68907 pts ยท November 13, 2012
Penis butt.
Yo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_London
Says the guy who kept shouting "it's weather!" as Britain choked under coal and thousands died because he refused to acknowledge the truth.
He would have run a more effective campaign if he had been fairly supported by the DNC and fairly portrayed by the media.
Hell yeah! http://observer.com/2016/12/democratic-elites-still-cant-grasp-that-sanders-would-have-won-in-a-landslide/
That's one opinion. http://observer.com/2016/12/democratic-elites-still-cant-grasp-that-sanders-would-have-won-in-a-landslide/
And if that's what adult thinking is- the kind of thinking that created this mess- then perhaps we're in need of more childish arguments.
It was that kind of thinking, that Hillary was the realistic choice, that made Donald Trump the reality we now have to accept.
The mistake was wanting to persist in a stagnant status quo, which Hillary represented.
Only because people like Franken threw all their weight into trying to prop up a lame duck. Bernie could have beaten Trump easily.
Well, they clearly thought wrongly.
Oh, the irony!
It's not cherry picking to be in agreement with scientific consensus.
As expected, you linked to a conservative rag. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Daily_Mail
However the claims that the report is way off only exist on fringe websites.
However, if you input accurate data into an accurate model you get an evidence based outcome. Which is what climate scientists do.
I'm sure you have a great conspiracy theory site to link to in order to back up your claim, right?
Eh, Franken is now, but he abandoned Bernie along with everyone else during the primary.
I see the half of the united states that wants to pretend this isn't happening is showing their voting presence on this post.
Psst, OP, your middle school is showing
Ignorance implies they don't know. Ignoring it implies they find the truth inconvenient... maybe because it could put a dent in their
bottom line.
It's on the news every day. How can it be ignorance?
And what motivation best explains why people are making these choices? Profit motive or a death drive?
I'm not moralizing, I'm stating a fact. Our economy, as currently structured, incentivizes the destruction of the earth.
If you disagree, give me your alternative theory about why we were unable to stay under 400 ppm of greenhouse gasses? Are we just lazy?
I'm a Marxist. The cow thing was just to be in keeping with the metaphor. The only reason we don't change to renewables is profit motive.
We can't, because of "traditional capitalism".
Because we'd have to stop bombing their countries and stealing their resources to do that.
Yo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_London
Says the guy who kept shouting "it's weather!" as Britain choked under coal and thousands died because he refused to acknowledge the truth.
He would have run a more effective campaign if he had been fairly supported by the DNC and fairly portrayed by the media.
Hell yeah! http://observer.com/2016/12/democratic-elites-still-cant-grasp-that-sanders-would-have-won-in-a-landslide/
That's one opinion. http://observer.com/2016/12/democratic-elites-still-cant-grasp-that-sanders-would-have-won-in-a-landslide/
And if that's what adult thinking is- the kind of thinking that created this mess- then perhaps we're in need of more childish arguments.
It was that kind of thinking, that Hillary was the realistic choice, that made Donald Trump the reality we now have to accept.
The mistake was wanting to persist in a stagnant status quo, which Hillary represented.
Only because people like Franken threw all their weight into trying to prop up a lame duck. Bernie could have beaten Trump easily.
Well, they clearly thought wrongly.
Well, they clearly thought wrongly.
Oh, the irony!
It's not cherry picking to be in agreement with scientific consensus.
As expected, you linked to a conservative rag. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Daily_Mail
However the claims that the report is way off only exist on fringe websites.
However, if you input accurate data into an accurate model you get an evidence based outcome. Which is what climate scientists do.
I'm sure you have a great conspiracy theory site to link to in order to back up your claim, right?
Eh, Franken is now, but he abandoned Bernie along with everyone else during the primary.
I see the half of the united states that wants to pretend this isn't happening is showing their voting presence on this post.
Psst, OP, your middle school is showing
Ignorance implies they don't know. Ignoring it implies they find the truth inconvenient... maybe because it could put a dent in their
bottom line.
It's on the news every day. How can it be ignorance?
And what motivation best explains why people are making these choices? Profit motive or a death drive?
I'm not moralizing, I'm stating a fact. Our economy, as currently structured, incentivizes the destruction of the earth.
If you disagree, give me your alternative theory about why we were unable to stay under 400 ppm of greenhouse gasses? Are we just lazy?
I'm a Marxist. The cow thing was just to be in keeping with the metaphor. The only reason we don't change to renewables is profit motive.
We can't, because of "traditional capitalism".
Because we'd have to stop bombing their countries and stealing their resources to do that.