Questions that conservatives can't answer
POSTED BY: kpo
UPDATED: Wednesday, April 9, 2025 23:15
VIEWED: 19339
PAGE 5 of 16
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
What I see the a bunch of right-wing parrots. They heard it from somebody who heard it from somebody, who heard it from a right-wing authority that it was true. And well, it came from the authority so it must be fact. A fact that doesn't need verification.
It's pretty obvious they haven't bothered to look up any actual studies, or bothered their extremely lazy and puny brains with any actual thinking.
Yup, it's all based on blind faith.
Which is why it is so telling when they refer to accepting science as a "religion".
Their stance on the issues really is based on nothing but faith - so they assume the same is true of other viewpoints. Which is why when confronted with actual evidence, or asked that they proivide evidence themselves - they tuck tail and run every time.
Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.
"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum
"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hell, Rappy wasn't even able to provide a single cite for his claim that the Keystone XL pipeline would create jobs in this country. That should have been an easy one, since they've been whining about it for so long now. Surely *somebody* has done some hard-hitting studies that would show the massive impact this project would have in lessening unemployment in this country.
But when pressed, he ran away, after suggesting I basically take it on faith that he was right.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Auraptor has been challenged to back up his repeated claim that 'AGW is a con', with his best bit of reasoning or evidence that would sway a neutral, unknowledgeable stranger. He has been unable to do so.
By the way, I've been thinking that each of our resident conservatives should have their own colour. Green for Auraptor, pink for Hero and so on...
For anyone wanting to use coloured font use the code font color=green inside triangle brackets (these <>). And then the code /font color inside triangle brackets to end the coloured text.
It's not personal. It's just war.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Shouldn't Rappy's color really be YELLOW
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
A valid point. Yes, yes I think it should.
Though, come to think of it... yellow is actually too strong a color. He doesn't even rate yellow. He deserves something much, much weaker. A pale, piss-stain, barely-yellow color seems appropriate.
Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.
"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum
"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Upon request, Rappy cannot find a single job that would be created by the approval of the Keystone XL pipeline.
Upon request, Rappy cannot name a single instance of a U.S. Ambassador calling the President directly to ask for more security.
Upon request, Rappy cannot cite a single source that supports his claim that "10,000 years" of society and tradition have defined marriage as only between one man and one woman.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
A valid point. Yes, yes I think it should.
Though, come to think of it... yellow is actually too strong a color. He doesn't even rate yellow. He deserves something much, much weaker. A pale, piss-stain, barely-yellow color seems appropriate.
Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.
"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum
"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"
Perhaps this is more appropriate for Rappy
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
In the interest of fairness, which we haven't gotten from the other side, I will back up Mike's claims:Quote:
The top climate scientist at NASA says the Bush administration has tried to stop him from speaking out since he gave a lecture last month calling for prompt reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases linked to global warming.
[He said] such procedures had already prevented the public from fully grasping recent findings about climate change that point to risks ahead.
He fell out of favor with the White House in 2004 after giving a speech at the University of Iowa before the presidential election, in which he complained that government climate scientists were being muzzled
But Dr. Hansen said that nothing in 30 years equaled the push made since early December to keep him from publicly discussing what he says are clear-cut dangers from further delay in curbing carbon dioxide.
He said he was particularly incensed that the directives had come through telephone conversations and not through formal channels, leaving no significant trails of documents.
The fresh efforts to quiet him, Dr. Hansen said, began in a series of calls after a lecture he gave on Dec. 6 at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco. In the talk, he said that significant emission cuts could be achieved with existing technologies, particularly in the case of motor vehicles, and that without leadership by the United States,
After that speech and the release of data by Dr. Hansen on Dec. 15 showing that 2005 was probably the warmest year in at least a century, officials at the headquarters of the space agency repeatedly phoned public affairs officers, who relayed the warning to Dr. Hansen that there would be "dire consequences" if such statements continued, those officers and Dr. Hansen said in interviews.
Among the restrictions, according to Dr. Hansen and an internal draft memorandum he provided to The Times, was that his supervisors could stand in for him in any news media interviews.
In one call, George Deutsch, a recently appointed public affairs officer at NASA headquarters, rejected a request from a producer at National Public Radio to interview Dr. Hansen, said Leslie McCarthy, a public affairs officer responsible for the Goddard Institute.
Citing handwritten notes taken during the conversation, Ms. McCarthy said Mr. Deutsch called N.P.R. "the most liberal" media outlet in the country. She said that in that call and others, Mr. Deutsch said his job was "to make the president look good" and that as a White House appointee that might be Mr. Deutsch's priority.
The fight between Dr. Hansen and administration officials echoes other recent disputes. At climate laboratories of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, for example, many scientists who routinely took calls from reporters five years ago can now do so only if the interview is approved by administration officials in Washington, and then only if a public affairs officer is present or on the phone.
Where scientists' points of view on climate policy align with those of the administration, however, there are few signs of restrictions on extracurricular lectures or writing. Excerpts from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/earth/29climate.html?pagewan
ted=all&_r=0Quote:
At the beginning of June, 2006, the BBC Panorama documentary followed up on this and found that many scientists felt they were being censored and that various reports had been systematically suppressed, even altered. In one case, a major climate assessment report was due out a month before the 2004 presidential elections, but was delayed because it had such a bleak assessment, and the Bush administration did not want it to be part of the election issues. It was released shortly after the elections were over.
Just weeks before hurricane Katrina devastated parts of Southern United States, Panorama reported that “
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
As to Keystone, a particular bugaboo of mine, the claims about it have been debunked over and over, but I'll put 'em up again, in case anyone on the right would ACTUALLY like to debate something, rather than just toss out "ad hominems":Quote:
The misleading assault on the president’s energy policies continues.
¦A conservative group’s TV ad claims “we will all pay more at the pump” because the administration “blocked” the Keystone XL pipeline.
¦Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell claims that the pipeline “could have brought 700,000 barrels of oil to the market each day.”
¦The TV ad also claims that Obama “opposed exploring for energy in Alaska,” which is only half true.
All those claims are false or misleading. Regarding the pipeline, as we’ve reported, there’s nothing stopping more Canadian oil from coming into the U.S. right now. Existing cross-border pipelines could carry perhaps 1 million additional barrels of oil per day, and surplus capacity is projected to persist for years to come even without the Keystone project.
Furthermore, Obama hasn’t “blocked” it. The Keystone’s sponsor says it expects the White House to approve the northern leg, from Hardisty, Alberta, to Steele City, Nebraska, in 2013, after it submits an application for a new route around Nebraska’s environmentally sensitive Sandhills region. Meanwhile, it is going ahead with the southern portion, which Obama has endorsed, ordering agencies to expedite permitting.
As for the claim that Obama “opposed exploring for energy in Alaska.” The truth is that Shell Oil days ago said it expects to begin drilling exploratory wells this summer in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas off Alaska’s Arctic coast, now that the Interior Department has granted approvals for the company’s oil spill response plans.
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/03/more-pipeline-piffle-and-an-alaskan-a
bsurdity/]
...aaand, we all know how well their explorations in the Chukchi have worked out, right? Further:Quote:
The latest TV ad to heap blame on Obama is “Nine Dollar Gas” from the American Energy Alliance, an advocacy group that does not disclose the sources of its money. It is a “subsidiary” of the industry-funded Institute for Energy Research. Thomas J. Pyle, a one-time aide to former Texas congressman Tom Delay, is president of both groups. Politico reported that both groups are funded in part by brothers Charles and David Koch and their donor network.
As to JUST the matter of jobs, here's some fact checking. Quote:
...jobs claims are based entirely on a report by the Perryman Group, commissioned by the pipeline’s owner TransCanada, whose results have been described as “dead wrong” and “meaningless” by Council on Foreign Relations fellow Michael Levi and environmental economist Andrew Leach, neither of whom oppose the construction of the pipeline.
The only independent analysis conducted of the American job-creation potential of the Keystone XL pipeline finds that between 500 and 1400 temporary construction jobs will be created, with a negative long-term economic impact as gas prices rise in the Midwest and environmental costs are borne:
Examining TransCanada’s business operations, the Cornell Global Labor Institute report finds that TransCanada has already purchased most of the steel it intends to use for the pipeline from India; that most of the work will be conducted by people already employed by TransCanada; and that the Perryman Group included already-completed pipeline projects in its job-creation estimates.
“The operating costs for KXL are very minimal,” the Cornell Global Labor Institute report explains, “and based on the figures provided by TransCanada for the Canadian section of the pipeline, the new permanent US pipeline jobs in the US number as few as 50.”
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Furthermore, Obama hasn’t “blocked” it. The Keystone’s sponsor says it expects the White House to approve the northern leg, from Hardisty, Alberta, to Steele City, Nebraska, in 2013, after it submits an application for a new route around Nebraska’s environmentally sensitive Sandhills region. Meanwhile, it is going ahead with the southern portion, which Obama has endorsed, ordering agencies to expedite permitting.
And that southern portion also involves the government of the state of Texas using eminent domain laws to take land from rightful owners and sell it to foreign corporations. Yes, the GOP fully approves of this and is backing it 100%.
That's the stuff they don't want you to talk about.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME