Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 10/24/2019 in Blog Comments

  1. I think you're right, in the long run. (POTUS has already made clear he'll intervene if the mayor and governor don't step up, and since they're flipped him off in response, he most likely will.) But I admit that I personally can't just casually dismiss the short-term threats, if the reports are true about businesses being "shaken down", the property damage, etc. I'm also thinking about how it's affecting people psychologically, having to witness this, especially the potentially innocent people caught in the cross-fire. (And now, there's someone acting as "warlord" already edging out Antifa?
    2 points
  2. My thought wasn’t directed solely at Brad and not necessarily only about money. Gore and Gore-like people do it to fleece money from the ‘system’ , Hollywood type virtue-signalers are probably motivated by an inherent narcissism. And they need their parrots to help move masses to accept the building of the ‘system’ or even to just be complacent enough to not fight back against the building .
    2 points
  3. Sorry, I guess I'm not understanding the issue in regards to falsifiability. Once again, falsifiable hypothesis and their approx date: And their conclusions:
    2 points
  4. Polar Amplification just keeps rolling on ... Siberian heat wave is driving massive wildfires, sea ice melt in Arctic With Fires, Heat and a Cyclone, Arctic Breaks Melting Record
    1 point
  5. Qanon targets pedophiles, sex traffickers and satanists. Twitter, Facebook, the MSM & some others target Qanon. Making sense yet?
    1 point
  6. A note on human trafficking.
    1 point
  7. One other thought about "war" in this context that crossed my mind: the blurred distinction between civilian and combatant, in the sense that the civilians are not mentally prepared as the soldier is. If combat gives even seasoned warriors PTSD, what of the civilians watching their streets being taken over in a scene they've ever only seen in movies? Watching their business get looted and burned down. The economic hardship that came with the unemployment of the shutdowns was bad enough to cause "suicides of desperation". They weren't psychologically prepared for this. Hence, my concerns about
    1 point
  8. Some readers may not go to a Twitter thread off the OL site, so I'll add this in as an example of what you are missing.
    1 point
  9. This is a screenshot of the above tweet: I will change the <meta> information to update the image and text in the Twitter Card. What will happen to the body of the tweet just capped? <meta name="twitter:card" content="summary_large_image"> <meta name="twitter:site" content="@DarleneViewer"> <meta name="twitter:title" content="This is an example of a Twitter Card with a Summary and Large Image"> <meta name="twitter:description" content="&quot;Tweet this page&quot; -- A simple set of <meta> tags in the head of an HTML document allows Twitter
    1 point
  10. Oh, so Q doesn't understand how that works? The Obama website got caught testing the image prior to Floyd's ritual murder. Q is trolling. Just letting the inept scum idiots know he caught them doing that.
    1 point
  11. Them chemtrails can hollow out a man's ability to check claims, it seems. 99 people are talking about this MSNBC’s parent company also confirmed to The Verge that the clip was a fake. “To confirm, the posts are fake,” NBCUniversal spokesperson Alexandra Roberts told the outlet. For these reasons, the claim that MSNBC tried to pass “World World Z” trailer footage off as video of protests in Phi
    1 point
  12. A Twitter thread by the author of the Conversation story, adding more detail:
    1 point
  13. I've been wondering if whoever started "Q" was taking a page from L. Ron Hubbard's book and setting out to found a religion. Ellen PS: I haven't read the article yet. I anticipate that it will be sneery and "sophisticated"-superior in tone. I'm simply reacting to the article's title, which echoes my own question regarding "Q's" long-range intent.
    1 point
  14. A fun read, if you like oddities, quirks and foibles ... The Church of QAnon: Will conspiracy theories form the basis of a new religious movement? May 18, 2020 7.12am EDT
    1 point
  15. Red herring. We aren't taking about how the climate change before the industrial revolution. I've already covered the mechanisms that lead the planet in and out of ice ages. That mechanism is in the wrong sign (negative) to explain current changes and there is not record of changes happening as abruptly as they currently are. Go back and read what I told you about Milakovitch Cycles. Funny that you didn't think my reply was applicable then.
    1 point
  16. I'm not sure about fraction. After all, climate change is supported by numerous overcome from different disciplines -conscilience. Scientists that study the sun have gone on record plenty of times starting that it is not the sun. The rate of warming does not match any changes in output of the sun. For a period, cosmic rays were being thrown around as a possible controller of cloud cover. That has since been debunked. And again, what causes a change in temperature in a system is either changes to the incoming energy or changes to the outgoing energy. You can warm yourself by throwin
    1 point
  17. How do you know so much while scientists know so little? --Brant
    1 point
  18. Energy balance of the planet has to do with how well heat moves from source (the sun in this case) to the sink (space). Greenhouse gases impede that movement.
    1 point
  19. This analogy really demonstrates either 1. Your lack of understanding the subject in the least bit or 2. That you are a completely dishonest broker in this conversation. Based on your tone, reliance on name calling, and complete refusal to answer a simple question that is very relevant to establish humans as the driver of the current climate, I'm going with #2.
    1 point
  20. No, idiot. The difference between a junkyard dog and a human being is stark.
    1 point
  21. We do actually. Because nature has actually been absorbing some of our emissions from the atm. We have emitted far more co2 than how much co2 has actually risen. We are responsible for the full increase.
    1 point
  22. Asshole, how to many times do you have to be told? Answer my questions, or fuck off. I’m not doing it your way. I’m not going to play your games.
    1 point
  23. Mankind's contribution to warming is considered to be 100%. Actually higher by some because without increased co2 all indications are we would have cooled, so we've offset the cooling plus added warming. You can falsify that humans are the cause of warming by delivering us a mechanism to explain the warming.
    1 point
  24. Maybe you missed the paper and the direct questions of whether or not burning fossil fuels is increasing atmospheric co2 concentrations. Do you care to insert your thoughts or just sit on the sidelines making accusations?
    1 point
  25. When spouting government conspiracies of control, the burden of proof is on the spouter.
    1 point
  26. Did he or didn't he claim increasing co2 would increase temperature? Page 16, if you want to check your answer before responding. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjNiciivbjnAhUH7awKHTVnCdoQFjAFegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw1Cm1sb1Pjyd2Sph86m9hd0
    1 point
  27. You too have failed to answer. How does Arrhenius hypothesis fail your criteria for a falsifiable hypothesis that increasing co2 would cause warming?
    1 point
  28. As I've said before somewhere, William's bringing Brad aboard, apparently thinking that Brad could handle Jonathan's questions, is itself an example of William's incompetence. Short form: Willism didn't know better. Ellen
    1 point
  29. These are your words. I have you a list of hypothesis. They have the years the predictions were made. The would be falsified had they not come true. What else is there to answer in regards to your question?
    1 point
  30. A bit more information about the basis for the Six Americas ... from the gang at Yale Climate Communications.
    1 point
  31. From 'Big Think': Original essay at PaulGraham.com: How to Disagree.
    1 point
  32. Jonathan, The answer is social and pure value judgment, not rational. They'll kick his ass right out of the Chosen People club if he treats this issue with true intellectual seriousness. The club is more important than the truth. That's why the intellectual arguments from these people consistently sound good, but when examined are not good. Once in the club, one does not need to make sense. One merely needs to dazzle with bullshit and snark a little for proof. In fact, making sense is the surest way of getting thrown out. The storyline abides... Michael
    1 point
  33. Government job? Or government-tied? (I couldn't resist. ) Michael
    1 point
  34. “Armed and violent cultists” is particularly hilarious from Ratschild and Billyboy when we consider what happens when two or more of their Antifa cockroaches get together: And we know from recent experience in Virginia what happens when tens of thousands of armed 2nd Amendment supporters get together: *Absolutely nothing* In other words, Ratschild and Billyboy use their own side’s projected violence to try to justify their coup by an anonymous source. What could be more anti-democratic? Well, you fascist shitbags can go to hell because you are going to keep on losing
    1 point
  35. Brad is on Twitter, doing Brad Schrag activities: https://twitter.com/BradSchrag/with_replies Of course. Are you hoping to have him return for a talking-to? That may not be the most alluring prospect for him ... but in any case, here's a recent comment retweeted by Brad Schrag, in which pioneers of climatological inquiry are noted. The names may mean nothing to a reader if the reader hasn't cracked open The Discovery of Global Warming.
    1 point
  36. Pithy. If you are a fan of skeptical inquiry, Poker & Politics should be in your Twitter feed. Glory, glory, Halleluja ...
    1 point
  37. Chemtrails for the win. "It's SCIENCE!"
    1 point
  38. Deleted. Gone. No longer here, departed. Gone up country to a good home. It was an unfinished blog entry that I failed to detect & delete during the earlier ruckus. If only you could communicate without loaded language and personal insults ... [Edited to add in a '&']
    1 point
  39. Whoever or whatever "Q" is, he or she or they are probably enjoying the break, not having posted since December 29 2019. This break has had zero effect on propagation of the 'cleaned-up' version of the mighty conspiracy-of-all-conspiracies ... from Mike Rothschild: The article is here. As "Q" might say, The 'silent' war continues.
    1 point
  40. 1 point
  41. I wonder if this person/collective is on the job today. Do any of their co-workers observe this kind of thing being typed out ... ? Think for yourself. Be the white zebra. The black zebras are evul.
    1 point
  42. Travis View in conversation with Steven Hassan ... for those not entirely caught up in the con.
    1 point
  43. Penultimate. Trap gun slogan [OBS]. Think thank thunk. One hour of old glory as touted by the mysterious entity ... this does not seem like Q-level insider knowledge. They may need to get caffeinated and a bit blasted on marijuana, to clear away the staleness and low energy.
    1 point
  44. Testing an easier way to add in Q-drops. Previously I took screen-captures of Qmap items one by one, then uploaded them, then posted them, then added link attributes pointing to the actual drop on (previously) 8chan.net. Since the 'new' Q server is on an unreliable and often-unreachable channel of the facelifted 8kun, and since Qmap has now added extra editorial material, it's easier for a lazy person like me to simply copy text/HTML snips from Qmap ... This is the experiment. Unfortunately for Q-enthusiasts, there is no way to reach 8kun through Qmap or from these drop-copies below
    1 point
  45. Roger Stone has been found guilty on all counts.
    1 point
  46. "Kamala Harris wielded her shtick fairly effectively at the game show formal whoopup in Miami. Building on her law order justice rap back in California, when she turns her steely eyes on you, it feeds electricity into the moment." [Edited for Twitter-friendly] That is what we could call charisma or native talent. The ugly business of Vote4ME is often the 'screen test' for the various actors. I have sampled a whole lot of individual opinion on last night, and conclude that she probably had the most 'impact' of the second and third-tier candidates, those between zero and eight pe
    1 point
  47. I like this woman's poise. Anybody put money on Harris win place or show? Even if the steely grace is a false front, there is a certain gravity in her performance. Will the presidential nickname stick?
    1 point
  48. Capes and Dollar Signs???????? Good grief!
    1 point