Libs are against free speech

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

And I believe the same about you.
But I do not call you a fascist/communist or whatever other bad word you want to substitute.
Insofar as to misinformed, what am I misinformed about?
Climate change?
Nah.
Just realize there is almost nothing we can do to stop it.
And I use the data from the climate changers to prove it.

Again, you're only proving how little you know about the science. The goal isn't to stop climate change. The goal is to mitigate the severity of climate change by lessening man's contribution, which is what is bringing the system out of balance. In other words, the effort is to soften man's impact so as to slow climate change back down to its more natural pace... not prevent it.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

The majority of the establishment Democrats are currently spineless pansies. At least the Republicans are dedicated to their fascism.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Well, it's true. LOL

President Obama tried to appoint a SCOTUS Justice, which was his duty. I don't think the Democrats demonized the Republicans for their obstruction enough. The Democrats should have used such inflammatory language...people would threaten to burn down the Capital if the Republicans didn't back down. So, in the end, the Republicans obstructed the appointment until they got Trump. Now it's full speed ahead and the Democrats have found themselves in no position to stop them.

The Democrats are spineless pansies who lack political foresight.

For example, the Islamic demographic is growing exponentially in the United States. Most Muslims are rather conservative in their religious values (closet extremists). The Democrats think they can cozy up to the Muslim community and get more voter support, seeing that they are racial and religious minorities. However, the Democrats don't see how the Muslim community is going to eventually turn on them and side with the Republicans to get religion back in the public square once they have greater influence. Then the Muslims will push their religious agenda for America. That's when Republicans realize... they're the dog who chased the car... and caught it. They'll not know what to do when the wall between church and state falls, only to reveal... impending Sharia law.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Flawed according to who... a politician? Rising sea level is rising sea level.

You obviously didn't read the article.

""the prediction was based on measurements at a point on the North Carolina coast that is unrepresentative of the rest of the coast.""

""A projection map showing land along the coast underwater would place the permits of many planned development projects in jeopardy. Numerous new flood zone areas would have to be drawn, new waste treatment plants would have to be built, and roads would have to be elevated. The endeavor would cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars""

So they did a study and used the measurements of one area of NC and applied that one area to the rest of the coast. Why would they do this? Obviously, their data for the rest of the coast didn't support their climate change beliefs, so instead they just took the one which might support their belief and applied it to the whole coast.

Stupid.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

You obviously didn't read the article.

""the prediction was based on measurements at a point on the North Carolina coast that is unrepresentative of the rest of the coast.""

""A projection map showing land along the coast underwater would place the permits of many planned development projects in jeopardy. Numerous new flood zone areas would have to be drawn, new waste treatment plants would have to be built, and roads would have to be elevated. The endeavor would cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars""

So they did a study and used the measurements of one area of NC and applied that one area to the rest of the coast. Why would they do this? Obviously, their data for the rest of the coast didn't support their climate change beliefs, so instead they just took the one which might support their belief and applied it to the whole coast.

Stupid.

Yep, them stupid hillbilly scientists. What are they thinking? LOL

Who was it that said the following?

"The prediction was based on measurements at a point on the North Carolina coast that is unrepresentative of the rest of the coast."

Tom Thompson (president of NC-20, a coastal development group) who denies global warming.

Wow. I guess that makes the guy an authority doesn't it?

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Well, it's true. LOL

President Obama tried to appoint a SCOTUS Justice, which was his duty. I don't think the Democrats demonized the Republicans for their obstruction enough. The Democrats should have used such inflammatory language...people would threaten to burn down the Capital if the Republicans didn't back down. So, in the end, the Republicans obstructed the appointment until they got Trump. Now it's full speed ahead and the Democrats have found themselves in no position to stop them.

The Democrats are spineless pansies who lack political foresight.

No, it's not true. Neither the GOP nor the WH are fascists. I've posted this before, but again you remind me of the conservatives who freaked out after obama was elected, claiming he was going to take away our guns and put us in FEMA camps. Like them, years from now you'll be looking a bit silly.

Your second paragraph above is hilarious. Here you are, supposedly scared because Republicans are sooooo eeeeeeeeviiiillllllll and one of the biggest threats ... yet you literally wish that Democrats would use inflammatory language to incite people to riot.

The threat is you and your antifa pals. You, the one who posted pleas to protest fellow believer's churches! You, the one who actually posted about how you would understand if someone committed the mass murder of innocent fellow believers. You, the one who wishes Democrats would incite people to riot and violence.

Look in the mirror, man. The threat is really you.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

You obviously didn't read the article.

""the prediction was based on measurements at a point on the North Carolina coast that is unrepresentative of the rest of the coast.""

""A projection map showing land along the coast underwater would place the permits of many planned development projects in jeopardy. Numerous new flood zone areas would have to be drawn, new waste treatment plants would have to be built, and roads would have to be elevated. The endeavor would cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars""

So they did a study and used the measurements of one area of NC and applied that one area to the rest of the coast. Why would they do this? Obviously, their data for the rest of the coast didn't support their climate change beliefs, so instead they just took the one which might support their belief and applied it to the whole coast.

Stupid.

You do realize that if they can get how the rise in sea level will affect one section of coastline (perhaps one section they are rather concerned about), they can use computer simulation to measure the impact elsewhere, all based on sea levels, land elevation, and costal composition, don't you???

Because if you think these scientists need to examine every inch of coast line to get accurate data.... you're obviously still back in the stone age.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Yep, them stupid hillbilly scientists. What are they thinking? LOL

Who was it that said the following?

"The prediction was based on measurements at a point on the North Carolina coast that is unrepresentative of the rest of the coast."

Tom Thompson (president of NC-20, a coastal development group) who denies global warming.

Wow. I guess that makes the guy an authority doesn't it?

Right, focus on the source and not what he's pointing out.

The scientists who did the survey are trying to push global warming fears, so why should we believe them. Especially since they falsified the data! You can't take data from one area and apply it to the whole coast.

But you don't care about facts or truth. You have an agenda, so forget about the facts.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

Right, focus on the source and not what he's pointing out.

The scientists who did the survey are trying to push global warming fears, so why should we believe them. Especially since they falsified the data! You can't take data from one area and apply it to the whole coast.

But you don't care about facts or truth. You have an agenda, so forget about the facts.

He's not even a climate scientist. LOL

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

The scientists who did the survey are trying to push global warming fears, so why should we believe them. Especially since they falsified the data! You can't take data from one area and apply it to the whole coast.

You do realize that if they can get how the rise in sea level will affect one section of coastline (perhaps one section they are rather concerned about), they can use computer simulation to measure the impact elsewhere, all based on sea levels, land elevation, and costal composition, don't you???

Because if you think these scientists need to examine every inch of coast line to get accurate data.... you're obviously still back in the stone age.

But you don't care about facts or truth. You have an agenda, so forget about the facts.

Ummm... what is my agenda? Not wanting to watch NC drown. LOL

What's yours??? Republican Dominance and the dismantling of every democratic institution in America. From unions to Medicare.