New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Happy Earth Day!

You REALLY are stupid, aren't you?

THIS is the fcking statement I was responding to:

These and similar measures by other countries may have postponed the crisis about which so many scientists warned us.


That is not only a lie, it is the DUMBEST, MOST IGNORANT LIE YOU'VE EVER TOLD, (up to the point where you're no doubt about to tell another one.)


THERE NEVER WAS ANY GODDAM GLOBAL WARMING.
THERE IS NO, ZERO ZIP, NADA ( a little Spanish lingo) HUMAN CAUSED CLIMATE CHANGE.


The fact that Nixon signed those useless agencies into law (useless because they have yet to clean ONE ounce of water, ONE breath of air, etc) had ZIPPO to do with global warming and climate change because

THERE IS NO [Unwelcome language removed] GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE.

Green Is the Color of Mold

It's a pity there isn't. Eco-eunuchs are so evil and destructive that we should go in-your-face with them and do the exact opposite of what they recommend, not just negate their negativism and wind up with zero.

Man's mind, or at least that of the few who are literally Cuomo sapiens, can eliminate excess cold, excess heat, hurricanes, floods, and droughts. Letting nature have its way with us shows the passive mindlessness of a subhuman species that is endangering the few who can advance our evolution.
 

EatTheRich

President
Green Is the Color of Mold

It's a pity there isn't. Eco-eunuchs are so evil and destructive that we should go in-your-face with them and do the exact opposite of what they recommend, not just negate their negativism and wind up with zero.

Man's mind, or at least that of the few who are literally Cuomo sapiens, can eliminate excess cold, excess heat, hurricanes, floods, and droughts. Letting nature have its way with us shows the passive mindlessness of a subhuman species that is endangering the few who can advance our evolution.
I hope you're right. But the first rule of technology, announced by Francis Bacon many centuries ago, was, "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed." When you're talking about the environment, that means recognizing the environmental consequences of our actions--helpful to our species, detrimental to our species, or a mix of both--for what they are, not what we wish them to be.
 

EatTheRich

President
First of all, I only told the truth. I had to use caps and bold because some people are too stupid to handle the truth.
Secondly, you ARE a moron.
Third, you have yet to make a factual argument.

The first post in this thread was factual. All you've done is lie and try to spin the truth.

That makes you a deliberate moron.
The factual argument, again: I pointed out that we did take immediate action, in 1970, the date of your post, with the passage of the National Environmental Policy Act and other measures to safeguard the future of our species. Whether we did so or not is a factual question, susceptible of confirmation. Do you recognize it as a fact that we took immediate action in 1970, or are you so stubbornly wedded to your anti-science ideology that you can't do that?

Continuing the factual argument: given that we did take immediate action in 1970, a statement made in 1970, predicting impending doom if immediate action were not taken, is not invalidated by the failure of the doom to materialize. Now it may be false anyway--I don't have the expertise to second-guess the Harvard biologist you quoted, and I doubt you do either, but my guess is that his position was outside the mainstream. But be that as it may, there is no straightforward historical data proving that he wasn't perfectly right. The assumption that the historical survival of the human species WITH the passage of emergency environmental legislation entails the hypothetical survival of our species WITHOUT the passage of said legislation is a hypothesis contrary to fact.
 
Top