• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Blowing Smoke: Obama Climate Speech Riddled With Lies

first off wolf, can you clarify which republican lie you are clinging to? you haven't been clear is it

GW is a hoax
yes the earth is warming but its natural
yes the earth is warming but it wont be as bad as predicted

and then clarify where you think you've posted anything that disproves that GW is real and man made. FYI, the climate depot is another conservative funded think tank. And fyi, economists saying its not real is just economists saying its not real. And the only papers they reference are their own papers. And the only non economist in your climate depot link says GW real but natural. He must be one of the 39 climate scientists that thinks it not man made. But he thinks its real. (Since you posted editorials that claim its a hoax, it would be nice to know which false narrative you cling to)

For the most part the British newspapers have debunked the so-called Global Warming scam. Most of the Liberal journalists have used their bias to influence people like you. Why haven't you discussed the collusion between East Anglia University, NASA, and other American universities.

See:
Evidence of a conspiracy to suppress the facts about global warming
 
For the most part the British newspapers have debunked the so-called Global Warming scam. Most of the Liberal journalists have used their bias to influence people like you. Why haven't you discussed the collusion between East Anglia University, NASA, and other American universities.

See:
Evidence of a conspiracy to suppress the facts about global warming

more editorials wolf? and wolf I couldn't help but notice that you haven't clarified your position. You've posted editorials that say its a hoax. you've posted two climate scientists that say its real and man made but wont be as bad as predicted and you posted one climate scientist that says its real and natural. Which narrative are you clinging to?

(I think wolf believes if he just keeps posting silly editorials he doesn't have to clarify what narrative he clings to. who knows)
 
more editorials wolf? and wolf I couldn't help but notice that you haven't clarified your position. You've posted editorials that say its a hoax. you've posted two climate scientists that say its real and man made but wont be as bad as predicted and you posted one climate scientist that says its real and natural. Which narrative are you clinging to?

(I think wolf believes if he just keeps posting silly editorials he doesn't have to clarify what narrative he clings to. who knows)

Silly editorials only become good and truthful when Vern uses them against conservative efforts.
 
Silly editorials only become good and truthful when Vern uses them against conservative efforts.

Amazeballs!! you mindlessly post so many editorials yet you cant just tell us what your current "opinion" on GW is? Amazeballs!!.

And what editorial did I post? mmmm, I don't consider the Nasa links editorials. I don't consider that News corp buying carbon credits an editorial. I don't consider Bush's Whitehouse report on global warming an editorial. I don't consider the EPA link showing carbon emissions an editorial. I don't consider posting "Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature" an editorial. You must think pretty highly of my links because you are not responding to the facts from them. You are just whining I post editorials.

and think about the phrase "courage of your convictions" when I ask you to clarify exactly what you believe about GW. geez, you've posted enough 'editorials'. Isnt it time you stopped cowardly cutting and running from a simple request?
 
No it's not.


Um, Mr Trudeau may think otherwise as might some attorneys

For-profit infringement, is a five-year felony if:

The defendant infringed by means of "the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means," AND
"during any 180-day period, of at least 10 copies or phonorecords, of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $2,500."

then there is:
(d) Fraudulent Removal of Copyright Notice.— Any person who, with fraudulent intent, removes or alters any notice of copyright appearing on a copy of a copyrighted work shall be fined not more than $2,500.
 
Um, Mr Trudeau may think otherwise as might some attorneys
...

... keep searching for something relevant because that wasn't ... I think I see your problem ... [hint] like many other things you're looking only for evidence to convict and you're falling way short.

But in the meantime here's something to keep your juices flowing on your search...

obama - npr - fox news.jpg
 
So you are admitting that you stole the intellectual property of Garry Trudeau? That is a felony by the way

It is a copyright infringement only if you are selling it. So, how does one get paid for posting on this website? Let me know, I can use a few extra bucks....
 
bull****.

Defending copyright infringement with such nice language.

Nice to know that bubbagone has openly admitted he altered copyrighted work and is now arguing that it isn't really a "felony" to post an image that has been altered from the original work
 
Defending copyright infringement with such nice language.

Nice to know that bubbagone has openly admitted he altered copyrighted work and is now arguing that it isn't really a "felony" to post an image that has been altered from the original work

and how much did he get paid for it???? it is only illegal if he sells it, or tries to sell it. Your blowing your own level of smoke, inserting ridiculous charges since you have no other valid argument for the topic at hand.
 
and how much did he get paid for it???? it is only illegal if he sells it, or tries to sell it. Your blowing your own level of smoke, inserting ridiculous charges since you have no other valid argument for the topic at hand.

I have other legal and valid arguments against the actions of a forum poster but it isn't worth my time to debate with deniers of reality. Deniers who deny simply because of political differences.

I'm not "running away" from this argument, you are simply too boring to debate
 
I have other legal and valid arguments against the actions of a forum poster but it isn't worth my time to debate with deniers of reality. Deniers who deny simply because of political differences.

I'm not "running away" from this argument, you are simply too boring to debate

....yawn.......
 
I have other legal and valid arguments against the actions of a forum poster but it isn't worth my time to debate with deniers of reality. Deniers who deny simply because of political differences.

I'm not "running away" from this argument, you are simply too boring to debate

I say this with love and no chance of copyright infringement...

01912716-be1b-404c-b40a-8e071b4f4ab5.jpg
 
I have other legal and valid arguments against the actions of a forum poster but it isn't worth my time to debate with deniers of reality.
Deniers who deny simply because of political differences.
I'm not "running away" from this argument, you are simply too boring to debate

....yawn.......

Waddya gonna do with some people, Woodman ... can't live with 'em and ya can't kill 'em.

And did you catch that line about denying because of "political differences".
Wanna bet he still doesn't catch the irony.
 
Waddya gonna do with some people, Woodman ... can't live with 'em and ya can't kill 'em.

And did you catch that line about denying because of "political differences".
Wanna bet he still doesn't catch the irony.

I guess the promoting of junk science is a political argument, rather than one where the promoter cannot prove their theories. Help me out here... what is the difference between a socialist and a liberal?
 
I guess the promoting of junk science is a political argument, rather than one where the promoter cannot prove their theories. Help me out here...
what is the difference between a socialist and a liberal?

The level of pretense & self-admiration.
 
I have other legal and valid arguments against the actions of a forum poster but it isn't worth my time to debate with deniers of reality. Deniers who deny simply because of political differences.

I'm not "running away" from this argument, you are simply too boring to debate

yeah, your right. Let me review your comments in this thread that were relevant to the subject at hand... oh, holy **** ... wait... you had none!!!!
 
yeah, your right. Let me review your comments in this thread that were relevant to the subject at hand... oh, holy **** ... wait... you had none!!!!
I even tried to help him with a hint and he'd apparently have none of it.
Ya just can't help some people.
 
Okay, on the carbon dioxide being emitted into space, that is still testimony that there is a vast increase in CO2 concentrations. People think, "Oh, if record high CO2 is being released, then CO2 isn't a big deal." Wrong. CO2 is being released because:

A) The atmosphere cannot trap all the CO2. It is trapping some, but the concentrations are going to level out at a maximum concentration over time.
B) There has been enough time for the CO2 to travel at through the stratosphere.

Another thing. People do not think about other possibilities when they think about what is going on. Here is another example. Ocean temperatures are recorded to be dropping and people opposed to global warming say this is evidence that there isn't global warming. But they aren't taking into account that records amount of ice is melting. As the volume of the oceans increase, the oceans are able to absorb more heat resulting in lower ocean temperatures. This is why it is dangerous for average americans to be making conclusions about global warming and not trusting the scientific community that studies the various processes that contribute to global warming. They are too dumb to think about all that is going on. The logic is too simplistic for the complexities that Gaia has to offer.

It's just frustrating. All we do is go to work, take care of what needs to be done at home and with the kids, and with exhaustion of energy we consume entertainment at an alarming portion. We do not education ourselves about various topics that we vote on, simply because we don't have the time, or if we do, we would rather mentally masterbate by means of electronics. This scares me. People with their own interests will get what they want, while millions of people and the environment suffer.

Just go on your library's databases and research global warming studies. There is vast amount of evidence. As we eliminate more species on this planet, it turns out that there is a correlation between that and temperature regulation throughout the planet. As the planet heats up, there are less mechanisms to stabilize the temperature, or the mechanisms are not as effective. Increases in CO2 have been discovered to increase the concentration of certain bacteria or microbes in the soil, thereby increasing the CO2 emissions.

Last but not least, I read an article describing evidence that there was indeed more CO2 present before the last iceage, which is believed to be the reset button so to speak on temperature (ice ages make the planet reach temperature homeostasis). Whether or not we are contributing to CO2 emissions increasing, the fact is putting more CO2 is going to intensify and speed up the process of the next ice age. Climatologists are predicting around 2100 intense changes will be happening to the environment.

All the while, we bitch and moan about spending money on curbing the emissions, or providing better education to all Americans etc. while we build complexes to spy on Americans that cost hundreds of billions of dollars.

Money and power takes all precedence over anything else.
We are going to let this remain as we are content with our consumption of entertainment.
We are screwed unless people decide to get behind a movement and reform policies of our government. That is the first step, then it is about tackling the various issues that plague our country.

Hmm..., When was the last time anyone got information on the loss of the ozone layer? Have any on the side of reducing CO2 and other gases into the atmosphere asked China, India and Russia do the same and reduce their pollution? I don't think so. evidence shows that the the air pollution in China alone is almost if not totally toxic to it's own population. CO2 and SO2 emissions are so high in China that it can be seen and felt.
 
In Obama's War On American Coal, China's The Victor


06/28/2013

WEBemis0701_345.gif.cms


While our electricity prices necessarily skyrocket under the weight of the administration's regulatory assault in fossil fuels, the world's largest carbon emitter will spew even more, preferring economic growth over climate change hype.

President Obama's expansion of his war on coal to include existing coal plants may very well put the industry on the path to extinction, costing jobs and economic growth while raising energy prices, a huge tax on the American consumer. But countries like China and India are increasing their coal consumption, more than outpacing any U.S. reductions in coal use and carbon emissions.

His actions come as news outlets ponder why global temperatures have flat lined for the last 16 years or so — and despite the fact that the U.S. has led the world in carbon reductions for the last two decades. The increased use of natural gas thanks to a boom in fracking has helped fuel these reductions. That proves once again that technology fuels both growth and clean air.

Energy analysts say the administration's energy policies could push about one-third of the U.S. coal-fired fleet into retirement. In the first quarter of 2013, there were 900 active coal mines, down 17% from a year earlier. Last year, U.S. utilities burned 825 million tons of coal, down from 1.045 billion tons in 2007.


Read More:
In Obama's War On American Coal, China's The Victor - Investors.com

Obama aim is to increase the cost of energy to America, both in electricity and fuel to move goods and heat our homes. Then he complains about Capitalists.
 
Hmm..., When was the last time anyone got information on the loss of the ozone layer? Have any on the side of reducing CO2 and other gases into the atmosphere asked China, India and Russia do the same and reduce their pollution? I don't think so. evidence shows that the the air pollution in China alone is almost if not totally toxic to it's own population. CO2 and SO2 emissions are so high in China that it can be seen and felt.

Good afternoon, Wehrwolfen. :2wave:

Do you think the leaders in China even care much about the fact that most of their people have to wear protective masks on their faces just to go outdoors? Are they embarrassed that those photos are seen around the world? I don't hear anyone from this administration challenging China on this...they would rather make a few people like Al Gore and others more wealthy than they already are, and "necessarily make our utility bills skyrocket," according to BHO. What a bunch of :bs: they expect us to swallow! :thumbdown:
 
Good afternoon, Wehrwolfen. :2wave:

Do you think the leaders in China even care much about the fact that most of their people have to wear protective masks on their faces just to go outdoors? Are they embarrassed that those photos are seen around the world? I don't hear anyone from this administration challenging China on this...they would rather make a few people like Al Gore and others more wealthy than they already are, and "necessarily make our utility bills skyrocket," according to BHO. What a bunch of :bs: they expect us to swallow! :thumbdown:

Exactly!, Obama is forcing America into destroying it's lively hood while the PRC and India couldn't give a damn about what they're doing to the atmosphere, while here in the US using the Clean Air Act, we have curtailed our effluent gases and pollution to pre 1950 levels.
 
you know wolf, for a guy who cant stop posting lying editorials and made up facts, you'd think clarifying your view on GW is wouldn't be such an ordeal. Why cant you just tell us your view. tell you what. Just tell us the letter of the narrative you believe

A its all a hoax
B yes the earth is warming but its natural
C yes its warming and man made but not as bad as predicted

ABC that's how easy global warming can be
 
Back
Top Bottom