OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[Gronk]

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Here's a summary - a bunch of people are fabricating data, or manipulating data through exclusion, and blatantly lying about natural and perfectly average phenomenon, in order to create a hoax hidden behind the shield of "science" to use as a political weapon.

How could it be possible that a small group of people mostly reliant on big government for their livelihood would have a political agenda?

 

[Gary Gutful]

How could it be possible that a small group of people mostly reliant on big government for their livelihood would have a political agenda?

If that's all it was then there wouldn't be the collective support that there is right now.

The majority of scientists that I have met have a political aspect to their work and many openly push political agendas, including climate change agendas.

That is a part of what is going on with the movement around climate change but it isn't the sole driver. There are a lot more moving parts.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Ping @Bazal - where is our Government funding to research the dwindling mermaid population! It's a humanitarian disaster FFS! Someone get me ScoMo's mobile number.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I've also worked with a few scientists and they are overwhelmingly narrow thinkers outside of their specific domain. Inferring the second and third order effects of 'science' is as beyond them as it is for the rest of us slobs. Years at university doesn't teach anyone to predict the future. This is as true of economics as it is of climate science or political 'science'.

I say this as someone who supports climate action. There's no conclusive proof of most of the claims bring made, but I believe the burden of proof should lie with those who support more pollution. I also don't think meaningful climate action is possible without hurting the economy. People need to be prepared for this. Unfortunately most would rather provide for their kids than worry about what will happen to their great grandchildren.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

I don't disagree that the other side of politics are dodgy. I don't trust them.

But here's the thing - Trump deserves everything he gets. You can't play a deliberately aggressive and devisive form of politics and then ONLY complain when things don't go your way.

Suck it up Trump and stop being a whiny bitch. Same goes for his apologist supporters. Isn't that what you merkins told everyone else to do after Trump won the election? Practice what you preach!

Not sure anyone actually understands what's happening...

What exactly is Trump supposed to be in trouble for? Asking Ukraine to look into Biden and Crowdstrike? What's wrong with that?

Crowdstrike were the ones who did the "investigation" into the "hack" of the DNC server and just ended up telling the FBI "Don't worry, it was the Russians..." Crowdstrike's own server is in Ukraine, so it's perfectly legitimate for Trump to ask about them considering they are paid stooges to cover up Hillary...

And Biden? Trump's in trouble for asking Ukraine to look into Biden? What's wrong with that?


52:00.

Biden outright states that he forced Ukraine to fire their prosecutor, with the threat of withholding funds from them if they did not. Who is this prosecutor? What was he seeking to prosecute? Was Biden's son a target of this prosecution? Was, therefore, Biden using his office to threaten a foreign nation to protect his son's criminality from being exposed?

And Trump is supposedly in trouble for asking Ukraine to look into this? Really?

Is everyone so desperate to scream "OrangeManBad!!!" that they don't bother to actually look into what is really going on?

The Dems wanna impeach Trump? f**king great! Seriously, do it!

1. House will vote in favour as numbers are with the Dems;
2. Senate will have to conduct a trial but, in the end, will vote no, as the Repubs have the numbers;
3. Nothing happens.

Oh, hang on...let's go back to 2 and put in a b):

2 a) Senate will have to conduct a trial but, in the end, will vote no, as the Repubs have the numbers;
2 b) However, during that trial, Trump's lawyer will have the right to subpoena anyone and put them under oath. Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Hillary, Obama...anyone. The Dems want an impeachment trial over Ukraine? Sweet, let's have one and see who gets called and what really gets revealed during the trial.

And this will all be happening when? At the same time as the FISA Declassification and the release of the IG's Report into FISA abuse? And these same people (Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Hillary, Obama...) will be called to testify while the IG Report is being released?

HAHAHAHA, it couldn't work out better for Trump. The guy is a f**king genius.

NOTE: I have edited the Crowdstrike stuff, because I am an idiot. I originally stated they investigated Hillary's private server, but their "investigation" was actually into the Russian "hack" of the DNC server, where the DNC told the FBI to f**k off and had Crowdstrike do the analysis.

My apologies for the error. I realised after I went to get a coffee so jumped back on to edit as soon as I got back top my desk.

 

[Gary Gutful]

I've also worked with a few scientists and they are overwhelmingly narrow thinkers outside of their specific domain. Inferring the second and third order effects of 'science' is as beyond them as it is for the rest of us slobs. Years at university doesn't teach anyone to predict the future. This is as true of economics as it is of climate science or political 'science'.

I say this as someone who supports climate action. There's no conclusive proof of most of the claims bring made, but I believe the burden of proof should lie with those who support more pollution. I also don't think meaningful climate action is possible without hurting the economy. People need to be prepared for this. Unfortunately most would rather provide for their kids than worry about what will happen to their great grandchildren.

Agree with all of this, merkin.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Not sure anyone actually understands what's happening...

What exactly is Trump supposed to be in trouble for? Asking Ukraine to look into Biden and Crowdstrike? What's wrong with that?

Crowdstrike were the ones who did the "investigation" into Hillary's server and just ended up telling the FBI "Don't worry, everything's ok..." Crowdstrike's own server is in Ukraine, so it's perfectly legitimate for Trump to ask about them considering they are paid stooges to cover up Hillary...

And Biden? Trump's in trouble for asking Ukraine to look into Biden? What's wrong with that?


52:00.

Biden outright states that he forced Ukraine to fire their prosecutor, with the threat of withholding funds from them if they did not. Who is this prosecutor? What was he seeking to prosecute? Was Biden's son a target of this prosecution? Was, therefore, Biden using his office to threaten a foreign nation to protect his son's criminality from being exposed?

And Trump is supposedly in trouble for asking Ukraine to look into this? Really?

Is everyone so desperate to scream "OrangeManBad!!!" that they don't bother to actually look into what is really going on?

The Dems wanna impeach Trump? f**king great! Seriously, do it!

1. House will vote in favour as numbers are with the Dems;
2. Senate will have to conduct a trial but, in the end, will vote no, as the Repubs have the numbers;
3. Nothing happens.

Oh, hang on...let's go back to 2 and put in a b):

2 a) Senate will have to conduct a trial but, in the end, will vote no, as the Repubs have the numbers;
2 b) However, during that trial, Trump's lawyer will have the right to subpoena anyone and put them under oath. Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Hillary, Obama...anyone. The Dems want an impeachment trial over Ukraine? Sweet, let's have one and see who gets called and what really gets revealed during the trial.

And this will all be happening when? At the same time as the FISA Declassification and the release of the IG's Report into FISA abuse? And these same people (Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Hillary, Obama...) will be called to testify while the IG Report is being released?

HAHAHAHA, it couldn't work out better for Trump. The guy is a f**king genius.

If it couldn't work out better for Trump, why is he whining like a little bitch?

 

[Gronk]

Not sure anyone actually understands what's happening...

What exactly is Trump supposed to be in trouble for? Asking Ukraine to look into Biden and Crowdstrike? What's wrong with that?

Crowdstrike were the ones who did the "investigation" into Hillary's server and just ended up telling the FBI "Don't worry, everything's ok..." Crowdstrike's own server is in Ukraine, so it's perfectly legitimate for Trump to ask about them considering they are paid stooges to cover up Hillary...

And Biden? Trump's in trouble for asking Ukraine to look into Biden? What's wrong with that?


52:00.

Biden outright states that he forced Ukraine to fire their prosecutor, with the threat of withholding funds from them if they did not. Who is this prosecutor? What was he seeking to prosecute? Was Biden's son a target of this prosecution? Was, therefore, Biden using his office to threaten a foreign nation to protect his son's criminality from being exposed?

And Trump is supposedly in trouble for asking Ukraine to look into this? Really?

Is everyone so desperate to scream "OrangeManBad!!!" that they don't bother to actually look into what is really going on?

The Dems wanna impeach Trump? f**king great! Seriously, do it!

1. House will vote in favour as numbers are with the Dems;
2. Senate will have to conduct a trial but, in the end, will vote no, as the Repubs have the numbers;
3. Nothing happens.

Oh, hang on...let's go back to 2 and put in a b):

2 a) Senate will have to conduct a trial but, in the end, will vote no, as the Repubs have the numbers;
2 b) However, during that trial, Trump's lawyer will have the right to subpoena anyone and put them under oath. Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Hillary, Obama...anyone. The Dems want an impeachment trial over Ukraine? Sweet, let's have one and see who gets called and what really gets revealed during the trial.

And this will all be happening when? At the same time as the FISA Declassification and the release of the IG's Report into FISA abuse? And these same people (Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Hillary, Obama...) will be called to testify while the IG Report is being released?

HAHAHAHA, it couldn't work out better for Trump. The guy is a f**king genius.

They won't impeach Trump simply because no US president has ever been impeached in history and probably never will. Some merkin in the 1800's was impeached by congress (twice) but could not get the support of the senate. Same with Clinton. Even Nixon wasn't impeached successfully - he just resigned. The system is not workable for impeachment whilst the sitting party have control of the senate.

What is going on is just politics. BTW Trump is not the genius - the real geniuses are the merkins mopping up after him.

 

[Bazal]

Ping @Bazal - where is our Government funding to research the dwindling mermaid population! It's a humanitarian disaster FFS! Someone get me ScoMo's mobile number.

Mermaiditarian*

I'm interested in HJs input on this issue

 

[Twizzle]

Asking Ukraine to look into Biden and Crowdstrike? What's wrong with that?

asking ? lol

The call occurred after Trump had ordered a freeze of nearly $400 million in American aid to Ukraine, which the administration only later released.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-president-to-investigate-biden-idUSKBN1WA0HC

 

[strider]

Lol just now the Whitehouse has released a claytons transcript. It's not the actual transcript, but a memo that resembles a transcript and summarises the conversation.

Like a Scott Seward transcript

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

I've also worked with a few scientists and they are overwhelmingly narrow thinkers outside of their specific domain. Inferring the second and third order effects of 'science' is as beyond them as it is for the rest of us slobs. Years at university doesn't teach anyone to predict the future. This is as true of economics as it is of climate science or political 'science'.

I say this as someone who supports climate action. There's no conclusive proof of most of the claims bring made, but I believe the burden of proof should lie with those who support more pollution. I also don't think meaningful climate action is possible without hurting the economy. People need to be prepared for this. Unfortunately most would rather provide for their kids than worry about what will happen to their great grandchildren.

WTF? Pollution?

"Climate change" is about carbon dioxide. Which plants f**king eat to grow.

It isn't pollution, not in any sense of the word. The use of that term is simply another example of moral hijacking by the left, used to guilt trip you into submitting to their bullshit, and it is a perfect example of why they should never be believed.

Don't confuse "climate change" with legitimate environmental issues like pollution, or deforestation, or rampant and destructive plastic use. Those are legitimate issues that we need to deal with - but they are not in any way linked to "climate change".

What your post basically shows is that you are a braindead moron, who has no ability to think logically and is easily manipulated by emotion. Why am I not surprised that Gronk has liked your post?

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

asking ? lol

The call occurred after Trump had ordered a freeze of nearly $400 million in American aid to Ukraine, which the administration only later released.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-president-to-investigate-biden-idUSKBN1WA0HC

So, therefore, when everyone screams about it they have no choice but to go after Biden, because Trump just did exactly what Biden is on video admitting to?. Do you see the trap being set?

And there's a big difference - Biden did it to ensure his son's criminality was never exposed. He used his position to protect his family's criminal network. Trump is doing it to expose criminals like the Bidens who have used their positions of power to benefit themselves.

Big difference.

 

[Gronk]

WTF? Pollution?

"Climate change" is about carbon dioxide. Which plants f**king eat to grow.

It isn't pollution, not in any sense of the word. The use of that term is simply another example of moral hijacking by the left, used to guilt trip you into submitting to their bullshit, and it is a perfect example of why they should never be believed.

Don't confuse "climate change" with legitimate environmental issues like pollution, or deforestation, or rampant and destructive plastic use. Those are legitimate issues that we need to deal with - but they are not in any way linked to "climate change".

What your post basically shows is that you are a braindead moron, who has no ability to think logically and is easily manipulated by emotion. Why am I not surprised that Gronk has liked your post?

I liked it because it was a balanced, unemotional, nonpartisan view of climate change.

Meanwhile you call people who have a different view to you as morons. No wonder they wouldn't accept you into James Ruse. Your social skills are abominable.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

I liked it because it was a balanced, unemotional, nonpartisan view of climate change.

Meanwhile you call people who have a different view to you as morons. No wonder they wouldn't accept you into James Ruse. Your social skills are abominable.

What? James Ruse? I was a Cambo boy through and through and never thought of going anywhere else.

And it wasn't "unemotional" - it called carbon dioxide a pollutant. That is, in an unemotional way, completely ignorant and a completely emotional statement. That's why leftoids use the term - because it triggers a (false) emotional response. It's the very reason the term "carbon pollution" exists.

 

[Gronk]

What? James Ruse? I was a Cambo boy through and through and never thought of going anywhere else.

And it wasn't "unemotional" - it called carbon dioxide a pollutant. That is, in an unemotional way, completely ignorant and a completely emotional statement. That's why leftoids use the term - because it triggers a (false) emotional response. It's the very reason the term "carbon pollution" exists.

You forgot your leftoids lolcrying emoji .

FYI your adolescent name calling is why people rarely bother with you.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

They won't impeach Trump simply because no US president has ever been impeached in history and probably never will. Some merkin in the 1800's was impeached by congress (twice) but could not get the support of the senate. Same with Clinton. Even Nixon wasn't impeached successfully - he just resigned. The system is not workable for impeachment whilst the sitting party have control of the senate.

What is going on is just politics. BTW Trump is not the genius - the real geniuses are the merkins mopping up after him.

I'm fairly convinced Trump is a genius, of the Rain Man variety.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

WTF? Pollution?

"Climate change" is about carbon dioxide. Which plants f**king eat to grow.

It isn't pollution, not in any sense of the word. The use of that term is simply another example of moral hijacking by the left, used to guilt trip you into submitting to their bullshit, and it is a perfect example of why they should never be believed.

Don't confuse "climate change" with legitimate environmental issues like pollution, or deforestation, or rampant and destructive plastic use. Those are legitimate issues that we need to deal with - but they are not in any way linked to "climate change".

What your post basically shows is that you are a braindead moron, who has no ability to think logically and is easily manipulated by emotion. Why am I not surprised that Gronk has liked your post?

Plants can only consume so much carbon. Are they growing fast enough to cover the increase? I know much of the world is getting greener but a lot of it is getting browner too. And big trees don't pop up overnight.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

What? James Ruse? I was a Cambo boy through and through and never thought of going anywhere else.

And it wasn't "unemotional" - it called carbon dioxide a pollutant. That is, in an unemotional way, completely ignorant and a completely emotional statement. That's why leftoids use the term - because it triggers a (false) emotional response. It's the very reason the term "carbon pollution" exists.

Carbon dioxide isn't the only carbon-based gas. Neither is it the only greenhouse gas.