The left's rejection of science

[NYcarbineer]

If it's not sustainable then it hasn't begun.

Again dimwit...it is scientific fact that life has begun at conception. Do you have any idea how many lives are sitting in Intensive Care Units across the country as we speak that are hooked to life-support machines because their current condition is unsustainable for life? Does that mean their life "hasn't begun"? Dumb ass.

Yah know... lefties are not exactly sustainable, since their survival is based upon wealth redistribution.

That's a great point. Detroit is proof of that. After 65 years of complete Dumbocrat control, the city is a third world shit-hole rampant with crime, drugs, and dilapidated buildings. They had to file for bankruptcy.

The left-wing ideology is completely unsustainable. Venezuela is another example.

After years of Democratic control San Francisco is the richest city in America, or close to it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Salt Lake City, the capital of one of the most conservative states in the US, has committed to a plan of using 100% renewables by 2032.

That if anything should tell you how far out on the fringe the typical USMB RW'er is on energy issues.

 

[Thinker101]

If it's not sustainable then it hasn't begun.

Again dimwit...it is scientific fact that life has begun at conception. Do you have any idea how many lives are sitting in Intensive Care Units across the country as we speak that are hooked to life-support machines because their current condition is unsustainable for life? Does that mean their life "hasn't begun"? Dumb ass.

Yah know... lefties are not exactly sustainable, since their survival is based upon wealth redistribution.

That's a great point. Detroit is proof of that. After 65 years of complete Dumbocrat control, the city is a third world shit-hole rampant with crime, drugs, and dilapidated buildings. They had to file for bankruptcy.

The left-wing ideology is completely unsustainable. Venezuela is another example.

After years of Democratic control San Francisco is the richest city in America, or close to it.

You may be confusing "richest city" with "most expensive city". Just comparing cities in California, SF is way down on the list of richest cities, even behind San Bernardino, which is an armpit of a city.
List of California locations by income - Wikipedia

 

[mamooth]

Pro-lifers don't need to define it. Science has already done it.

Ah, more of your famous "BECAUSE I SAY SO!" logic. It's all you'll ever have.

I asked for the scientific definition of person. You declared it existed, but refused to say exactly what it was, or back up your claim in any way. You and I both know no such definition exists, which is why you ran. "Person" is a social and legal definition, not a scientific one. Always has been, always will be. Pro-lifers pretend that their totally arbitrary choice is a scientific definition, but we know they're lying, because none of them can even give a scientific definition.

Life begins at conception. Science has unequivocally proven that already. A fetus even has it's own unique DNA.

So you're a flaming eugenicist, like almost all pro-lifers. All hail the superior human DNA! You can't define what human DNA is, but that's convenient for you. You'll get to arbitrarily define anyone as untermenschen for having subpar DNA, and thus have an excuse to exterminate them.

It's so good to be one of the rational and moral people. We don't have to rely on sick and totally arbitrary eugenics arguments. We just use the same definition of "person: or "human being" that humanity has used over all of human history, which is "human, born and alive". And here come the pro-lifers, claiming that all of humanity has gotten it totally wrong, and that they know better. Their justification? "BECAUSE I SAY SO!".

Sorry, but you'll have to do better than that to justify your fascist agenda. This is about defending liberty. It's what liberals do.

 

[OKTexas]

Simple question, did your life exist before conception?.

Sort of, just as it only sort of existed after conception.

You're demanding bright dividing lines, when the real world is very fuzzy. You very arbitrarily place that line at conception, even though there's no good reason to do so.

Now who's reverting to circular logic? You're nothing but a hypocrite, new human life without conception will never exist, nothing fuzzy about that.

 

[BlindBoo]

Everyone's life began with conception but not all conceptions will produce life.

 

[P@triot]

You attack the green house effect

Hahahahahahahahaha!!! Eat it, bitch...

Monster snowstorm in Colorado forces postponement of climate change & global warming rally

Science has unequivocally proven you wrong and you continue to deny it. The Earth has cooled, we've had colder than normal temperatures, the polar ice-cap expanded a mind-boggling 900,000 sq. miles (over 60% expansion) after left-wing political activists said it would be completely gone, and none of the left-wing predictions have ever come true. You're an idiot science denier.

 

[P@triot]

Given how all the Trumptards have been repeatedly so humiliated on the global warming topic, do you really want to go another round?

Hahahahahahahahaha!!! Eat it, bitch...

Monster snowstorm in Colorado forces postponement of climate change & global warming rally

Science has unequivocally proven you wrong and you continue to deny it. The Earth has cooled, we've had colder than normal temperatures, the polar ice-cap expanded a mind-boggling 900,000 sq. miles (over 60% expansion) after left-wing political activists said it would be completely gone, and none of the left-wing predictions have ever come true. Your'e an idiot science denier.

 

[P@triot]

It's been causing steady strong warming.

Hahahahahahahahaha!!! Eat it, bitch...

Monster snowstorm in Colorado forces postponement of climate change & global warming rally

Science has unequivocally proven you wrong and you continue to deny it. The Earth has cooled, we've had colder than normal temperatures, the polar ice-cap expanded a mind-boggling 900,000 sq. miles (over 60% expansion) after left-wing political activists said it would be completely gone, and none of the left-wing predictions have ever come true. Your'e an idiot science denier.

 

[P@triot]

Salt Lake City, the capital of one of the most conservative states in the US, has committed to a plan of using 100% renewables by 2032.

That if anything should tell you how far out on the fringe the typical USMB RW'er is on energy issues.

You lack the intellect to ask the most important question: why? You didn't address that (presumably because you're not bight enough too but possibly because you have something to hide).

Are they doing it because they bought into the "Global Warming" scam or are they doing it because of massive federal subsidies?

Are they doing it because they want to "save the plant" ( ), or because they believe that renewable energy can save their tax payer's money over the long term?

Get back to us when you have link backing up your claim and when you can provide the full story.

 

[mamooth]

Now who's reverting to circular logic?

Not me. You don't appear to understand what "circular logic" means.

You're nothing but a hypocrite,

You also don't appear to know what "hypocrisy" means, being you haven't demonstrated any on my part.

new human life without conception will never exist, nothing fuzzy about that.

And a new human being won't exist without ovulation, or with implantation, or many other events. Hence it's not a sensible standard.

The funniest thing about the conception crowd is that they don't even know what conception is. They claim a new human forms because chromosomes merge, but chromosomes _don't_ merge during conception. The fundamental pro-life argument is dead wrong on a scientific basis.

(For those wondering what I'm referring to, chromosome fusion happens during the second cell division, not during conception. Hence, pro-lifers should be saying "Life begins at the second cell division", if they don't want to be totally wrong scientifically. Too bad that phrase kind of lacks zip.)

 

[P@triot]

You attack the green house effect

Hahahahahahahahaha!!! Eat it, bitch...

A study in the journal Nature Climate Change reviewed 117 climate predictions and found that 97.4% never materialized.

• Biologist Paul Ehrlich predicted in the 1970s that: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” and that “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”

• In January 1970, Life reported, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”

• In January 2006 Al Gore predicted that we had ten years left before the planet turned into a “total frying pan.” We made it.

• In 2008, a segment aired on ABC News predicted that NYC would be under water by June 2015.

• In 1970, ecologist Kenneth E.F. Wattpredicted that “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder by the year 2000, This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.”

• In 2008, Al Gore predicted that there is a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap would be completely melted within 5-7 years. He at least hedged that prediction by giving himself “75%” certainty. By 2014 - the polar ice cap had expanded over 60% (more than 900,000 sq miles)

• On May 13th 2014 France’s foreign minister said that we only have 500 days to stop “climate chaos.” The recent Paris climate summit met 565 days after his remark.

• In 2009, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center head James Wassen warned that Obama only had four years left to save the earth.

• On the first Earth Day its sponsor warned that “in 25 years, somewhere between 75% and 80% of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”

• And another Earth Day prediction from Kenneth Watt: “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”

Stop embracing left-wing lunacy and start embracing the facts, you science denying jack-ass.

Top 10 Climate Change Predictions Gone Spectacularly Wrong; This Is EPIC!

 

[OKTexas]

Now who's reverting to circular logic?

Not me. You don't appear to understand what "circular logic" means.

You're nothing but a hypocrite,

You also don't appear to know what "hypocrisy" means, being you haven't demonstrated any on my part.

new human life without conception will never exist, nothing fuzzy about that.

And a new human being won't exist without ovulation, or with implantation, or many other events. Hence it's not a sensible standard.

The funniest thing about the conception crowd is that they don't even know what conception is. They claim a new human forms because chromosomes merge, but chromosomes _don't_ merge during conception. The fundamental pro-life argument is dead wrong on a scientific basis.

(For those wondering what I'm referring to, chromosome fusion happens during the second cell division, not during conception. Hence, pro-lifers should be saying "Life begins at the second cell division", if they don't want to be totally wrong scientifically. Too bad that phrase kind of lacks zip.)

I think it's you who lacks understanding. Note number 2.

Conception: 1. The union of the sperm and the ovum. Synonymous with fertilization.
2. The onset of pregnancy, marked by implantation of the blastocyst into the endometrium.
3. A basic understanding of a situation or a principle.
From the Latin conceptio, conceptionis meaning conception, becoming pregnant; drawing up of legal formulae; and from the Latin conceptus meaning conceiving, pregnancy; collecting, or a collection.

Medical Definition of Conception

.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Now who's reverting to circular logic?

Not me. You don't appear to understand what "circular logic" means.

You're nothing but a hypocrite,

You also don't appear to know what "hypocrisy" means, being you haven't demonstrated any on my part.

new human life without conception will never exist, nothing fuzzy about that.

And a new human being won't exist without ovulation, or with implantation, or many other events. Hence it's not a sensible standard.

The funniest thing about the conception crowd is that they don't even know what conception is. They claim a new human forms because chromosomes merge, but chromosomes _don't_ merge during conception. The fundamental pro-life argument is dead wrong on a scientific basis.

(For those wondering what I'm referring to, chromosome fusion happens during the second cell division, not during conception. Hence, pro-lifers should be saying "Life begins at the second cell division", if they don't want to be totally wrong scientifically. Too bad that phrase kind of lacks zip.)

It's set in motion....

 

[P@triot]

Given how all the Trumptards have been repeatedly so humiliated on the global warming topic, do you really want to go another round?

Hahahahahahahahaha!!! Eat it, bitch...

A study in the journal Nature Climate Change reviewed 117 climate predictions and found that 97.4% never materialized.

• Biologist Paul Ehrlich predicted in the 1970s that: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” and that “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”

• In January 1970, Life reported, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”

• In January 2006 Al Gore predicted that we had ten years left before the planet turned into a “total frying pan.” We made it.

• In 2008, a segment aired on ABC News predicted that NYC would be under water by June 2015.

• In 1970, ecologist Kenneth E.F. Wattpredicted that “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder by the year 2000, This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.”

• In 2008, Al Gore predicted that there is a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap would be completely melted within 5-7 years. He at least hedged that prediction by giving himself “75%” certainty. By 2014 - the polar ice cap had expanded over 60% (more than 900,000 sq miles)

• On May 13th 2014 France’s foreign minister said that we only have 500 days to stop “climate chaos.” The recent Paris climate summit met 565 days after his remark.

• In 2009, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center head James Wassen warned that Obama only had four years left to save the earth.

• On the first Earth Day its sponsor warned that “in 25 years, somewhere between 75% and 80% of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”

• And another Earth Day prediction from Kenneth Watt: “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”

Stop embracing left-wing lunacy and start embracing the facts, you science denying jack-ass.

Top 10 Climate Change Predictions Gone Spectacularly Wrong; This Is EPIC!

 

[mamooth]

Science has unequivocally proven you wrong and you continue to deny it.

Science says you've pickled your little cult brain slurping down too much cult piss

The Earth has cooled,

'Tard-boy, does this look like cooling?

we've had colder than normal temperatures,

Just stop. Everyone knows you're knowingly pushing a fraud at the urging of your Stalinist political cult. Your charade isn't fooling anyone.

the polar ice-cap expanded a mind-boggling 900,000 sq. miles (over 60% expansion)

Both polar ice caps are near record lows for this time of year. You're using dishonest cherrypicking and failing hard at statistics.

after left-wing political activists said it would be completely gone,

Nice backpedal. You've retreated from vague unnamed "scientists" to mysterious "left-wing activists". And of course, you still can't find any scientists making that prediction. You just effectively admitted that. You're just making up more stories.

and none of the left-wing predictions have ever come true.

For the past 40 years, the predictions of climate science have been stellar. That record of success is why climate science has such credibility. In contrast, the 40-year record of denier predictions is one of complete failure. That's why deniers are universally considered to be pathologically dishonest cult morons. Deniers think they can earn credibility by crying about how butthurt they are, but science doesn't work that way. Credibility comes from success, and deniers always fail.

So, P@triot, your denier cult has been predicting an imminent ice-age non-stop for 40 years straight now. That ice age never arrives. Instead, it just keeps warming strongly, just as the scientists have been predicting for those 40 years. Do you still have faith that the holy ice age referred to in your cult scriptures will nonetheless arrive soon?

 

[mamooth]

I think it's you who lacks understanding. Note number 2.

I'm just using the pro-life definition of "sperm enters egg"

You've got a problem if you're using implantation, being most other pro-lifers don't use it. They say that even a blastocyst in a test tube is a person.

 

[bripat9643]

How many scientists do you suppose agree with the Republican consensus that God created Man in his present form less than 10,000 years ago?

In U.S., 46% Hold Creationist View of Human Origins

That isn't the Republican consensus, douche bag.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[OKTexas]

I think it's you who lacks understanding. Note number 2.

I'm just using the pro-life definition of "sperm enters egg"

You've got a problem if you're using implantation, being most other pro-lifers don't use it. They say that even a blastocyst in a test tube is a person.

Without implantation of a fertilized egg, there is no conception, there will be no child. Of course the same applies to abortion, without implantation, it's not an option.

.

 

[bripat9643]

If it's not sustainable then it hasn't begun.

Again dimwit...it is scientific fact that life has begun at conception. Do you have any idea how many lives are sitting in Intensive Care Units across the country as we speak that are hooked to life-support machines because their current condition is unsustainable for life? Does that mean their life "hasn't begun"? Dumb ass.

Yah know... lefties are not exactly sustainable, since their survival is based upon wealth redistribution.

That's a great point. Detroit is proof of that. After 65 years of complete Dumbocrat control, the city is a third world shit-hole rampant with crime, drugs, and dilapidated buildings. They had to file for bankruptcy.

The left-wing ideology is completely unsustainable. Venezuela is another example.

After years of Democratic control San Francisco is the richest city in America, or close to it.

Only the 1% can afford to live there, so I don't think it helps your argument.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app