Originally posted by @eladarWhat lie? An error with a basis in evidence, albeit refuted by new and later information, is not a lie. If you could restrict climate change deniers to that level of lying we would have something useful to debate.
I do not care what it was based on. Perhaps you do, but that's because of your ideological beliefs.
If you would be so kind, would you acknowledge that I provided you with the lie you requested?
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
Originally posted by @finneganOh, so your going to downsize to a smaller masion... Good for you! I just hope your not the type of person that spouts off about my driving of a gas guzzling full sized truck here in rural America ( it actuallly gets 18 mpg average, so its pretty good as far as trucks go)?
Do you detect a tinge of what you said? I hope so. Well done.
My home consumes too much as we brought up a family here. The family has grown up and one day we may sell it and get something more suited to our needs: a music room, an art / hobby room, a bigger library, a room for the TV I never watch, a room for visitors. Smaller, anyhow.
04 Aug 17
Originally posted by @joe-shmoYes indeed, but it's the gardens that take up most of my efforts at this time of year. Always something changing, growing or dying. The shrubs also soon change shape if I am not onto it with my clippers.
Oh, so your going to downsize to a smaller masion... Good for you! I just hope your not the type of person that spouts off about my driving of a gas guzzling full sized truck here in rural America ( it actuallly gets 18 mpg average, so its pretty good as far as trucks go)?
I never make assumptions about large vehicles any more. Gas guzzling trucks are great candidates for conversion to alternative fuels and often emit nothing but water vapour. I am sure you will have looked into this.
04 Aug 17
Originally posted by @checkbaiterSo here's how the game proceeds.
State of the Climate: 10 years after Al Gore declared a ‘planetary emergency’ – top 10 reasons Gore was wrong
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/01/25/state-of-the-climate-10-years-after-al-gore-declared-a-planetary-emergency-top-10-reasons-gore-was-wrong/
Gore is a US politician with all the credibility that enjoys among people like myself - to wit, virtually none whatsoever.
Gore makes a film about climate change with a message the climate change deniers do not want to hear. It threatens the value of oil deposits in the accounts of sponsors like the Koch family. The Koch family can buy all the political and media influence it wants to sustain the value of its investments.
Every claim Gore makes is subjected to the most intense scrutiny, establishing those where there is room for doubt or dispute, however tendentious or extravagant.
Actually, as Eladar accidentally demonstrated above, a lot of fact checking supports Gore either in detail or at least in broad terms and refutes his critics. Ooops. Never mind, Let's try different fact checkers.
This is used to substantiate the claims of the deniers, whose claims we are asked to simply accept without scrutiny as set out on the page / screen.
So here you push in front of us a web page making a set of assertions which we are invited to swallow as presented - they must surely be true and balanced and do not require fact checking nor placing in context.
That includes refuting assertions which we are told Gore made, but which maybe he never did make, or not in the way decribed. Did he really say the world would end in ten years, or did he say (for example) that in ten years time it will be too late to change the process? Remember, those two statements are fundamentally unlike each other. And I am not claiming anything - just that we need to verify just what we are being told here.
The ultimate con trick being of course the idea that if nobody has the energy and the time and the skills to fact check your random post, then you can slink away patting yourself on the back for a job well done. That showed them liberal progressive dims.
Good game lads. That'll do the trick.