Biden Position on Guns Is a Joke

[Rigby5]

And all the while, Putin is murdering civilians, Trump is asking him for help in his next election.

That is not what really is happening.
It is the Ukraine that started murdering civilians, even before the military coup of 2014.
The Ukraine has been stealing oil, murdering ethnic Russians, and violating treaties for decades.
Russia happens to be the good guys in this conflict.

Trump is corrupt, but in this case, he is not asking for "help", but just asking for the truth, which is that the Bidens were taking kickbacks for illegally bribing bureaucrats in the Ukraine to murder and steal.

 

[Rigby5]

Ignorance is saying every scientist agrees with you when there are hundreds that don't.

A lot of scientists are very narrow and just focus on one subject, in which there is nothing about atmospheric chemistry.
If you ask someone who knows about something like electronics about climate, you might as well as a painter.
They are not going to know a thing about it.

So you have to qualify which "scientists" you ask.
And when you reduce the set to only those who understand atmospheric physics, it is then 100% who warn of global warming being man made.

The only disagreement among those who know atmospheric physics, is how quickly and badly it is likely to accelerate.
The acceleration forces are increased water vapor and thawing methane hydrate that was frozen before.
The slow down forces are that increased water vapor will produce clouds that reflect and increase albedo.
But who wants to live on a planet where the skies are perpetually cloudy?

 

[Rigby5]

Nope, climate has been changing since the earth was made, that's a fact. The other fact is we can't change that no matter what we do. How do I know this? Because they've been trying since I was a child back in the 60's. Since that time they've outlawed many products and it cost us trillions of dollars. And guess what? They are more upset today than they were over 50 years ago.

Climate change is a bottomless money pit that can never be filled even if we used every dollar in this country. And I'll ask you a question no enviro-nut has ever been able to answer: What are the metrics that will shut you people up forever, and how much will it cost us?

Sometimes while on this subject, I picture a classroom of children in school a hundred years or so from today. The teacher tells the children that back in the 2000's, man thought they could control the climate, and the children bust out in laughter like when our teachers told us at one time, man thought the earth was flat and if you go too far, you'll fall off.

That is not true.
The products they outlawed had nothing to do with climate, but were highly concentrated neuro toxins that we were inadvertently getting into our food chain.

They have tried to reduce emissions slightly with auto emissions regulations, but they actually cost us nothing and saved us millions, because the forced cars to go from 10 mpg, to 30 mpg.

Reducing climate change costs us nothing.
It saves us money to use less fossil fuel.

As to what is the goal to stop claim change, it is to not produce more carbon emissions than plants use up.
It is homeostasis.
Where carbon is not accumulating and increasing in the atmosphere.

The industrial carbon we are adding is not that large, only about 5 trillions tons a years or so.
But the problem is they are unbalanced, and accumulating.
So that can not be allowed to continue.
We have to reduce back to a sustainable level, where plants can remove ALL that we produce.
Otherwise eventually we all die.

 

[Rigby5]

The difference of course is we have empirical evidence all those other things work. Climate change is a theory, not a reality. There is no proof that it actually exists, only that yes, the climate changes.

That is not true.
We know exactly how climate change works, because you can duplicate greenhouse gas experiments in a lab.
When solar energy hits the earth, it can't escape by conduction, because the earth is surrounded by vacuum.
The only way it can leave is by photonic radiation.
And this can only happen at the outer edges of the atmosphere, the boundary to space.
So if you add carbon to that boundary, it blocks photonic radiation and converts it to vibratory heat.
Which then forces the whole planet to retain more heat.

Natural climate cycles are over 110,000 years long, and we have artificially duplicated those changes in less than 100 years.

 

[Rigby5]

Same BS. No shit Denier. You really have no idea do you ? But neither does any-other denier. So, you’re in good company with other Trump munchkins. At no time in the history of mankind, has the climate changed at a rate as fast as it has since the industrial revolution. Being a science and math illiterate, I guess you ‘re going to pretend now you have no idea how rare of change in a climate affects species do you ? . Hilarious.

I happen to agree with you on this, but you are not helping.
That is no way to convince anyone of anything.
Try sticking to facts, without all the coercive value judgements.

 

[Rigby5]

The recession was mostly due to the housing crash which many a Democrat had their fingerprints on. In fact it all started with Bill Clinton when he put in the then youngest leader of HUD, Andrew Cuomo. They instituted policies like zero down and no credit check with Clinton's mad desire to put more minorities in houses. Well it worked. He got more minorities in houses and GW didn't stop it. However Republicans in Congress did try to stop it and was met with strong opposition by the Democrats. Need the videos, just ask.

Yes, the Supreme Court got involved in the election (which they normally don't do) because of the constitutional violation of legislating from the bench. The LAW states all ballots have to be turned in within 7 days whether there's a recount or not. As for Gore winning if that didn't happen:

MIAMI, Florida (CNN) -- If a recount of Florida's disputed votes in last year's close presidential election had been allowed to proceed by the U.S. Supreme Court, Republican George W. Bush still would have won the White House, two newspapers reported Wednesday.

The Miami Herald and USA Today conducted a comprehensive review of 64,248 "undercounted" ballots in Florida's 67 counties that ended last month. Their count showed that Bush's razor-thin margin of 537 votes -- certified in December by the Florida Secretary of State's office -- would have tripled to 1,665 votes if counted according to standards advocated by his Democratic rival, former Vice President Al Gore.

CNN.com - Bush still wins Florida in newspaper recount - April 4, 2001

www.cnn.com

I was buying/selling real estate back during the 2007 crash, and disagree HUD was a problem.
HUD FHA loans were and are actually much stricter and harder to get than conventional loans.
HUD, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, etc, also had a lower delinquency rate than conventional.
The problem was greedy real estate brokers using adjustable rate mortgages with large balloon payments, based on the British LIBOR instead of US prime.
Banks would then combine these "subprime" mortgages into "toxic derivatives" that Fannie Mae was required by law to buy up.

You have to know it was NOT the home buyers that caused the real estate crash, because they were paying their mortgage for years without problem, before the crash, and they paid rents reliably after the crash.
They were not the problem.
The problem was that balloon payments and inability to refinance, forced mortgage payments to double.
It was essentially theft by the banks.

 

[Rigby5]

You mean like these?

You ask, I provide. November 2nd, 1922. Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt.

Roger Carr recently wrote in comments: HELP WANTED: I am trying to purchase (or plunder) a full copy of this story, mentioned here on this forum: A Washington, D.C. resident John Lockwood was condu…

wattsupwiththat.com

Study: Global warming will cause 180,000 more rapes by 2099

Controversial new research predicts that over the coming century, rising temperatures will result in more violent crime.

www.motherjones.com

And That’s the Way It Was: In 1972, Cronkite Warned of ‘New Ice Age’

The “brutal” winter is on the attack again, bringing sleet and heavy snow to the mid-Atlantic region. Previous storms targeted the deep south including Dallas, Texas, and several hammered New England. By March 4, Boston was just 2 inches away from hitting an all-time record for snow, Boston.com...

newsbusters.org

Flashback 1989: UN Predicted Global Warming Would Destroy Entire Nations By 2000

Sounding like a Kool-Aid cult

dailycaller.com

FLASHBACK: ABC News Warns NYC Will Be Under Water by 2015 Due to Global Warming and Polar Bears Will Fall From Sky | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

Seven years ago ABC News warned viewers that New York City will be under water by 2015 due to global warming.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

First of all, the industrial revolution around 1830 DID start some significant climate change problems.
Which we reduced by finding cleaner ways to make steel and produce energy.

Walter Cronkite was correct that in theory we should be entering an ice age.
But that is from the normal and natural 110,000 year long cycle, and is irrelevant compared to the fact we are still just slightly past the warmest part of the natural cycle, and are artificially adding a whole additional heating cycle on top of the natural one.

Imagine if we had NOT reacted to the environmental warnings of the 1960s, and instead still all drove cars getting 10 mpg?

 

[Rigby5]

noun, plural the·o·ries.
a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.

a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

Sorry, but that is incorrect.

In detective stories, a "theory" is conjecture.
In science, a "theory" is the over all or underlying abstract explanation, and has no conjecture implied at all.

Well established and proven scientific explanations are called "theory".
The reason scientist call proven abstract explanations "theory", is that the underlying cause usually is not that useful, and to allow for further additions and changes, since science actually is infinite and never completely settled.

 

[Dagosa]

I happen to agree with you on this, but you are not helping.
That is no way to convince anyone of anything.
Try sticking to facts, without all the coercive value judgements.

Facts ? Really ? There are thousands of websites that give you all the evidence any literate science person needs. You have to be shitting me if you think I’m going to debate by copy paste climate change evidence which is in abundance….literally everywhere people don’t have their head up their ass. I find it really silly to debate the weather with my dog as it would be to debate climate change with a denier.

 

[Dagosa]

That is no way to convince anyone of anything.

Seriously. You think you can convince a denier of anything. It’s a waste of tIme. They know so little about science in general, you’d have start with “ see spot run.” They have an agenda that has nothing to do with knowledge.

 

[Dagosa]

Well established and proven scientific explanations are called "theory".

They are NEVER proven. Everytime we make that mistake we play into the hands of deniers. Theories are altered, changed and added to as more evidence is found. Thats why they are called theories. They are subject to change. We keep confusing geometry with natural science.

 

[Dagosa]

That is not what really is happening.
It is the Ukraine that started murdering civilians, even before the military coup of 2014.
The Ukraine has been stealing oil, murdering ethnic Russians, and violating treaties for decades.
Russia happens to be the good guys in this conflict.

Trump is corrupt, but in this case, he is not asking for "help", but just asking for the truth, which is that the Bidens were taking kickbacks for illegally bribing bureaucrats in the Ukraine to murder and steal.

Seriously ? Trump asked the the president of Ukraine to make up shit on Biden or he wouldn’t get the weapons he wanted.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Seriously ? Trump asked the the president of Ukraine to make up shit on Biden or he wouldn’t get the weapons he wanted.

Let's see the evidence of your lie..................I mean claim.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sorry, but that is incorrect.

In detective stories, a "theory" is conjecture.
In science, a "theory" is the over all or underlying abstract explanation, and has no conjecture implied at all.

Well established and proven scientific explanations are called "theory".
The reason scientist call proven abstract explanations "theory", is that the underlying cause usually is not that useful, and to allow for further additions and changes, since science actually is infinite and never completely settled.

It is in some cases. Years ago our river caught on fire. The theory was that industry could dump toxic chemicals into the river because the river emptied into Lake Erie and it would dissipate to the point nobody would know. It would be so diluted it couldn't possible cause harm to anybody.

Well the river caught on fire and since we all know water isn't flamable, the theory was flawed. We had empirical evidence that it was the chemicals that started the fire, and that's when we took action to correct the problem.

With global warming or climate change, we have no such evidence. Is the climate changing? Yes it is. It's been changing since God made the place, but no empirical evidence man has anything to do with it. In fact they changed it from global warming to climate change because there was evidence the globe was not warming at all. That too was a flawed theory.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

First of all, the industrial revolution around 1830 DID start some significant climate change problems.
Which we reduced by finding cleaner ways to make steel and produce energy.

Walter Cronkite was correct that in theory we should be entering an ice age.
But that is from the normal and natural 110,000 year long cycle, and is irrelevant compared to the fact we are still just slightly past the warmest part of the natural cycle, and are artificially adding a whole additional heating cycle on top of the natural one.

Imagine if we had NOT reacted to the environmental warnings of the 1960s, and instead still all drove cars getting 10 mpg?

There is nothing wrong with doing things better or cleaner. The problem is the cost in which to do it. As I stated earlier in the post, climate change is a bottomless money pit. All the money in the country.....in the world could never fill it, yet we continue to dump trillions of dollars to fight something that we have no control over.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I was buying/selling real estate back during the 2007 crash, and disagree HUD was a problem.
HUD FHA loans were and are actually much stricter and harder to get than conventional loans.
HUD, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, etc, also had a lower delinquency rate than conventional.
The problem was greedy real estate brokers using adjustable rate mortgages with large balloon payments, based on the British LIBOR instead of US prime.
Banks would then combine these "subprime" mortgages into "toxic derivatives" that Fannie Mae was required by law to buy up.

You have to know it was NOT the home buyers that caused the real estate crash, because they were paying their mortgage for years without problem, before the crash, and they paid rents reliably after the crash.
They were not the problem.
The problem was that balloon payments and inability to refinance, forced mortgage payments to double.
It was essentially theft by the banks.

It's up to the consumer to gain knowledge of what they are buying. When standards were dropped, people ran to he bank for home loans. I know because during that time I lost a few good tenants who were over their head in credit and had not much money in the bank. One of them was renting his television set.

Banks gave the loans because the borrower thought "I can afford X amount of dollars per month" not realizing it was only going to go up from there. You can't get less than 2% on a mortgage. Rates went up, these people were all mortgaged with an arm, and they could no longer afford it.

All people knew at the time is they could afford a home and nothing about borrowing money, especially poor people. With 0 dollars down and no credit check, the lowlifes began buying houses in the suburbs and destroyed the areas. They had no intention or ability to pay a mortgage, but it was a free vacation from the projects for a while.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Reducing climate change costs us nothing.
It saves us money to use less fossil fuel.

Fighting climate change is a $150 trillion battle: Bank of America report

Decarbonizing the world would take $5 trillion a year of investment over the next 30 years, a new Bank of America report found.

finance.yahoo.com

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

You and I both know Trump was pro-gun. He only did that because of the Vegas shooting to show he's doing something. Trump would have never tried to ban magazines or ammo.

Be careful how much faith and trust you place in a former New York Democrat Billionaire.

 

[Dagosa]

Let's see the evidence of your lie..................I mean claim.

So you’re living under a rock. Trump couldn’t get the evidence when he was president, commander and chief with the DOJ, FBI and CIA appointees under his wing. What, are you nuts ? He’s now hounding Putin while Putin is busy orchestrating genocide. By Humpers will continue to hang with the dufus delux.

 

[otto105]

Let's see the evidence of your lie..................I mean claim.

First ray, post the transcript of the phone call.

That should be a good start to rudy heading over there.