Aces Posted August 4, 2011 Author Share Posted August 4, 2011 (edited) I thought this was the most interesting point made How much money has the Left made on the threat of Global Cooling, Man Made Global Warming, Climate Change, without every offering any concrete evidence that it exists?Don't worry Aces, NASA says you're the one ignoring the "FACTS"Sorry Son, looks like you have lost the argument again. If you keep losing, are you going to keep posting? And when can we expect you to start answering questions? Another Dupe of the Oil lobby.......the author of your distorted article is a paid shill for the Oil industry. Some people will believe anything. Duh! Edited August 4, 2011 by Aces Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cocheese Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 (edited) Another Dupe of the Oil lobby.......the author of your distorted article is a paid shill for the Oil industry. Some people will believe anything. Duh! Hook, line, and sinker. Aces, you have provided hundreds on links to stories from people who are in the "tank" for the Left, yet when they get questioned, you go off on a temper tantrum. So why is it when people play the same game as you, you dismiss what they say? Either start playing by the same rules, or get lost. Out of curiosity, why didn't you address the remark about the money made by the Left in pushing their agenda? Opps, another question that we all know you are too stupid to answer Edited August 4, 2011 by Cocheese 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Wahrheit Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 Hook, line, and sinker. Aces, you have provided hundreds on links to stories from people who are in the "tank" for the Left, yet when they get questioned, you go off on a temper tantrum. So why is it when people play the same game as you, you dismiss what they say? Either start playing by the same rules, or get lost. Out of curiosity, why didn't you address the remark about the money made by the Left in pushing their agenda? Opps, another question that we all know you are too stupid to answer http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/04/fox-news-palin-pulled-punches-beckel-gutfeld_n_918016.html Oh No Really! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cocheese Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/04/fox-news-palin-pulled-punches-beckel-gutfeld_n_918016.html Oh No Really! You're right, because it's not as if MSNBC would ever bend over backwards to support Obama. Opps, maybe not My link parts, I mean Die, when are you minions going to understand that Fox is no different than anybody else, with the exception that they are Right leaning, instead of Left leaning? As well, now that you are back out of hiding, do you plan on returning to these threads that you started, or are you too much of a coward? WOW! The List! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted August 4, 2011 Author Share Posted August 4, 2011 It is too bad that we cannot debate without all of the schoolyard tactics and mutual masturbation that the right wing posters here seem addicted to. I guess they did not grow up .......I feel for the people that have to work with such spoiled brats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 It is too bad that we cannot debate without all of the schoolyard tactics and mutual masturbation that the right wing posters here seem addicted to. I guess they did not grow up .......I feel for the people that have to work with such spoiled brats. OFF TOPIC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cocheese Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 Mo Cheese & Whine, Let me offer a scathing criticism based on a academic approach to your post and its link. It should be enlightening. ..... Once again dad, you completely missed the point. And in your attempt to defend the Left, your ignorance has only embarrassed yourself further. You see Aces (who I commend you for outing) likes to offer up links to to opinion sites, written by people who have no education, experience, or credibility in the field they are speaking of. They are essentially a paid advertisement for whatever agenda they are trying to push. I merely lead Aces right into the trap in which he would contradict himself when he objected to the author of that article. As you can see, he has completely ignored it, and has no disappeared from the thread until he feels it's safe to return when the issue has blown over. The point is, the Left is just as good as the Right in getting their agendas out there. The important thing is, realizing someone has an agenda, and ignoring it. It's an ability Aces is lacking. It would also appear you are lacking it, along with an ability to go a day without being a Democrat excuse maker. Like I said earlier, I applaud you for your comments about Aces, but how about lighting a firecracker under parts, I mean Die's ass, and get him to man up once and a while? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 Mo Cheese & Whine, Let me offer a scathing criticism based on a academic approach to your post and its link. It should be enlightening. 1. No one in a thoughtful debate concerning Climate change, whether man-made or not would use the term facts. We can all agree that Man-made Climate change is only a theory and to date has not been proven one way or another. There are conflicting academic models and studies. And this is only their interpretation of the statistical evidence and will be subject to much stricter peer review in the coming weeks. 2. Of the three people involved with this article (1) and subsequent study (2) not one are employed by NASA or speak for NASA. I have included NASA's positions on the issue. A) A blanket around the Earth B) Climate change: How do we know? 3. The author (James Taylor) of the op-ed you posted is a lawyer with no history of education in any climate science. A) The writer shows a clear bias using antagonistic language B) The writer is a senor fellow at a conservative anti-Global Warming think tank 5. The lead author of the study has been criticized in prior writings for having a bias and using the wrong mathematical basis for this and the preceding work he did. These criticism seem to have a basis in reality as I've found them on more than a few sights from different climatologists. 6. The Lead scientist has admitted to several errors in a previous study using satellite data that made their conclusions possible and that the correct data shows exactly opposite of what his paper concluded. 7. The Journal this study is being peer reviewed in is used for different scientific purposes and doesn't contain any significant number of Climate or Meteorology scientists. 8. Finally the conclusions are being overstated by Conservative blogs and op-eds the lead author even admits. You are talking to yourself......there is no one home there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 (edited) You are talking to yourself......there is no one home there. Sounds like descention on the team to me Edited August 5, 2011 by longball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cocheese Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Mo cheese, i offer consistent and lucid arguments to counter your selection of partisan talking point dung. Any point you offer that i comment on i have read verbatim and examined it all the way back to its actual source. Like your Op-ed blast about Global warming. Have you read the actual study? i have. Not just the story about the study but the study. I read a couple of his others too. Consistent and lucid arguments eh? So that's what saying "talking points" every day is? I asked you to explain why you thought of Obama's resume, and I have yet to hear back. I asked what you thought of Obama's clear cut lies, and I have yet to hear back. Your entire act is to defend Obama at all costs. You are no better than the links you try to disparage It always says something about someone when they link to an interpretation of a study instead of the study. You wouldn't find Marginal or Fired doing that. And that's fantastic. Should I explain to you again why I posted the link for Aces' viewing pleasure? [r is this like every other thing that you've chosen to ignore? You know as much as you bust Aces ass, your holding his spot on the conservative side. You may not like it but its true. Most of your comments are tired played out examples of shit sent my way on Free Republic years ago or Red State lately. You understand little of context, history or even the value of political philosophy outside of the parties canned points. I wonder if you've even read the writers that have influenced not only your party but our founders. Can you tell Locke from Hobbes from Rousseau? You and your ilk embody the people my signature speak of. You only see Hobbes, but its possible you don't even know Hobbes. i might giving you too much credit. (stop typing his name in Wikipedia) dad, you've been owned numerous times on this board by most of the Righties. Every time you use "talking points" as a way to defend Obama just shows you have no defence. How about instead of accusing others, you do what you preach? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cocheese Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/04/fox-news-palin-pulled-punches-beckel-gutfeld_n_918016.html Oh No Really! Opps, looks like Huff Po did some more creative editting 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal50 Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Sounds like descention on the team to me They will work it out in the shower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 you guys sound like my boys when they were little....this has turned into an embarrassing joke....this isn't intelligent discussion by a long shot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cocheese Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Mocheese and Whine, i have spoken at length about Obama's resume. A couple of different threads. I need to say no more. you know where i stand already. It disingenuous to continue to ask the same canned questions just using different words. “Length”!??!?! You referred to calling an “empty suit” as a talking point, copied his resume off of Wilki, then disappeared. The only stand I got from you was that you didn’t want to discuss his resume. And to be honest. I don’t blame you. You know i feel that 11 years in elected office and a Harvard law degree make him qualified to hold the job. I assumed that because of your overwhelming support for the guy, but you never explained why (or at least that I saw). And to be honest, I don’t know why someone would think a nominee is a creditable candidate with such a limited amount of experience. But to each there own I guess. I’d ask you why you support a guy who never really took a stand on anything, doesn’t have any real world experience, and basically walked into politics unopposed. But I know you either won’t answer, or will call those issues “talking points”, drop some vulgar language, talk about how great you are, then disappear. And for the record, when Ford was in the weeds, I’m glad they sought out a guy who had a wealth of experience in a real world situation. Someone who had been at the bottom, and fought his way to the top. I do not believe for one second Ford would be in the situation they are right now, if they hired some up and coming slick talking shyster. So that’s why I’m having a hard time believing that Obama was the right choice for the US at that time. i have expressed disappointment for certain campaign promises broken and understood the need to break others. i don't watch highly edited video's with no context. Sorry, that medium is so subjective and easily manipulated that i don't waste my time. you care to get me the transcript for it and i'll take a look. I also don't watch the ones ACES or other liberals post. i prefer to read things and get around what oft times is partisan editing. Fair enough, but why is it every legitimate criticism of Obama causes you to fly off the handle? The "Righties" on here have criticized Bush and the Republicans for many things, yet you go to great lengths to defend Obama on everything Because you only offer up what others think. Your not thinking for yourself. Why should i debate you on someones else's work when i can go to Red State and debate the author. And because i get the same links sent to me by conservatives. Again, with the old “talking points” claim. If you really don’t want to debate with me, why quote my postings? You could just as easily ignore me, or other Righties if you feel we are just getting orders from “our leaders”. For the record, this is the only discussion board I visit (during the NHL season I visit hockeyfights.com, but that is only to see the highlights of any hockey fights I might want to watch). As well, I have never purposely watched a second of FNC (I don’t get it on my cable package, although I have watched a few minutes of SunTV, which the Left up here called Fox News North when they tried to block the channel from starting), nor have I ever intentionally visited Fox’s website. I have never heard of “Red State”, so I clearly have never been there either. And you could torture me for days and I would not be able to name a single other “Right Wing” dissuasion board. So the fact that you accuse me of not thinking for myself, and instead regurgitating “talking points” is laughable. I have begged people like Aces to drop the link bombing tactics, and have actual conversation. So if all I was capable of was re-quoting others, why would I be pushing for people to use their own voice? The reality is, you know full well who I am, but you know the only way for you to slither out of a losing debate, is to use that tired excuse, and run away. You might as well just call me a racist. It’s the same pathetic action. Whether or not you believe that is up to you. Believing means you are wrong. Not believing it allows you think you’re right. It’s up to you. I am rarely owned and the few times it does happen its to people of higher intellectual abilities, like Fired or Marginal. Never your constantly copying another's work ass. Every time you use "talking points" as a way to defend Obama just shows you have no defence, and have been “owned”. Just because I’m a little more in your face about the issues than Fired or Marginal are, doesn’t mean the results are any less. Its not like you actually counter Aces offerings either. So you the kettle or the pot???? Maybe you need to do your research again. His point has been counter more times than he’s received negative ratings. But each and every time he’s refused to offer up a response. So why would I continue putting the effort into a refuting him, when all as he does is scream “SCAB”, then goes on to posting another link? Like I said, I have challenged him to stop link bombing, and he has never accept the offer. I would love to have a debate with Aces. He doesn’t share my feelings Hmmmm, instead of offering canned opinions and the partisan pre-arranged in your email inbox points, you actually think for your self and use your own words. I have, and the proof is all across this board. How about you doing the same thing? And maybe go one day without saying “talking points” or defending Obama on everything? You committed one of the most egregious errors in debate, you offered another's work as your own. And when was that? you got OWNED on this..BIG FUCKING TIME!!! Huh? First off, don’t accuse someone of parroting someone else’s thoughts, accuse someone of offering someone’s work as your own, then directly copy what I said. This response is like the line from Trailer Park Boys Ricky: Suck it Donny! Donny: You suck it Ricky, MORE! Ricky: What the f*#k kind of comeback was that? You said the same thing that I said, but you just added 'more' to it. Donny: No! More! You suck it more! Ricky: You're a f*#kin' dick! i would be glad to see original points that contain your actual opinion not what the RNC want you to think. then i might feel like responding. It would have easily seen why I think Obama is an empty suit, if you had stuck around the conversation. But when you disappeared, I couldn’t be bothered to explain. Although, I’m quite sure if you scroll through the thread, you’d see plenty of posts that explain it. The line “empty suit” wasn’t invented to describe Barack Obama by Glen Beck. It has been around for as long as I remember. It’s another term to describe a puppet. Someone who doesn’t think for themselves, but instead are controlled by people behind the scene. Why do I call him an empty suit? Simple, look at his life. People say he’s a great speaker, but off the teleprompter, he’s an idiot (yes, so was Bush). I don’t really care about great speeches, but when you get praised overwhelmingly for something, you need to be good at it, right? He’s also suppose to be this ubber smart guy, yet doesn’t know how many States there are, thinks Austria has their own language, can’t remember what year it is, and so on. I know smart people, and when they talk, you can sense their intelligence. I don’t get the same sense with Obama. Then he’s suppose to be this smart lawyer, yet outside of teaching it, we don’t know anything that he’s done in the real world to put it to good use. There’s a difference between classroom smarts, and street smarts. You can know the law, but can you put it to good use? Obama never has. So again, it means nothing to me. It’s hollow. Then there’s his political career. First off, he’s never faced adversity in trying to climb the ladder. There’s an old saying in sports; “you have to learn to lose, before you can learn to win”. I believe you have to get knocked down once and a while, so that we can see you get back up. I believe it adds character, and defines who you are. Obama never went through this. Hell, until 2008, he never went through any sort of fight in an election. Everything was handed to him. Of course once he made his way into politics, what did he do? He voted “Present” so that he never had to make a stand. I don’t care if I disagree with you, but stand up for something, anything. Again, when you look into the guy, I see nothing. So that’s why I think he’s an empty suit. My guess is after reading that (but probably not), you are just going to claim I got those lines from somewhere else. And that’s fine. There is ample evidence here to prove you wrong, but you’ll ignore that too. But did you ever stop to think people call him an "empty suit", because he really is just an "empty suit"? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 (edited) “Length”!??!?!You referred to calling an “empty suit” as a talking point, copied his resume off of Wilki, then disappeared. The only stand I got from you was that you didn’t want to discuss his resume. And to be honest. I don’t blame you.I assumed that because of your overwhelming support for the guy, but you never explained why (or at least that I saw). And to be honest, I don’t know why someone would think a nominee is a creditable candidate with such a limited amount of experience. But to each there own I guess.I’d ask you why you support a guy who never really took a stand on anything, doesn’t have any real world experience, and basically walked into politics unopposed. But I know you either won’t answer, or will call those issues “talking points”, drop some vulgar language, talk about how great you are, then disappear. And for the record, when Ford was in the weeds, I’m glad they sought out a guy who had a wealth of experience in a real world situation. Someone who had been at the bottom, and fought his way to the top. I do not believe for one second Ford would be in the situation they are right now, if they hired some up and coming slick talking shyster. So that’s why I’m having a hard time believing that Obama was the right choice for the US at that time. Fair enough, but why is it every legitimate criticism of Obama causes you to fly off the handle? The "Righties" on here have criticized Bush and the Republicans for many things, yet you go to great lengths to defend Obama on everythingAgain, with the old “talking points” claim. If you really don’t want to debate with me, why quote my postings? You could just as easily ignore me, or other Righties if you feel we are just getting orders from “our leaders”.For the record, this is the only discussion board I visit (during the NHL season I visit hockeyfights.com, but that is only to see the highlights of any hockey fights I might want to watch). As well, I have never purposely watched a second of FNC (I don’t get it on my cable package, although I have watched a few minutes of SunTV, which the Left up here called Fox News North when they tried to block the channel from starting), nor have I ever intentionally visited Fox’s website. I have never heard of “Red State”, so I clearly have never been there either. And you could torture me for days and I would not be able to name a single other “Right Wing” dissuasion board. So the fact that you accuse me of not thinking for myself, and instead regurgitating “talking points” is laughable. I have begged people like Aces to drop the link bombing tactics, and have actual conversation. So if all I was capable of was re-quoting others, why would I be pushing for people to use their own voice? The reality is, you know full well who I am, but you know the only way for you to slither out of a losing debate, is to use that tired excuse, and run away. You might as well just call me a racist. It’s the same pathetic action.Whether or not you believe that is up to you. Believing means you are wrong. Not believing it allows you think you’re right. It’s up to you. Every time you use "talking points" as a way to defend Obama just shows you have no defence, and have been “owned”. Just because I’m a little more in your face about the issues than Fired or Marginal are, doesn’t mean the results are any less. Maybe you need to do your research again. His point has been counter more times than he’s received negative ratings. But each and every time he’s refused to offer up a response. So why would I continue putting the effort into a refuting him, when all as he does is scream “SCAB”, then goes on to posting another link? Like I said, I have challenged him to stop link bombing, and he has never accept the offer. I would love to have a debate with Aces. He doesn’t share my feelingsI have, and the proof is all across this board. How about you doing the same thing? And maybe go one day without saying “talking points” or defending Obama on everything?nd when was that?Huh? First off, don’t accuse someone of parroting someone else’s thoughts, accuse someone of offering someone’s work as your own, then directly copy what I said. This response is like the line from Trailer Park Boys Ricky: Suck it Donny!Donny: You suck it Ricky, MORE! Ricky: What the f*#k kind of comeback was that? You said the same thing that I said, but you just added 'more' to it. Donny: No! More! You suck it more! Ricky: You're a f*#kin' dick
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.