Questions that conservatives can't answer

POSTED BY: kpo
UPDATED: Wednesday, April 9, 2025 23:15
VIEWED: 19339
PAGE 11 of 16

PREV PAGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NEXT PAGE

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Saturday, September 20, 2014 4:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:

1. An anti AGW advocacy group founded by a climate skeptic
2. See Magons' post
3. See Magons' post. The fact that this is the Kremlin's line on climate science is worrying, and doesn't bode well for future climate negotiations
4. Another climate skeptic advocacy group founded by a group of petroleum geologists
5. Religious conspiracy site?
6. ??

Perhaps you misunderstood what was meant by 'scientific body or institution'. It's not a lobby group set up to fight climate science, or a group of conspiracy nuts. To give you an example, here's a list of dozens of scientific bodies/institutions worldwide, and many of their statements on climate change: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Conc
urring

Also note that many of these bodies are not funded by governments, and those that are, generally aren't funded for their views on climate change.

It's not personal. It's just war.

It's interesting to look at that website, a very comprehensive list of renowned scientific institutions from across the world from a multitude of disciplines vs a few conspiracy theory sites, and organisations funded by the petrochemical and mining industries.

I see what consensus looks like.

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Tuesday, September 23, 2014 3:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Upon request, Auraptor can't name a scientific body or institution that disputes the theory of man-made climate change.

All that proves, if it is indeed true, is that there isn't a scientific body or institution that disputes the theory of man-made climate change.

It doesn't prove that these institutions are CORRECT in supporting the theory of man-made climate change.

History of science is replete with examples of scientific institutions being incorrect in the theories they have supported.

-----

Disobedience is not an issue if obedience is not the goal.

CTS: nice contribution. Some ditz will follow with a question of any one example of science history - so try that whole "flat Earth" fabrication put forth by all the scientific institutions of the time. EVERYBODY knew it was true, including all scientists. (anybody who didn't think it was true was, like, decaptiated for, like, heresy)

That was one example.

Another is dactyloscopy. Proven over and over again by scientists to have no basis in reality, no factual support, and decried by police departments worldwide as unreliable, unsubstantiated, and understood by all to be completely fictitious. Even Hoss on Bonanza knew enough to disprove all the scientists, in one episode.

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Thursday, September 25, 2014 4:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Niki wrote:

The Supremes are batting it around (like you can find much ELSE on the news...sigh...), so why don't we? Maybe not debate the issue of same-sex marriage ITSELF, since we've been there/done that enough times to choke a horse, but make guesses as to what the Supremes will end up doing?

When asked, Rappy doesn't care to hazard a guess at what the Supremes might decide on DOMA and/or Prop 8, but worries that it will lead directly to dogs marrying horses, or something.

"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."

Guessing what the SCOTUS will vote? That is a lame entry to this dategory.

STORYMARK

Thursday, September 25, 2014 6:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh, and because I'm about 95% sure that Rappy is going to come stumbling in any second and start whining about "Cites?", here ya go, even though you steadfastly refuse to produce any such cites for your own idiotic claims.

I don't readily recall AURaptor asking for "cites" here. Can you cite?

Can you read? Because no such claim was made.

Fuckin' wingnuts, man. READ.

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”? Isaac Asimov

STORYMARK

Thursday, September 25, 2014 6:33 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
I would welcome one. And I certainly wouldn't take it as an 'attack thread'.

It's not personal. It's just war.

I would too. But they won't do it - because we'd actually do our best to address them - and then they wouldn't be able to claim (falsely, but whatever) that we won't have "honest discussion."

But come on, righties - prove us wrong, I DARE YOU.

(of course, they're too scared to even enter the thread, so the challenge will likely go unseen.)

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

Since ol' socky resurrected this thread, Ill point out with glee that none of these hucksters ever managed to ever put up.

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”? Isaac Asimov

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Wednesday, October 1, 2014 5:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh, and because I'm about 95% sure that Rappy is going to come stumbling in any second and start whining about "Cites?", here ya go, even though you steadfastly refuse to produce any such cites for your own idiotic claims.

I don't readily recall AURaptor asking for "cites" here. Can you cite?

Can you read? Because no such claim was made.

Fuckin' wingnuts, man. READ.

Are you unable to read English?
"Whining about cites" is akin to "asking for cites" nitwit.
Or is your delusion filtering into a different reading failure?

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Saturday, October 4, 2014 5:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Auraptor tells Magons, 'You need to get laid', and claims his reasons for it 'weren't the least bit sexist'. But then he can't/won't answer:

Why, according to you, does Magons, 'need to get laid'? Why are you making assumptions about the length of time since she last had sex, and what does it have to do with what she posted?

It's not personal. It's just war.

The old saying "An apple a day keeps the doctor away, an orgasm a day keeps the shrink away" goes a long way. Getting laid helps you people keep your crazy in the closet.
How clueless must you really be to not understnad the basest of human needs?

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Saturday, October 4, 2014 5:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
In the "Race relations have plummeted since Obama took office" thread, Geezer refuses to answer:

"What do you think? Has Obama done much to turn black people against white people, or vice-versa? If so what exactly has he done?"

He calls it a "Have you stopped beating your wife?" question.

Are you admitting that a question that you can't answer is Have you stopped beating your wife?

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Saturday, October 4, 2014 5:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Upon request, Rappy cannot state what his definition of "incest" is, only that he agrees with Jeremy Irons that a man marrying his son isn't incest.

Reference thread:

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=54520

Are you again confused about what you said, how your strawman argument failed right out of the gate? RapKnight did not say that - he was pointing out the redefining of marriage that you so blindly drone on about.

KPO

Saturday, October 4, 2014 5:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Auraptor tells Magons, 'You need to get laid', and claims his reasons for it 'weren't the least bit sexist'. But then he can't/won't answer:

Why, according to you, does Magons, 'need to get laid'? Why are you making assumptions about the length of time since she last had sex, and what does it have to do with what she posted?

It's not personal. It's just war.

The old saying "An apple a day keeps the doctor away, an orgasm a day keeps the shrink away" goes a long way. Getting laid helps you people keep your crazy in the closet.
How clueless must you really be to not understnad the basest of human needs?

Lol, I forgot about this incident. Oh Auraptor.

Quote:
Are you admitting that a question that you can't answer is Have you stopped beating your wife?

That's an easy question to answer. First off, I don't have a wife. Second, if I did I certainly wouldn't beat her, so you clearly have ALL your facts wrong... etc. etc.

See?

It's not personal. It's just war.

PREV PAGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NEXT PAGE