycles), tectonic shifts, and oceanic circulation changes, demonstrate that significant climate change predates human influence and operates on scales far exceeding modern records. Second, natural drivers continue to play a critical role in climate variability. Solar irradiance, though relatively stable, fluctuates in cycles (e.g., the 11-year sunspot cycle), influencing Earth’s energy balance. Historical correlations, like the Maunder Minimum (1645-1715)—a period of low solar activity coinciding with the Little Ice Age—suggest solar forcing impacts climate. Volcanic eruptions also exert short-term but potent effects, injecting aerosols into the stratosphere that reflect sunlight and cool the planet, as seen with Mount Pinatubo in 1991. These factors operate independently of human activity, underscoring nature’s capacity to alter climate. Third, the Earth’s climate is governed by long-term cycles that dwarf human timescales. Milankovitch cycles, involving changes in orbital eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession, drive glacial and interglacial periods over tens of thousands of years. The current interglacial period, the Holocene, began roughly 11,700 years ago and follows a natural warming trend after the last Ice Age. While human emissions may amplify warming, the underlying shift from cooler to warmer conditions aligns with these pre-existing cycles, suggesting that the trajectory of change is not wholly artificial. Critics argue that current warming rates and CO2 levels are unprecedented, pointing to industrial emissions as the primary cause. However, this view often overlooks natural analogs. For instance, during the PETM, CO2 concentrations rose rapidly (albeit over thousands of years), driven by natural carbon cycle feedbacks. Today’s accelerated pace may reflect human influence, but the mechanisms—CO2 as a greenhouse gas, atmospheric dynamics—remain natural processes. Moreover, proxy data (e.g., ice cores, sediment records) indicate that abrupt climate shifts have occurred before, challenging the notion that speed alone proves artificial causation. In conclusion, global climate change is a natural phenomenon rooted in Earth’s dynamic systems. Historical climate shifts, ongoing natural drivers, and long-term cycles demonstrate that variability is intrinsic to the planet. While human activity may modulate these processes, it does not negate their fundamental natural origin. Recognizing this context reframes climate change as a continuation of Earth’s history, rather than an anomaly requiring solely human-centric explanations.

And you still can't say what she did was wrong? Maybe you should tend to that plank in your eye.

Lmao...ok Beev.

Didn't the left get all up in arms over the perception that Trump might have made fun of someone? Not a single lefty on this board has even mentioned that Crockett is disparaging a man because a tree fell on him.

You keep using that term incorrectly. Nothing I said was misleading and the videos are not misleading. The videos illustrate a series of lies. To be a Gish Gallup, you have to make up a bunch of misleading or untrue statements. Yes, he's likely lying. However, there also appears to be a misunderstanding of terms. War plans are detailed. From what I've seen, the Signal messages are generic and broad. So Hegseth is probably telling the truth there. But he did say the messages didn't happen, and that is a lie. I will not firmly decide the full extent of my opinion until I see all of the information. It will be a bit before all of that is out.

Both are screw ups and those clips are an extremely small example of left wing lies. None of which have you ever spoken out against. If Pete is lying (and it is likely he is) then he needs to stop, own it and move on. It'll serve him well.

Lmao.. 3 links, all from a lwnj that hated Trump. Now, here is why the article itself is a lie. The 4 year period he portends.to have counted the "lies" is 1460 days. That would have meant Trump lied 21 times a day. He didn't even make 21 statements a day. Somehow, your lwnj, desguised as a "journalist", counted more lies than statements.

No. I said the whole thing was a screw up. I'm on the side of consistent. You are the one that is both decrying and excusing lies depending on the side of the aisle they are on.

Do you want to go through the list of Biden era lies that y'all never gave a damn about? Don't be such verifiable hypocrites.

Innocent until proven guilty does not apply to immigration law, as my link describes. You can be deported without a hearing, court appearance, etc. In some instances, a Border Patrol, Customs or ICE agent can deport an individual or group.