Sponsored

Will Joe Biden die of old age or be sent to prison?

Joe Biden will die or be arrested first?

  • Dead

    Votes: 18 56.3%
  • Arrested

    Votes: 1 3.1%
  • Don't care

    Votes: 13 40.6%

  • Total voters
    32
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

526 HRSE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2020
Threads
9
Messages
687
Reaction score
613
Location
California
Vehicle(s)
2017 GT350 Grabber Blue
Vehicle Showcase
1
Lmao, stop. Wiki has plenty of citations for you to use. Moreover, Tucker Carlson and Fox News constantly lie.

News networks on both sides are funded by elites who don't want to act in the best interest of the working class because of greed and power. Moreover, on a global scale, Republicans are extreme right and Democrats are moderate right. But in no developed nation in the world would the democrats be considered left. On the other hand, many of the dilemmas in the US today (trade deals, deregulation, police state) have been bipartisan bills. Things is, that doesn't help media sell.

As Matt Taibbi said, if it doesn't fit the following, media won't cover it: Republicans suck. Democrats suck. Isn't that weird, isn't that terrible?
Again, nobody can post anything that they've been wrong about that has any substance. Tucker Carlson's opinion of John Bolton was a major story in the US? Ralph Peters attacks FOX because they have grown to love Trump because he stands up for Americans. He actually believes that Putin controls Trump. lol 3 1/2 years of the United States top law enforcement agencies couldn't find a lick of dirt on Trump yet Ralph doesn't think that's good enough?

C'mon, what important information has FOX mislead us on?
Sponsored

 

watisthis

Banned
Banned
Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Threads
25
Messages
1,446
Reaction score
688
Location
Odenton, MD
First Name
Justin
Vehicle(s)
2015 GT Pro-charged
Again, nobody can post anything that they've been wrong about that has any substance. Tucker Carlson's opinion of John Bolton was a major story in the US? Ralph Peters attacks FOX because they have grown to love Trump because he stands up for Americans. He actually believes that Putin controls Trump. lol 3 1/2 years of the United States top law enforcement agencies couldn't find a lick of dirt on Trump yet Ralph doesn't think that's good enough?

C'mon, what important information has FOX mislead us on?
https://www.politifact.com/factchec...oocy-nasa-fudged-data-make-case-global-warmi/
https://www.politifact.com/factchec...on/carlson-guns-dont-kill-people-bathtubs-do/

Moreover, have you had your head in the sand for the past 1-4 months for their coronavirus and protest coverage?
 
Last edited:

Burkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2016
Threads
87
Messages
5,541
Reaction score
3,520
Location
Australia
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
Vehicle Showcase
1
Goddard/Heller has long been one of the “leading” idiots in the denial of climate science. It was only recently that he asserted that the oceans should rise at the same rate across the globe, using a bathtub or puddle as his analogy. Like a Flat Earther, the only thing he repeatedly demonstrates is his utter misunderstanding / incredulity / ignorance.
It’s genuinely amazing that people find him either credible or compelling. It really speaks volumes about the methods they use to evaluate evidence.
 

Gregs24

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2018
Threads
23
Messages
4,499
Reaction score
2,831
Location
Wiltshire UK & Charente FR
First Name
Greg
Vehicle(s)
Mustang V8 GT, Ford Kuga PHEV
Again, nobody can post anything that they've been wrong about that has any substance. Tucker Carlson's opinion of John Bolton was a major story in the US? Ralph Peters attacks FOX because they have grown to love Trump because he stands up for Americans. He actually believes that Putin controls Trump. lol 3 1/2 years of the United States top law enforcement agencies couldn't find a lick of dirt on Trump yet Ralph doesn't think that's good enough?

C'mon, what important information has FOX mislead us on?
https://www.thedailybeast.com/pro-trump-war-hero-featured-on-fox-news-never-actually-served

https://time.com/5853408/fox-news-altered-photo-seattle/

Do fake pictures and fake war heroes not count as substantial enough ?

This may help you - this is not the 'bias' of the press per se, but the press chosen by those of a political placement. If you are right wing, Fox will tell you what you want to hear (as would the Daily Express in the UK). They want to sell a product to people who want to buy their product, so they make that product attractive to their buyers by appealing to their own bias. You will find their reporting fair and accurate because you are that target audience and they are telling you things you want to hear. It does not mean they are either correct or accurate, but will appear so to you in the same way most of what the Washington Post writes will not.

Pew_mediapolarization_ideologicalplacementsourceaudience.png
 

Sponsored

Hack

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2014
Threads
83
Messages
12,283
Reaction score
7,444
Location
Minneapolis
Vehicle(s)
Mustang, Camaro
Goddard/Heller has long been one of the “leading” idiots in the denial of climate science. It was only recently that he asserted that the oceans should rise at the same rate across the globe, using a bathtub or puddle as his analogy. Like a Flat Earther, the only thing he repeatedly demonstrates is his utter misunderstanding / incredulity / ignorance.
It’s genuinely amazing that people find him either credible or compelling. It really speaks volumes about the methods they use to evaluate evidence.
Climate science. Funny.

If you believe the science behind "climate science", please find me an example where they predicted 10+ years in advance ANY change in climate. I'm not saying they said it would get warmer and it got warmer .. anyone can do that well flipping a coin. What I'm talking about is lets say in 2005 someone predicted what average global temperatures would be last year, and they got it correct.

It's not a science if they can't make accurate predictions. Then it's a theory. My assertion is that the climate "science" is a bunch of theories right now. They don't really know what will happen based on equations. They are still guessing what will happen.

And most people don't talk about the sun and how it influences global temperatures. Without that part of the puzzle "climate science" will never be a true science. It will just be fodder for heavy-handed government officials to increase regulations.

Edit: one other thing about science. If something is well known, there are equations describing how it functions. And in so-called "climate science", there are different models. Why are there different models? Because the scientists don't agree.
 

watisthis

Banned
Banned
Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Threads
25
Messages
1,446
Reaction score
688
Location
Odenton, MD
First Name
Justin
Vehicle(s)
2015 GT Pro-charged
Climate science. Funny.

If you believe the science behind "climate science", please find me an example where they predicted 10+ years in advance ANY change in climate. I'm not saying they said it would get warmer and it got warmer .. anyone can do that well flipping a coin. What I'm talking about is lets say in 2005 someone predicted what average global temperatures would be last year, and they got it correct.

It's not a science if they can't make accurate predictions. Then it's a theory. My assertion is that the climate "science" is a bunch of theories right now. They don't really know what will happen based on equations. They are still guessing what will happen.

And most people don't talk about the sun and how it influences global temperatures. Without that part of the puzzle "climate science" will never be a true science. It will just be fodder for heavy-handed government officials to increase regulations.
https://climate.nasa.gov/

Imagine not understanding that is scientists who are confirming and disproving other scientists data not some 50 million dummies in denial.
 

Caballus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2016
Threads
43
Messages
3,651
Reaction score
2,094
Location
Europe
Vehicle(s)
GT350
Climate science. Funny.

If you believe the science behind "climate science", please find me an example where they predicted 10+ years in advance ANY change in climate. I'm not saying they said it would get warmer and it got warmer .. anyone can do that well flipping a coin. What I'm talking about is lets say in 2005 someone predicted what average global temperatures would be last year, and they got it correct.

It's not a science if they can't make accurate predictions. Then it's a theory. My assertion is that the climate "science" is a bunch of theories right now. They don't really know what will happen based on equations. They are still guessing what will happen.

And most people don't talk about the sun and how it influences global temperatures. Without that part of the puzzle "climate science" will never be a true science. It will just be fodder for heavy-handed government officials to increase regulations.

Edit: one other thing about science. If something is well known, there are equations describing how it functions. And in so-called "climate science", there are different models. Why are there different models? Because the scientists don't agree.
My simple question is should the military make strategic plans to operate in the arctic in support of national objectives or not? If so, should those plans be based on mobility as it is today or greater mobility that would exist with less ice? Hint: Russians and Chinese are part of the equation.
 

Burkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2016
Threads
87
Messages
5,541
Reaction score
3,520
Location
Australia
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
Vehicle Showcase
1
Climate science. Funny.

If you believe the science behind "climate science", please find me an example where they predicted 10+ years in advance ANY change in climate. I'm not saying they said it would get warmer and it got warmer .. anyone can do that well flipping a coin. What I'm talking about is lets say in 2005 someone predicted what average global temperatures would be last year, and they got it correct.

It's not a science if they can't make accurate predictions. Then it's a theory. My assertion is that the climate "science" is a bunch of theories right now. They don't really know what will happen based on equations. They are still guessing what will happen.

And most people don't talk about the sun and how it influences global temperatures. Without that part of the puzzle "climate science" will never be a true science. It will just be fodder for heavy-handed government officials to increase regulations.

Edit: one other thing about science. If something is well known, there are equations describing how it functions. And in so-called "climate science", there are different models. Why are there different models? Because the scientists don't agree.
It’s funny that you think climate science doesn’t take solar insolation (that’s insOlation, not insUlation) into account, that’s just your lack of understanding shining through. Every model accounts for it.
Why would there be only one model? The models will change as the data changes.
Instead of responding in a million words, I’ll let the “coin flipping” scientists give you 45 years of predictions.
How correct do they need to be before you’ll accept that the basic premise has merit?

EDIT: If you pay attention to the predictions from the IPCC, you’ll notice that the prediction sits BELOW the actual temp. This is precisely what many climate scientists have accused them of - UNDERSTATING the issue. Of course, you probably won’t see that in media sources that deny the whole thing in the first place.
CAA505AE-7976-498E-9168-B6559B71D498.jpeg
9BBA11F6-BF80-45C2-9184-0C6B7B217894.jpeg
EADEDA98-128D-4B34-8866-17055D5C67D3.jpeg
4E12BECD-0EEE-4121-B540-7BFFB03D065D.jpeg
DD3EB7C7-51FF-4609-ABA4-584F06F75951.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Hack

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2014
Threads
83
Messages
12,283
Reaction score
7,444
Location
Minneapolis
Vehicle(s)
Mustang, Camaro
It’s funny that you think climate science doesn’t take solar insolation (that’s insOlation, not insUlation) into account, that’s just your lack of understanding shining through. Every model accounts for it.
Why would there be only one model? The models will change as the data changes.
Instead of responding in a million words, I’ll let the “coin flipping” scientists give you 45 years of predictions.
How correct do they need to be before you’ll accept that the basic premise has merit?

EDIT: If you pay attention to the predictions from the IPCC, you’ll notice that the prediction sits BELOW the actual temp. This is precisely what many climate scientists have accused them of - UNDERSTATING the issue. Of course, you probably won’t see that in media sources that deny the whole thing in the first place.
CAA505AE-7976-498E-9168-B6559B71D498.jpeg
9BBA11F6-BF80-45C2-9184-0C6B7B217894.jpeg
EADEDA98-128D-4B34-8866-17055D5C67D3.jpeg
4E12BECD-0EEE-4121-B540-7BFFB03D065D.jpeg
DD3EB7C7-51FF-4609-ABA4-584F06F75951.jpeg
Exactly. No one agrees and they are all wrong. If you want to put enormous +/- error brackets on something - it means your model is not accurate.
 

Sponsored

Caballus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2016
Threads
43
Messages
3,651
Reaction score
2,094
Location
Europe
Vehicle(s)
GT350
Exactly. No one agrees and they are all wrong. If you want to put enormous +/- error brackets on something - it means your model is not accurate.
So do not invest in R&D and TTPs for operating in the arctic?
 

Burkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2016
Threads
87
Messages
5,541
Reaction score
3,520
Location
Australia
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
Vehicle Showcase
1
Exactly. No one agrees and they are all wrong. If you want to put enormous +/- error brackets on something - it means your model is not accurate.
Enormous? I’d ask you to take another look at that IPCC report from 2001. The error bars represent a total of 0.4*. If you think you could roll a dice and produce a result that good for average global temp 19 years into the future, you’re utterly deluded.
Your local weatherman can’t even predict tomorrow’s temp in a specific area to that level of certainty more than half the time.
I think you’re holding science to an impossible standard.
 
Last edited:

Gregs24

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2018
Threads
23
Messages
4,499
Reaction score
2,831
Location
Wiltshire UK & Charente FR
First Name
Greg
Vehicle(s)
Mustang V8 GT, Ford Kuga PHEV
Climate science. Funny.


It's not a science if they can't make accurate predictions.
Not really. Volcanologists are scientists and can explain scientifically how volcanoes and earthquakes work but they can't predict activity very well can they ! Doesn't mean it isn't science.
 

Caballus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2016
Threads
43
Messages
3,651
Reaction score
2,094
Location
Europe
Vehicle(s)
GT350
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science

1 : the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding

2a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study the science of theology

b : something (such as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge have it down to a science

3a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method

b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : natural science

4 : a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws cooking is both a science and an art
 

Burkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2016
Threads
87
Messages
5,541
Reaction score
3,520
Location
Australia
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT
Vehicle Showcase
1
Not really. Volcanologists are scientists and can explain scientifically how volcanoes and earthquakes work but they can't predict activity very well can they ! Doesn't mean it isn't science.
Exactly. Now, in the example of CC, throw in the variable of CO2 increase over time, which is largely decided by humans and then wonder why the predictions aren’t “perfect”. It’s utterly ridiculous.
Sponsored

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
 




Top