Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
4 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

Plasi, i think you should take another booster and then glue yourself to Starry Night. 

make sure it's on video. 

I'm all boostered up.

Starry Night is beautiful, so I could think of worse fates. 

I've been drinking and I'm a mushy drunk. You the bomb!

Posted
12 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

the only thing worse than a climate hoax and the sheep that believe it are the grifters and derelict administration that also push it.

 

 

I’m thinking of captions, like:

I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.  
Even if you build it, nobody will come. 

  • Fire 1
  • Clown 1
Posted

you are a self-admitted climate thumper. 

i think you're as confused on who is embarrassing themselves as your are about the science of climate change. 

  • Haha 2
  • Clown 1

TBD

Posted
44 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

the only thing worse than a climate hoax and the sheep that believe it are the grifters and derelict administration that also push it.

 

 

Yes, grifters and sheep. It’s an amazing dynamic. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

has any deliverables in that bill been actualized yet?

edit: sounds like your right. man, the wheels of government grind slow, huh?

 

image.png

I think you meant to say change is difficult and complex.  Lots of people have to be dragged kicking and screaming.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

you are a self-admitted climate thumper. 

i think you're as confused on who is embarrassing themselves as your are about the science of climate change. 

Honest question - all of these "gotcha" retweets that you do are easy to debunk as absurd.  Do you do that before you post them just to troll us or do you actually blindly buy into them?

  • Haha 1
Posted

The arrogance of people thinking they’re going to change the climate of the Earth.  Thinking that of all the changes the Earth has gone through, this is the right climate and it should stay like this forever.  It’s a religion and they are playing God. 

  • Fire 3
  • Clown 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Plasmodium said:

Honest question - all of these "gotcha" retweets that you do are easy to debunk as absurd.  Do you do that before you post them just to troll us or do you actually blindly buy into them?

at what point did you debunk anything involving climate change?

there is zero substance in about 99% of your posts (on any topic)

  • Fire 2
  • Confused 1

TBD

Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

at what point did you debunk anything involving climate change?

there is zero substance in about 99% of your posts (on any topic)

Perhaps I'm mistaken. Let me double check what I think you are intending to communicate with these retweets:
1) This guy is an authority and has an earth shattering reveal.

2) The more Carbon dioxide, the better.

3) New growth -any growth - of coral indicates warmer sea temperatures have no effect on sea life.

4) because a scientist wrote a paper discussing the future of our planet 30 years ago and the cycle is incomplete, climate change is malarkey.

5) Biden wasted 7.5 billion dollars trying in vain to build EV changing stations.

Edited by Plasmodium
missed one
  • Fire 1
Posted

My take on global warming/climate change/whatever it will be called next is based on these facts....is the climate different than say 100 years ago...absolutely.  Do humans cause problems for the environment because of polution....absolutely.   Should we always be looking for better and different ways to get our energy...absolutely.  Should there be mass hysteria that the world will come to end because of man made global warming/climate change/whatever it will be called next...NO!!  People who get caught up in the hysteria...including "scientists", that may or may not have a reason for their OPINIONS...seem to pick and choose what historical data they want to use to make said OPINIONS and for certain reasons.  The earth is billions of years old; thus, even taking a thousand years of data (and not including known weather data from the history of the earth as we know it) will be in no means an indication of what the weather is or isn't doing because of human polution...again, I think we as humans need to not pollute the environment as much as possible...but it's just lazy biased science to not include the WHOLE data set when providing a scientific opinion on the matter.

Bottom line is there are people on both sides of this issue that make this whole topic a farse and turn it into some sort of divisive way to drive people in opposite directions....like pretty much any issue out there.  So we just have to sit back and watch people get mad at each other over another stupid issue, see people glue themselves to streets and ruin works of art, and listen to idiot politicians pander to whatever crisis they can to get votes, all the while watching halfway otherwise normal people get tricked into believing things they hear from these politicians or read on the internet because those people are to damn lazy to think for themselves.

  • Fire 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

My take on global warming/climate change/whatever it will be called next is based on these facts....is the climate different than say 100 years ago...absolutely.  Do humans cause problems for the environment because of polution....absolutely.   Should we always be looking for better and different ways to get our energy...absolutely.  Should there be mass hysteria that the world will come to end because of man made global warming/climate change/whatever it will be called next...NO!!  People who get caught up in the hysteria...including "scientists", that may or may not have a reason for their OPINIONS...seem to pick and choose what historical data they want to use to make said OPINIONS and for certain reasons.  The earth is billions of years old; thus, even taking a thousand years of data (and not including known weather data from the history of the earth as we know it) will be in no means an indication of what the weather is or isn't doing because of human polution...again, I think we as humans need to not pollute the environment as much as possible...but it's just lazy biased science to not include the WHOLE data set when providing a scientific opinion on the matter.

Bottom line is there are people on both sides of this issue that make this whole topic a farse and turn it into some sort of divisive way to drive people in opposite directions....like pretty much any issue out there.  So we just have to sit back and watch people get mad at each other over another stupid issue, see people glue themselves to streets and ruin works of art, and listen to idiot politicians pander to whatever crisis they can to get votes, all the while watching halfway otherwise normal people get tricked into believing things they hear from these politicians or read on the internet because those people are to damn lazy to think for themselves.

Can you provide a specific example of this treachery?

Posted
2 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

Perhaps I'm mistaken. Let me double check what I think you are intending to communicate with these retweets:
1) This guy is an authority and has an earth shattering reveal.

2) The more Carbon dioxide, the better.

3) New growth -any growth - of coral indicates warmer sea temperatures have no effect on sea life.

4) because a scientist wrote a paper discussing the future of our planet 30 years ago and the cycle is incomplete, climate change is malarkey.

5) Biden wasted 7.5 billion dollars trying in vain to build EV changing stations.

if that's what you inferred from my posts, god bless your soul.

every single one of them is off.

keep sipping the kool aid the msm and govt is feeding ya, hoss.

TBD

Posted
2 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

if that's what you inferred from my posts, god bless your soul.

every single one of them is off.

keep sipping the kool aid the msm and govt is feeding ya, hoss.

 

5 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

the only thing worse than a climate hoax and the sheep that believe it are the grifters and derelict administration that also push it.

 

 

Help me out.  What is to be inferred by this?

Posted

there are climate change industry grifters at every corner.

and a govt that allocates  7.5bil and gets not one thing done in 3 years is derelict. 

just like the parts for the wall that's been sitting at the border for 6 years that they just started discussing the erection of.

 

TBD

Posted
2 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

there are climate change industry grifters at every corner.

and a govt that allocates  7.5bil and gets not one thing done in 3 years is derelict. 

just like the parts for the wall that's been sitting at the border for 6 years that they just started discussing the erection of.

 

Not even the government can spend quickly spend 400 billion of new money.  It is two years.  The tweet literally starts with “Even More EV Failure”, so not buying your nut tuck.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

Not even the government can spend quickly spend 400 billion of new money.  It is two years.  The tweet literally starts with “Even More EV Failure”, so not buying your nut tuck.

If this were a dire emergency, the money would be allocated and spent.   Obviously this is neither a priority or an emergency. 

mspart

  • Fire 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...