• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Irrational Thinking: A Winner!

Ah, another equally intellectual contribution!

Tokie
Click to expand...

Too succinct? Not enough big words?

You repeatedly lay long lines of unsupported assertions. When questioned, you rant and flail about instead of actually supporting your points. This has been pointed out to you many times to no effect. My comment was intended as a reminder to others of your tactics while at the same time trolling for a pith award nomination.

For future reference, you don't get 'intellectual' in response to hyperbolic crap.
 
fishbob said:
Too succinct? Not enough big words?

You repeatedly lay long lines of unsupported assertions. When questioned, you rant and flail about instead of actually supporting your points. This has been pointed out to you many times to no effect. My comment was intended as a reminder to others of your tactics while at the same time trolling for a pith award nomination.

For future reference, you don't get 'intellectual' in response to hyperbolic crap.
Click to expand...

Wow.

When I mean "no, I can't support anything I say," I just usually say "no."

You dun't need to waste all them 'net cells to say "no."

Tokie
 
martillo said:
As odd as it might seem, I tend to agree with many of your points. Yet, this thread does not belong in this section.

And your continued irrational outbursts like this one do nothing but poison the well.
Click to expand...

If a discussion of the way in which irrational thinking tends to turn people from scientific truth does not belong in this thread, where then does it belong?

You suggested the CT thread. This suggests to me that regardless of your words, you are among those who'd rather not have "inconvenient truths" about the religion, AGW, staring you in the face.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I let it take to wing and put some #6 shot up it's backside before plucking and eating it.

Tokie
 
Mark A. Siefert said:
Uuuuummmm No. You're pretty spot on. That's more or less sounded like me during my days as a right-wing global warming (and general environmental) denier. Back then, I received most of my news and opinion from conservative squawk show hosts (e.g. Limbaugh, Reagan, a few local clones, etc.) and I ended up believing that environmentalism was all a bunch of invented doomsday scenarios (e.g. global warming, ozone depletion, acid rain, nuclear winter, etc) invented by Leftish scientists with an anti-capitalist/anti-American agenda. The express purposes of this conspiracy was to influence the governments of the world to enact legislation that would destroy the free market and plunge the country into a left-wing dictatorship.

Of course, I'm feeling much better now.
Click to expand...

Nothing worse than reformed hookers and smokers....

Tokie
 
[SIZE=-1]Google says there are bunches of places where GW and PC are thought of coexisting. Of course, correlation is not causation....

Results 1 - 10 of about 393,000 for "global warming" and "political correctness". (0.22 seconds) [/SIZE]

Noteworthy: Global Warming and Political Correctness

[SIZE=-1]Global Warming and Political Correctness. Since we're sure to hear lots of support for the new AP Global Warming story, as prominently featured with a large ...
bubbanear.blogspot.com/2006/06/global-warming-and-political.html -

[/SIZE] American Thinker: 'Global Warming' as Pathological Science Science/Tech

[SIZE=-1]Today's Global Warming campaign is endangering real, honest science. Global Warming superstition has become an international power grab, and good science ...
www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/global_warming_as_pathological.html

[/SIZE] Political correctness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia · Political Science

[SIZE=-1]Opponents of mainstream scientific views on evolution, global warming, passive smoking, AIDS and other issues have claimed that political correctness is ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness - 98k -

[/SIZE] Politically Correct Linguistics

[SIZE=-1]Macaca, Global Warming Denier, Herstory and Flip Chart Top Annual List ... "In 2006, the Political Correctness movement continued to gain momentum to the ...
www.languagemonitor.com/wst_page20.html

and many more...
[/SIZE]
 
Token, why, exactly, do you do this? We have mhaze already for quadruple-posted flame-filled emotional conspiracy theory-and-strawman with fallacy on top-laden garbage. Do you have some sort of point to make?

Indeed, many scientific publications have for some time now refused to accept any related research that fails to recognize that “warming” is occurring
Click to expand...
Troll.

Even the most hardline neo-conservative denalialists, heck, even mhaze, now accepts that the average global temperature on Earth is rising and has been for 30 years. Either your head is really deep in the sand, or you're a troll. Given the general nature of your post, I'm inclined to believe the latter.

JoeEllison: See also the list comparing Creationist arguments to denialist arguments.
 
Last edited:
Tokenconservative said:
Nothing worse than reformed hookers and smokers....

Tokie
Click to expand...

Sure there is: Obnoxious, right-wing, know-nothings with their proverbial heads so far up their figurative ass that they know their colons on a first-name basis.

Pull your head out!

That includes you too Jerome.
 
Last edited:
Safe-Keeper said:
Token, why, exactly, do you do this? We have mhaze already for quadruple-posted flame-filled emotional conspiracy theory-and-strawman with fallacy on top-laden garbage.....
Click to expand...

Hmm....Of course if I said I'd eat a kitten if X occurred, I would in fact eat a kitten. Now you said you would eat a kitten under certain conditions. Those conditions having now been met, are you or are you not going to eat a kitten?

Please respond with the age, weight, color and so forth.

Also, how does one eat a kitten? Pin it down like a frog on the dissection table? Maybe just a quick bite-off-of-the head? Inquiring minds would like to know if there are established, peer reviewed kitten eating methodologies.

Checking wikipedia, we do in fact find alleged kitten eaters -

Sonia Verma of the Toronto Star speculated[7] that the original kitten-eater comment may have been a reference to the television show Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which at one point featured a kitten-eating demon, a character by the name of Clem. He played "kitten poker", in which kittens are used as chips, and was reputed to eat his winnings.

In the wild, raccoons do eat kittens, as do mother cats. But what does this have to do with political correctness and global warming?

Exploding cat populations have of course been linked to global warming, and the obviously politically incorrect act of eating kittens may have to be re examined as mitigative measure, a job which could be assigned to the United Nations and their lackeys in the IPCC.

By the way, Safekeeper -

heck, even mhaze, now accepts that the average global temperature on Earth is rising and has been for 30 years.

"Now accepts"? Making things up?
And are you going to answer my question about the attitude of Norweigens whom have gotten their $466 higher per year household utility bills for the supposed great cause of "solving global warming?"
 
Last edited:
Safe-Keeper said:
Troll.

Even the most hardline neo-conservative denalialists, heck, even mhaze, now accepts that the average global temperature on Earth is rising and has been for 30 years. Either your head is really deep in the sand, or you're a troll. Given the general nature of your post, I'm inclined to believe the latter.
Click to expand...

You are making his point with every post.

:D :D :D
 
One also has to wonder what irrational thinking has to do with science, math, medicine or technology. Surely reason vs. unreason is more of a philosophy subject?
 
JEROME DA GNOME said:
You are making his point with every post.

:D :D :D
Click to expand...

We can say the same for Tokie. That his cries of "conspiracy" and "political correctness" are nothing more than an ideological driven delusion that flies in the face scientific reality and betrays his own willful stupidity.

The "poor, oppressed conservative" bull crap isn't going to cut it around here. Evidence does.

Speakling of which: Jerome, do you have another explanation for the scientific evidence that points to evolution?
 
Mark A. Siefert said:
We can say the same for Tokie. That his cries of "conspiracy" and "political correctness" are nothing more than an ideological driven delusion that flies in the face scientific reality and betrays his own willful stupidity.

The "poor, oppressed conservative" bull crap isn't going to cut it around here. Evidence does.

Speakling of which: Jerome, do you have another explanation for the scientific evidence that points to evolution?
Click to expand...


I love your use of "code" words to place people into a definable maligned box so as to discard what they say.

Hey, this is to his point also!
 
You are making his point with every post.
Click to expand...
Not even remotely.

Tokie's posts are nothing but the things I have accused them of being, and the burden of proof was on him to prove they're more than the conspiracy theories I make them out to be. If he wanted me to address whatever facts and evidence he may have for his strawmen and conspiracy theories presented in this thread and others, he would have to actually present them. This he has failed to do, instead creating this thread lamenting how he's not allowed to speak his mind. His posts so far have been devoid of anything useful and have followed an mhaze-ish nature of double-posting, using emotion as a weapon, and complaining about PC, so he's on my ignore list.

I do debate AGW with those who take it seriously and really want to debate it. I even agree to an extent that the reactions by many to criticism of AGW theories are wrong. My many posts here on this subject should be proof that I don't throw 'denialist' and 'ct' card at every AGW sceptic out there.
 
Last edited:
Safe-Keeper said:
Not even remotely.

Tokie's posts are nothing but the things I have accused them of being, and the burden of proof was on him to prove they're more than the conspiracy theories I make them out to be. If he wanted me to address whatever facts and evidence he may have for his strawmen and conspiracy theories presented in this thread and others, he would have to actually present them. This he has failed to do, instead creating this thread lamenting how he's not allowed to speak his mind. His posts so far have been devoid of anything useful and have followed an mhaze-ish nature of double-posting, using emotion as a weapon, and complaining about PC, so he's on my ignore list.

I do debate AGW with those who take it seriously and really want to debate it. I even agree to an extent that the reactions by many to criticism of AGW theories are wrong. My many posts here on this subject should be proof that I don't throw 'denialist' and 'ct' card at every AGW sceptic out there.
Click to expand...


Does the climate change constantly?

Do we currently have the ideal climate on Earth?

Does man have the understanding of and the ability to substantially change the climate?
 
mhaze said:
[SIZE=-1]Google says there are bunches of places where GW and PC are thought of coexisting. Of course, correlation is not causation....

Results 1 - 10 of about 393,000 for "global warming" and "political correctness". (0.22 seconds) [/SIZE]

Noteworthy: Global Warming and Political Correctness

[SIZE=-1]Global Warming and Political Correctness. Since we're sure to hear lots of support for the new AP Global Warming story, as prominently featured with a large ...
bubbanear.blogspot.com/2006/06/global-warming-and-political.html -

[/SIZE] American Thinker: 'Global Warming' as Pathological Science Science/Tech

[SIZE=-1]Today's Global Warming campaign is endangering real, honest science. Global Warming superstition has become an international power grab, and good science ...
www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/global_warming_as_pathological.html

[/SIZE] Political correctness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia · Political Science

[SIZE=-1]Opponents of mainstream scientific views on evolution, global warming, passive smoking, AIDS and other issues have claimed that political correctness is ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness - 98k -

[/SIZE] Politically Correct Linguistics

[SIZE=-1]Macaca, Global Warming Denier, Herstory and Flip Chart Top Annual List ... "In 2006, the Political Correctness movement continued to gain momentum to the ...
www.languagemonitor.com/wst_page20.html

and many more...
[/SIZE]
Click to expand...

Recap:

Joe: AGW denialists often point to a ludicrous PC conspiracy as part of their argument.

mhaze: Nonsense! After a few minutes of searching I was easily able to find AGW denialists pointing to a ludicrous PC conspiracy as part of their argument.

quix: I hereby use humor to point out you are making Joe's point for him.

mhaze: Oh YEAH?? Here's THREE MORE sources of AGW denialists pointing to a ludicrous PC conspiracy as part of their argument.

quix: I sense you may soon be in the market for a new shovel.

eta: I especially enjoyed the one that claimed a PC conspiracy while comparing climatologists to Stalinists.
 
Last edited:
quixotecoyote said:
Recap:

Joe: AGW denialists often point to a ludicrous PC conspiracy as part of their argument.

mhaze: Nonsense! After a few minutes of searching I was easily able to find AGW denialists pointing to a ludicrous PC conspiracy as part of their argument.

quix: I hereby use humor to point out you are making Joe's point for him.

mhaze: Oh YEAH?? Here's THREE MORE sources of AGW denialists pointing to a ludicrous PC conspiracy as part of their argument.


quix: I sense you may soon be in the market for a new shovel.

eta: I especially enjoyed the one that claimed a PC conspiracy while comparing climatologists to Stalinists.
Click to expand...

:D

It's almost too good to be true, isn't it?

mhaze's first example has a Gore-count of 9; I haven't checked the others.

ETA : the blubbanear link has a Gore-count of 11. The American Thinker has zero, but it makes up for that with Lysenko.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom