Who and why?
“ Said no Scientist ever.”
Actually, there are many scientists who disagree with global warming, and there would likely be much more if scientists weren’t blackballed for having a different view.
Evolution should not be a Religious issue. It is a Scientific fact
In all fairness, it is both a religious issue and a scientific issue.
“I admitted I was out of order. Yea, you're supposed to do that when you're wrong. My point was that all candidates are terrible, and because my admittedly wrong offhanded comment didn't effectively portray my beliefs, I gave real reasons. I hate Democrats too, it just so happened that this thread is on Republicans, who I have MORE of a problem with.”
Fair enough. I actually have a lot more respect for you knowing you hate both sides. I do too though I suspect we have different reasons for hating the politicians.
“It doesn't matter if it should or shouldn't, it is. There are laws that allow and prevent it, and it has benefits. Anything that includes laws is a political issue, plain and simple.”
Gay marriage is a good example of how government works. It sticks its nose into where it doesn’t belong and then tries to regulate it. This causes more problems. Rather than getting the government out, people add more regulations to fix the old regulations which cause more problems.
Get the government out of marriage. It should not be a political issue.
“ Yes, they are separate. However, federal law supersedes.If the federal law says minimum wage HAS to be at least $10, EVERY state has to follow it, or leave the union. If the federal government says homosexuals should be able to get married, the states have to follow. They can require more paperwork, they can require consent from both parties AND the pastor, but they can't outright deny the law. That is just how it is.”
Federal law does supersede, but federal jurisdiction, Constitutionally speaking, is very limited and gives the federal government no power over marriage.
“Evolution isn't a religious issue. Religion is the base of Biology, arguably the most important field of science. This stuff is literally middle school stuff, along with plate tectonics, newton's laws, and basic structure of an atom. I prefer someone deciding where to point nuclear warheads to have at least a 6th grade understanding of science.”
So you have no source on Cruz denying evolution?
If someone believes in the Flying Spaghetti Monster built the White House out of potato salad, and he does not show other signs of insanity and wants to protect my rights in office, then I would vote for him because religious views, even ones that contradict science, are not prerequisites for office in my view.
“I agree. A lot of people are pretty ignorant of just how big of a deal it is, and the huge range of effects it has.”
I disagree. The Earth has warmed less than a degree in a hundred years and it has now stalled. I’m not panicked.
“Perhaps this is a point where we simply have different opinions, but I believe that we should be very careful of using resources we won't get more of.”
We have achieved the scientific wonders we enjoy today because we used Earth’s resources, and the further science advances, the more ways we learn to harness natural resources. To believe we will run out of useful resources is to believe we will run out of ways to innovate which is a premise I reject.
“The constitution says that we the people are allowed to have a militia, mostly so that the state can fight the federal government should it become too powerful. It does NOT mean that every suburban household should have access to a killing machine that can end anyone within an X radius on a whim.”
The Constitution does say that the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, and the Founding Fathers said the militia was every free man.
George Mason – “I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
I can add to this a million other quotes from Founders stating gun ownership as an individual right if you want them.
“You mean the ones that didn't fill out the paperwork? Thats literally what this is about: Paperwork. They came across the boarder without paperwork, and instead of saying "Oh, you didn't fill it out, here is another copy, just fill it out and you can stay", they ship them back.”
Tax fraud? You mean paperwork? Forgery? You mean paper work? Blackmail? You mean paperwork?
The real issue is not the paperwork but the unlawful entry, and yes, I don’t think someone whose first act in this country is breaking the law should be given citizenship.
“It is my personal opinion that having more patrols isn't the way to solve the problem. If it is your belief that it is, thats fine, we can debate that another time.”
It will not solve the problem completely, but it will help quite a bit. Securing borders is one of the few legitimate powers of the Federal government.
Again, that is your belief, I share different ones. This is an issue that can be debated, and I will gladly do so at another time.
I have a lot of ideas which are controversial and debatable, but Social Security being unsustainable in its current model is stone cold fact.
“Except, if everyone has to pay 10% for example, minimum wage workers can't afford rent while the rich are buying private jets. If we make the poor pay 2% and the rich pay 30%, the poor might be able to buy an extra gallon of milk while the rich can still afford a jet.”
The problem is that the poor (I grew up poor and am now lower middle class for the record) never feel the expense of large government programs because they can vote themselves endless benefits without ever directly footing the bill. The rich do foot the bill for ineffective government programs and invest less in business which results in fewer jobs for everyone including the poor.
“As a future education major that has already taken college classes in the subject, I beg a huge differ. There are stories of valedictorians graduating highschool and being so far behind normal 3.0 kids that they can't keep up and have to drop out of college.”
This is true, and as someone who worked in such a school, I can tell you that one of the problems is that schools will not fail students and will dip the curve however they must because schools lose funding and/or are taken over by the state if they do not have a high graduation rate. Changing standards will not change the urge to push students on to the next level whether or not they learned anything. I was told, though I have never looked into the law, that until students reach high school, teachers cannot hold them back anyway but can only recommend they repeat a year which parents rarely accept.
“The Common Core standards are a list of benchmarks that teachers (mostly elementary) have to have kids reach, like being able to multiply single digit numbers by the end of 3rd grade, understand decimals by 5th grade, and linear equations by 8th grade.”
I’m aware of Common Core standards, but they are not federal standards as you originally claimed. They were freely adopted by the states though there was some federal bribery involved. (long story)
“The schools that already met them don't have to change anything, and the schools that don't have been deemed not up to standard. It is something that really needed to be put in place, because even moving IN my state caused huge discrepancies in curriculum”
Unless every teacher follows the exact same lesson plan, then there will always be some discrepancies. Most states did not even have standards until the early nineties, and since that time, education has continued to get worse.
“I don't think people should have better or worse education based on location (believe me, the second high school I went to had far lower standards, and the kids aren't as smart there). Currently there are only CC for Math and English, but other subjects are being written as we speak.”
Having standards does not mean education improves. NCLB set standards as well. CC is not a new idea. It’s just NCLB to the nth degree. Having the same curriculum mandated everywhere does not mean students will grasp it equally. Personally, I think the degree of importance parents place on education has much more to do with the success of the student than does curriculum.
“http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cruz-shutdown-successful-because-it-sparked-debate/”
My point stands. Cruz was no more responsible for the shutdown than Obama and the government didn’t actually shut down.
“Sometimes death is preferable to the alternative. And parents know that.”
If so, do you support the right of parents to terminate their child at any age?
“I had people in my physics class who aced it and didn't understand a thing.”
If they were not cheating and made consistently good grades, then they know something.
“Good grades don't mean a thing when it comes to intelligence,”
I disagree completely.
“and law careers are a lot of the time who you know.”
I could say the same thing about the field of education, yet I would be amiss to discredit your successes, would I not?
“He has stances that usually said "know nothing moderates" show. He either believes them, in which case see one, or he is standing by those stance BECAUSE those people have them, and are getting their votes, or see three.”
You do a disservice to yourself by dismissing those who disagree with you as stupid. I believe you are more than capable of rising above this.
Moderates go whichever way the wind blows, and the wind of popular opinion is not at Cruz’s back.
“Global warming: It is no secret that burning fossil fuels is a large factor in it. Therefore the VERY rich companies that handle them would like it if someone just turned a blind eye. Plus, if Global warming was accepted by everyone, than more people might use more eco-friendly options, which would cause businesses that aren't them to create competition, forcing them to have... well, competition. Businesses don't like competition. Its the nature of corporations, to sell things, and it gets in their way.”
Kudos. That was what I was thinking as well.
“Encourages Ecological Destruction for the sake of Economic Gain: Yea, I don't see how all the private contractors who'd get hired to do this wouldn't want this.
I wasn’t really sure what you meant by the whole Ecological Destruction angle, but I suppose that works.
“Rifles: Bullet and gun manufactures are both hoping that everyone can buy their goods, yes?”
That’s true. I did overlook that one.
“SS: Employers have a lot to do with SS, and they personally don't benefit. If it gets axed, less work for them and... well, that's it.”
That’s a stretch. Social security is not a big strain on corporations. Also, Cruz wanted to cut back on SS not ban it which would not even decrease the hassle of corporations.
“Rich & Poor taxes: Corporate heads (who he would be trying to appeal to) would definitely be saving a lot of money if they had to pay taxes as if they didn't know where their next meal was coming from.”
I don’t know what you mean by “if they had to pay taxes as if they didn't know where their next meal was coming from.”
“Business has no place in government. Business is all about results this quarter, government needs to look farther.”
Government has been showing loss for every quarter since I can remember, and we are now in 18 trillion dollars of debt. Some business acumen might not go amiss.
“Yes. Lobbying is pretty much legal bribery.”
As long as you condemn equally every politician who associates with lobbyists, then you are being consistent, but that puts every politician on your naughty list.
“On heritage alone? No. But fact is, that is his father, the person who a large part of his life is based around. You can tell a lot by someone's legal guardian.”
So you should not judge someone based on their heritage but you can judge them on their guardians? I think you should judge people for their own actions.
“He refused to sign a bill unless someone else did what he wanted. Is it legal? Yea. Is it how I want the person leading my country to act? No.”
What you just described is the executive power to veto. I think the veto is a good check and balance built into the system, but as long as you disagree with every veto ever, you are being consistent in your view.
http://www.texastribune.org/2011/06/17/on-the-records-vetoes--then-and-now/
So what? Rick Perry used his power to veto as is his right.
Also, that chart does not show Perry has the highest amount of vetoes by any Governor since Reconstruction. It shows Perry has the highest amount of vetoes out of the last ten governors of Texas. Furthermore, all those governors served much shorter terms in office. Looking at how many vetoes were issued a year, Clements actually issued the most vetoes. Out of the ten, Perry comes in seventh place in terms of frequency of veto use putting him in the lower middle of the pack.
“The fact that everyone does it doesn't make it better.”
The fact that money went to a contributor does not mean there is a conspiracy. Almost all businesses finance politicians and all government funding funds business.
“We are the most capitalist first world country, and the one falling behind the most. Coincidence?”
We have been one of the most capitalistic nations and we have led the world. We have taken massive steps towards Socialism (bailouts, Obamacare) and we are losing our standing. Coincidence?
“So because you get raped you should have to go through child birth”
Because it is wrong to kill an innocent human, you don’t get to murder someone regardless of whether or not you were raped.
“and raise a kid for 18 years regardless of what that will do your life, even if you don't have the resources to take care of them? Yea, nothing bad can possibly come from that.”
There is this crazy new concept called adoption. I would argue that it’s better than murdering a kid because Mom thinks mothering sounds like a drag, but I’m just funny that way.
It very well might be a personal thing that I don't want my leaders to say that I am inherently sinned, and because I don't believe a guy who may or not have been born a couple millennia ago was the child of a omnipotent being that had to kill said child so I wouldn't be sinned.
I stand corrected. Perry did agree that people who don’t believe in Jesus go to Hell.
I still don’t think religion should be a prerequisite for political office. Catholics, as I understand it, think you go to Hell if you aren’t Catholic, but that wouldn’t keep me from voting from John F. Kennedy.
“Cuts school funding and graduation rates go up, so he stands by it.”
That’s not the same as being against school funding as you originally suggested.
“He also refused 700 million from the federal government in fear that they might raise their standards.”
He refused money to adopt Common Core standards which are not superior. Sandra Stotsky, an educational expert who was on the Validation Committee for Common Core, says they are crap.
“Marriage grants different tax rates, and is very much an issue because of it.”
People should not be discriminated against because of their marital status. Get the government out of marriage.
On My Honor
Why the American Values of the Boy Scouts Are Worth Fighting For
By Rick Perry
Check pg 69: The BSA's position is that a homosexual who makes is sex life a public matter is not an appropriate role model of the Scout Oath and Law for adolescent boys.
I quoted a paraphrase, my bad.
The quote you gave is Perry’s explanation of the BSA’s position not his own. Perry goes on to say, “I do not believe the teaching of sexual preference fits within the parameters of Scouting's mission. The defining characteristics of homosexuality and heterosexuality is sex. Scouting is not intended to advance a discussion about sexual activity, whether of the heterosexual or homosexual form. You will find few parents of Scouts concerned about the homosexual scoutmaster whose sexuality is not disclosed as long as sexuality in no way enters into the scout-scoutmaster relationship.”
Do you find anything in Perry’s statement objectionable? I do not.
“As a future science teacher, I put VERY high value on knowing at least the basics of how the world works.”
That’s your prerogative. In my view, it does not speak to a politician’s political views or moral character, so I don’t care.
“People say that until a different religion does it in an assembly or over the intercom. "Please, allow me to lead a prayer for our lord Satan" probably wouldn't go too well with many parents, who would pull their kids out, and than lawsuits, and countless letters and even death-threats... Best to just keep it out of school completely.”
I don’t care if a kid wants to pray to Satan at school. He has a right to exercise his religion. As far as what kinds of religious discourse can be allowed by the staff, that’s best left for schools to decide. If they want to praise Allah, they can praise Allah as long as they don’t force students to agree to it.
“Sorry, but I find this barbaric. "Yes I am in charge of little Timmy's well being. Whats that? You want to hurt my child? Why would you - Oh, he disrespected you? Hit em harder!" I thought this mentality had died down.”
Spanking is not barbaric. It’s a very direct way to give discipline. Spanking should not come from a place of vengeance but a place of love and correction just like any other punishment.
“That would be us.”
If you feel natural resources must be protected from use, get rid of everything you have made of natural resources and live like the Amish. Otherwise, you are on board with using natural resources.
“Common Core states the minimum that must be taught. It doesn't state teaching style, rate of learning (beyond you shouldn't be above X grade if you don't know Y), and certainly doesn't ask anything from anyone other than students and teachers.”
I continue to reject the premise that decisions for educating students can best be made by people who have never met the students. Even if I did not, I still would not embrace these standards which are shoddy and experimental.
“That does sound horrible!
“Except they aren't even born yet, and are hardly human when they haven't even developed a brain.”
Unborn children have not only a brain but a thinking brain by six weeks. If you want to kill them before that, then go for it, but there is no arguing that a thinking being with human DNA is not human.
“I agree, marriage had no benefits legally, and I don't think it should, this would be a stupid point, and than I couldn't care less what he thought.”
Then we should both be fighting against government involvement in marriage instead of advocating a policy that will discriminate against single people, unmarried couples, polygamists and other non-government promoted lifestyles.
“That is a opinion that you have a right to. Its just a point that bothers me (being on the bad end of this before) so I included it.”
I understand. I’m not defending people being a dick with their business but their right to be a dick. Similarly, I don’t support Westborro’s speech, but I support their freedom of speech.
“Wait, you were a teacher? Cool :)”
Yep! (gives a comic book loving, student teaching, political advocating fist bump)
“And there are certainly some schools that this applies to. One of my schools had three huge TVs in the cafeteria just cause, not even using them. I got to use laser based time-recording equipment in physics, and we got brand new drums every ten years or so. But than again, another school I went to... yikes. A couple HUNDRED dollars would have gone a LONG way at that dump.
“They need this money, if nothing else than an faculty.”
I understand. In reality though, you just need a moderately comfortable class, some books, basic equipment, good teachers, and…that’s it. My father-in-law was telling me the other day about a guy who earns his money going school to school doing a magic show/safety class. That’s nice and all, but do we really need to shell out hundreds of dollars for that? I work at a Convention Center where schools routinely shell out tons of money to do Professional Development…most of which is complete crap. The money goes to frivolous things.
You are a scientist. Do some research and look at the numbers. We keep paying more for schools and getting less in education. Dumping money on this problem does not help. If it did, we’d have the brightest students in the world.
“Yea, and all these crazy heat waves and weather patterns and record breaking heats that we've seen in the last few years are just coincidences?”
It’s illogical to look for secondary signs of Global Warming when the primary factor, warming, is absent. Furthermore, a record is always being broken somewhere in the world.
“S.AMDT.803, I honestly only glanced over it, but seems like a conservation effort to me.”
I’m for use of our resources not conservation. How is it better to have something useful to mankind and to refuse to use it?
“I'm not an extremest that will say "(insert time/place) the same thing was/is said about (insert oppressed group)", but I do believe that we can be a lot nicer than we are to animals.”
I don’t like unnecessary abuse to animals, but I think granting them any rights is a slippery slope. In the end, we are going to kill them and eat them, and there is not a nice way to do that.
“Just because it could have been worse doesn't mean it's not bad.”
This is true, but campaign finance law is a tangled mess like tax law which is hard to follow. Have you reported every gift you got this year as income? How about trades? If not, you violated tax code.
“No, I dislike politicians because I am an idealist who thinks politicians should be the best and morally strongest human beings who are free of hypocrisy. Fact is, almost none/none of them are.”
Agreed. (gives another comic book loving, student teaching, political advocating fist bump)
“I didn't bring up a lot of things I object, such as plans to help the economy, but only the things that are so self destructive that I had to point them out, and a couple things that irked me personally. Here is an overview on things that I personally find important:”
Fair enough.
“”Abortion: People have a right to choose what they think is best. Legalizing abortion doesn't mean they are forcing it on anyone, just that such things can even be taken into consideration by a family that needs it”
If it were just the life of the mother, I would agree, but by six weeks, I don’t see how anyone can argue an unborn child is not human. If human death occurs when the brain stops functioning, shouldn’t human life begin when the brain starts functioning?
Dealing now with two lives, I do not think the right of a mother to choose her ideal path for life supersedes the most basic right of the child, the right to life.
“Everyone has equal oppertunity for the tax exemptions that come along with marriage: or gays should be able to get married”
But legalizing gay marriage continues to discriminate against individuals and couples. We should all have equal standing under the law.
“Respect the environment: Humans are the most powerful force on the planet, we can do some serious damage.”
I might agree or disagree with this sentiment based on its application.
“Evolution: If you kill all the tall giraffes, there won't be any more tall giraffes, and so there probably won't be as many tall giraffes in the future because they will most likely be shorter like their parents. If you keep killing the taller ones, the giraffe population will most likely be short after a while. That is all it is. THAT is evolution. If you deny that, you show a COMPLETE lack of common sense. Know how using the same poison doesn't work forever when getting rid of pests? Know how dog breeders select dogs to pass on genes? Thats evolution. I don't want ANYONE denying such simple facts deciding anything too important.”
I somewhat understand though I still think this is a small consideration in the grand scheme of things.
Also, Perry was the only one you mentioned who you could prove didn’t believe in evolution.
Also, the evolution that you mention is common sense. However, I do not see how something like an organ can evolve since it requires many, many specific genetic alterations to fall into place perfectly, and without each of the functions coming together perfectly, it is not a useful adaptation. In general, it strikes me as illogical to believe that a vastly complicated system could come into being without an organizing intelligence.
“Global warming: It is an issue, and we have to deal with it.”
Predictions for rising temperature have been wrong for over a decade now.
“How it is dealt with depends on our leaders.”
Not necessarily.
“I don't care how they do it,”
That’s an extremely dangerous view to hold.
“but it won't go away if we pretend its not there.”
Ironically, we are pretending it is there and it has gone away.
“Education: It is arguably the most important topic, because it is what helps trains the future generations.”
True, and I would rather trust schools, teachers and parents to train their kids than politicians who by your own admission are usually bad people.
“By who? The people living under the rocks? Because of course big companies exploiting the environment do not lie, but hard working scientists with no reason to lie do.”
Actually, global warming scientists get money based on the idea that global warming exists and have every reason to keep up the illusion. Also, climatology is a useless field except for the purposes of studying global warming, so nobody goes into that field unless they already believe in the concept, and once enrolled, they are taught by people who also believe it, so it’s a matter of faith for them.
“Nearly every single report on the matter says how it is a serious threat.”
Reports made by people paid to make woeful prognostications.
“And if it isn't true, what will be so bad about a completely sustainable future with clean energy?”
No other policy gives the government such an excuse to tax and control citizens. Cap and Trade, for instance, would cause energy costs to skyrocket according to President Obama.
“Giving companies the right to pollute, and destroy the landscape for monetary gains.”
The place where you live was built by releasing pollution and destroying landscape. If you believe this is wrong, then live in the forest. If not, then join me in enjoying the wonders of our modern world.
“So people who are mentally unstable, involved in criminal activity, should have guns?”
If people are incapable of functioning in society, then they should be deemed mentally unfit and lose their rights to guns as they lose many other rights.
“You do know that social security spending is less than the spending on healthcare that is nowhere near universal?”
So?
“Everyone should pay their fair share”
What exactly is a fair share?
Personally, I don’t want any special favors for anyone.
“Common Core State Standards Initiative.”
Those are not federal standards. They were freely adopted by the states.
“Because of the 'shut down' billions were lost and all because they wouldn't agree on some laws.”
They? Who is this “they” you mention? Who could not agree? Was it multiple parties that would not compromise?
“So you are expected to have a child you cannot support and you do not want?”
There is this crazy new thing called adoption which I would suggest over murder.
“Abortion is when you kill it when it is nothing but a ball of cells, it has no feeling of pain etc”
We are all just balls of cells. At six weeks, a child has brain activity. Time of pain is unknown but estimates range from ten to twenty-six weeks. I’m not for killing kids even if they feel no pain.
“Business has no place in politics.”
Business experience should neither qualify nor disqualify you from office.
“Lobbying benefits no one but the lobbyist.”
Join me, then, in condemning abortion rights lobbyists and gun control lobbyists. Those guys suck!
“http://www.texastribune.org/2011/06/17/on-the-records-vetoes--then-and-now/”
So what? Rick Perry used his power to veto as is his right.
Also, that chart does not show Perry has the highest amount of vetoes by any Governor since Reconstruction. It shows Perry has the highest amount of vetoes out of the last ten governors of Texas. Furthermore, all those governors served much shorter terms in office. Looking at how many vetoes were issued a year, Clements actually issued the most vetoes. Out of the ten, Perry comes in seventh place in terms of frequency of veto use.
“Doing what you said is extreme corruption, and no, I cannot find the connections in every politicians.”
There is no evidence of corruption here just potential corruption. Name a major modern politician, and I’ll show you a potential kickback.
“The American healthcare system costs more per person than the UK, Canada and Australian universal ones.”
That appears true. That being said, we haven’t had a free market healthcare system in living memory. Medicare and Medicaid controls cost for their patients making cost for private insurers go up.
Imagine if you were sexually assaulted, given a child you didn't want and can't support, you are given the option to kill it when it is nothing but a ball of cells, feels no pain, has no intelligence, feelings etc Would you really not accept that?
No, I would not. I don’t understand the desire to kill a child because I’ve been raped nor do I understand how that is supposedly the compassionate side of the issue, but if it were as you said, I would support a woman’s right to abortion. Sadly, any fetuses past six weeks having a thinking brain and human DNA, and that makes them human in my book. You want to kill them before that, it’s your prerogative.
“Religion has no place in politics.”
The Founding Fathers disagree with you.
Also, Perry having a religious view does not mean he will impose it politically.
“I think what he is saying is universal prayer in school, sort of religious oppression.”
I will passionately fight against any school that tries to force students to pray, but I’ve never heard of that happening.
“From companies using it all up so there is nothing left for the future (cutting down forests), polluting (polluting rivers) and there is more.”
Companies that cut down forests plant new trees. They like staying in business.
If someone is polluting rivers with harmful materials, they should be stopped.
“I agree that politics shouldn't have anything to do with education, but there has to be education standards.”
I agree, and those standards are best established between parents, schools and teachers. U.S. education was much better before we started the one size fits all approach of state standards.
“Abortion happens when the baby is a ball of cells, it can't think, feel pain etc”
Some abortions do and some do not.
“So if the boss was a racist p****, and he paid race a less than race b for the same amount of work, that should be allowed?”
Don’t forget that cursing is banned on ComicVine.
Yes, I think people should be allowed to hire and fire who they choose. For every douchebag, there are ten employers looking for good workers.
I'd vote for a One Eyed, One Horned, Flying Purple People Eater who snuck into the country without a green card if I thought it would do any good. But the country I grew up in is long gone and this decaying empire is led by weak leaders who distrust and dislike achievement and scorn the individual in favor of the greater good. Since my name is not 'Greater Good' I am meaningless to them and since my vote is like a drop of water in the ocean, powerless as well. A good conservative republican president might slow the trend toward extinction, heck even a good democrat might slow things down a bit. But even if we get one of those the current political parties hate each other far more than they love the country.
And we won't get a good, competent, intelligent person. The media and the money will give us either another weak democrat who can't stand the idea of government not having an impact in every single aspect of our lives or another republican who doesn't believe government should do anything. If there is hope on the horizon it is well hidden by the clouds of banality and pettiness.
Bill Williamson For President!
1. Incorrect. 95% (an astounding number) of the Scientific community accept Climate Change. Denial of Climate Change has empirically been proven as a Pseudoscience. It's not about having a ''different view'' --- it's about what's true and what isn't.
Under the spoiler block is a diagram which illustrates Scientific consensus on Climate Change from major organizations.
2. Evolution is a Scientific fact. If one chooses to deny it, is denying fact.
You said there are many Scientists who say Climate Change does not exist. This, put into context is simply untrue. 95% of the Scientific Community are on the consensus that it is real, thus not ''many'' Scientists.
I did not say a large percentage. I said many as in a large number.
If 95% of scientists accept climate change, then that leaves five percent not believing, and five percent of scientists is a large amount of people especially considering they end their careers by breaking from the consensus.
Also, "Belief in climate change" can mean many different things. I believe the climate has changed. I also believe CO2 is a contributing factor. That being said, I might be classified as believing Inclimate change. However, I don't believe in CO2 causing massive warming as global warming scientists predict. Many scientists who sign on for part of the global warming belief system do not believe in it all.
But belief is the key word here, and science is about evidence, not belief. The fact is the world hasn't warmed in over ten years, and the climatologists said it would, so the undeniable fact is that climatologists don't know how the climate works.
Steve Rogers
Ya know I would vote for any politician who came out to do a debate or conference dressed like Captain America.
I think that oughta happen or at least I think I might have to get into politics and make that happen.
It should happen
YEAH!!
“By who? The people living under the rocks? Because of course big companies exploiting the environment do not lie, but hard working scientists with no reason to lie do.”
Actually, global warming scientists get money based on the idea that global warming exists and have every reason to keep up the illusion. Also, climatology is a useless field except for the purposes of studying global warming, so nobody goes into that field unless they already believe in the concept, and once enrolled, they are taught by people who also believe it, so it’s a matter of faith for them.
I was mainly asking which majority thinks that global warming is a lie, I cannot think of any majority. Climatology is not only for global warming, it studies events such as El Nino, the Madden–Julian Oscillation etc and also studying long term weather patterns. And no, quite a lot of people go into the field regardless of their belief in global warming, and they aren't always told by people who 100% believe in it, at least in the UK and China.
“Nearly every single report on the matter says how it is a serious threat.”
Reports made by people paid to make woeful prognostications.
Well, no. Many countries have paid scientists to study and observe climate change and it has almost always come up with it is a serious threat. And many reports that have not, one major report was made by a scientist working for Royal Dutch Shell, so this can go both ways.
“And if it isn't true, what will be so bad about a completely sustainable future with clean energy?”
No other policy gives the government such an excuse to tax and control citizens. Cap and Trade, for instance, would cause energy costs to skyrocket according to President Obama.
I think Cap and Trade is mostly to stop harmful emissions, it doesn't have much to do with climate change. What do you mean by control citizens? And in the end, the money spent in new, clean, cheaper energy is still less than the military budget, so you could argue that terrorism gives the government more power, it literally spies on its own citizens and observes their emails. When we do develop the clean energy it means energy costs will not rise so much as it will be renewable, and last vast amounts more time than our current fuels.
“Giving companies the right to pollute, and destroy the landscape for monetary gains.”
The place where you live was built by releasing pollution and destroying landscape. If you believe this is wrong, then live in the forest. If not, then join me in enjoying the wonders of our modern world.
Yes, let us join together to enjoy the modern world, how we can build and make new technologies that barely scathe the landscape and have the technology to clean it up, but these are more expensive and in the end companies are for profit and most people want the cheapest and will not pay so much for something that is very expensive, so the cleaner way becomes un profitable, but the environment gets extremely polluted etc If this was not allowed, than companies would have to opt for the cleaner method, and there would be more research into cheaper and even cleaner ways, meaning the planet no longer has to be polluted nor the landscape destroyed.
“So people who are mentally unstable, involved in criminal activity, should have guns?”
If people are incapable of functioning in society, then they should be deemed mentally unfit and lose their rights to guns as they lose many other rights.
I agree, but I can't see where it says high power rifles, just guns, so why should everyone have high power rifles? (as the original statement said) Also, a lot of the time these old texts that says how countries should be governed do not age very well, such as sharia law.
“You do know that social security spending is less than the spending on healthcare that is nowhere near universal?”
So?
So why should social security need to be cut so much more than healthcare?
“Everyone should pay their fair share”
What exactly is a fair share?
Personally, I don’t want any special favors for anyone.
I know, but I think if you earn below living wage I do not think you should pay as much of a percentage as the very well off, as it is called a living wage for a reason, and the well off should understand, as most of them will have been in the same situation.
“Common Core State Standards Initiative.”
Those are not federal standards. They were freely adopted by the states.
I'll take your word for it.
“Because of the 'shut down' billions were lost and all because they wouldn't agree on some laws.”
They? Who is this “they” you mention? Who could not agree? Was it multiple parties that would not compromise?
The Republicans refused to pass the bill unless healthcare spending was cut massively, even though the healthcare bill had already passed.
“So you are expected to have a child you cannot support and you do not want?”
There is this crazy new thing called adoption which I would suggest over murder.
The amount of adoptions is already not enough to meet demand, and if you add over 1 million more to that, it definitely won't meet it. In 1970-80 abortion rarely occurred and crime rate was very high as many children were being born into bad environments where parents could not support children and there was no one to adopt them, but when abortion was slowly introduced, this got far better as the children weren't being born into such cruel environments.
"Abortion is when you kill it when it is nothing but a ball of cells, it has no feeling of pain etc”
We are all just balls of cells. At six weeks, a child has brain activity. Time of pain is unknown but estimates range from ten to twenty-six weeks. I’m not for killing kids even if they feel no pain.
IIRC, the brain only develops 9 weeks in.
“Business has no place in politics.”
Business experience should neither qualify nor disqualify you from office.
Not business experience, but the fact that he is involved in businesses that can be easily affected by law, and sometimes it can affect judgement, like many times in the House of Lords etc
“http://www.texastribune.org/2011/06/17/on-the-records-vetoes--then-and-now/”
So what? Rick Perry used his power to veto as is his right.
Also, that chart does not show Perry has the highest amount of vetoes by any Governor since Reconstruction. It shows Perry has the highest amount of vetoes out of the last ten governors of Texas. Furthermore, all those governors served much shorter terms in office. Looking at how many vetoes were issued a year, Clements actually issued the most vetoes. Out of the ten, Perry comes in seventh place in terms of frequency of veto use.
I'm just giving a source, as you said originally you could not find a source.
“Doing what you said is extreme corruption, and no, I cannot find the connections in every politicians.”
There is no evidence of corruption here just potential corruption. Name a major modern politician, and I’ll show you a potential kickback.
You said he had given money to companies who had supported him and donated to his campaign, which is corruption. Ok, give me corruption kick backs for Xi Jing Ping.
“The American healthcare system costs more per person than the UK, Canada and Australian universal ones.”
That appears true. That being said, we haven’t had a free market healthcare system in living memory. Medicare and Medicaid controls cost for their patients making cost for private insurers go up.
If they truly want a 'socialist' healthcare system, it would be nationalised and the healthcare cost need not to go up, so I fail to see why this 'socialist' healthcare is so bad.
Imagine if you were sexually assaulted, given a child you didn't want and can't support, you are given the option to kill it when it is nothing but a ball of cells, feels no pain, has no intelligence, feelings etc Would you really not accept that?
No, I would not. I don’t understand the desire to kill a child because I’ve been raped nor do I understand how that is supposedly the compassionate side of the issue, but if it were as you said, I would support a woman’s right to abortion. Sadly, any fetuses past six weeks having a thinking brain and human DNA, and that makes them human in my book. You want to kill them before that, it’s your prerogative.
IIRC, I don't think foetuses have a thinking brain until about 9 weeks in.
“Religion has no place in politics.”
The Founding Fathers disagree with you.
Also, Perry having a religious view does not mean he will impose it politically.
And many corrupt dictators in the middle east agree, but that doesn't make it right.
Fair enough, but the burn in hell bit is sort of a bit off putting.
“I think what he is saying is universal prayer in school, sort of religious oppression.”
I will passionately fight against any school that tries to force students to pray, but I’ve never heard of that happening.
I have heard some stuff about it, but they are mostly rumours, but I agree.
“From companies using it all up so there is nothing left for the future (cutting down forests), polluting (polluting rivers) and there is more.”
Companies that cut down forests plant new trees. They like staying in business.
If someone is polluting rivers with harmful materials, they should be stopped.
In many places across the world have had forests cut down so fast, with nothing replacing them, that now it is almost too late.
I agree.
“I agree that politics shouldn't have anything to do with education, but there has to be education standards.”
I agree, and those standards are best established between parents, schools and teachers. U.S. education was much better before we started the one size fits all approach of state standards.
I also agree.
“Abortion happens when the baby is a ball of cells, it can't think, feel pain etc”
Some abortions do and some do not.
Those that don't are less than 12%
“So if the boss was a racist p****, and he paid race a less than race b for the same amount of work, that should be allowed?”
Don’t forget that cursing is banned on ComicVine.
Yes, I think people should be allowed to hire and fire who they choose. For every douchebag, there are ten employers looking for good workers.
I don't think 'prick' is a curse word, at least not in Britain.
Racism is a thing of the past, and should not be tolerated, and even with ten employers doing good, they don't have infinite jobs, and many will have to turn to the racists and be discriminated against.
“I was mainly asking which majority thinks that global warming is a lie, I cannot think of any majority.”
I never said it was a majority that were skeptical. In my OP, I meant the general understanding of GW is wrong not that GW is generally understood as wrong.
“Climatology is not only for global warming, it studies events such as El Nino, the Madden–Julian Oscillation etc and also studying long term weather patterns.”
You can study anything, but there is little demand (profit) for climatology info outside of global warming research. Before Global Warming gained steam in the 1970's, very few scientists went into the field.
“And no, quite a lot of people go into the field regardless of their belief in global warming, and they aren't always told by people who 100% believe in it, at least in the UK and China.”
I'm not going to pretend I have research to back this up, but I would be shocked if the majority of people going into the study and teaching of climatology did not embrace whole heartedly global warming fears.
“Well, no. Many countries have paid scientists to study and observe climate change and it has almost always come up with it is a serious threat. And many reports that have not, one major report was made by a scientist working for Royal Dutch Shell, so this can go both ways.”
If you get paid to research or promote awareness of Global Warming, it destroys your career if you produce information that shows global warming is not a genuine threat. It would be like the Ghost Hunters saying there is no evidence of ghosts.
Yes, some skeptical reports do come out, but these “Global Warming deniers” are lambasted, so it takes real balls to risk your career in breaking with the consensus.
“I think Cap and Trade is mostly to stop harmful emissions, it doesn't have much to do with climate change.”
Cap and Trade is theoretically intended to limit greenhouse gases.
“What do you mean by control citizens?”
It's an excuse for a bunch of new regulations and a bunch of new taxes both of which shackle people.
“And in the end, the money spent in new, clean, cheaper energy”
It's not cheaper. We will come back to that.
“is still less than the military budget, so you could argue that terrorism gives the government more power, it literally spies on its own citizens and observes their emails.”
That's a fair point, and believe me, I hate that too. That being said, I'm not sure which is worse between skyrocketing cost of energy and many other products alongside increased regulation vs domestic spying.
“When we do develop the clean energy it means energy costs will not rise so much as it will be renewable, and last vast amounts more time than our current fuels.”
Yes, when we develop these forms of energy, they will be amazing, but they are not yet developed. Hurting oil and gas to promote the growth of green energy is like choking the horse and bicycle industry to promote the growth of the auto industry years before the auto industry is up to speed.
“Yes, let us join together to enjoy the modern world, how we can build and make new technologies that barely scathe the landscape and have the technology to clean it up”
So for the record, you aren't willing to give up all your technology that comes from scathed landscape?
I'm all about new technology, but I'm not going to give up old technology until the new proves itself superior.
“but these are more expensive and in the end companies are for profit and most people want the cheapest and will not pay so much for something that is very expensive, so the cleaner way becomes un profitable, but the environment gets extremely polluted etc”
Now here is the rub. Earlier, you said that these new technologies were cheaper, but in fact, they are actually much more expensive, and yes, companies do want to maximize their profits just like everybody else, so they go for the tried and true methods that work.
As far as the environment being extremely polluted, I do not concur. Look at some third world countries without modern technology, and I'd say they are much more polluted as they live in squalor.
“If this was not allowed, than companies would have to opt for the cleaner method,”
If this was not allowed, than companies would be forced to use more expensive methods which would increase the cost of the good they produced which would hurt the pocket book of every citizen.
“and there would be more research into cheaper and even cleaner ways, meaning the planet no longer has to be polluted nor the landscape destroyed.”
Companies already make more money if they can find new, cheaper ways of making a product so they are already researching new methods.
“I agree, but I can't see where it says high power rifles, just guns, so why should everyone have high power rifles? (as the original statement said)”
The Second Amendment says, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Infringed means limited. Arms means weapons of any sort.
“Also, a lot of the time these old texts that says how countries should be governed do not age very well, such as sharia law.”
Saying the Constitution is bad because sharia law is bad and they are both old documents is like saying the United Kingdom is bad because Iran is bad and they are both old nations. It's nonsense.
The United States Constitution is the longest lasting constitution. It has stood the test of time. As times changed, it can be amended, but it cannot be ignored without throwing out the rule of law altogether.
“So why should social security need to be cut so much more than healthcare?”
When did I say it should?
“I know, but I think if you earn below living wage I do not think you should pay as much of a percentage as the very well off, as it is called a living wage for a reason, and the well off should understand, as most of them will have been in the same situation.”
If poor people do not pay the same tax rate, they don't have any skin in the game. They can vote for a million government programs costing trillion of dollars, (U.S. debt 18 trillion) and it means nothing to them because they never have to pay for it. The second people see tax increases affecting them, they start thinking about how much better it would be if they could spend their money for themselves.
Also, you shouldn't be scraping by if you've put any effort into working. I worked for six months part-time at McDonald before I was offered something above minimum wage.
“The Republicans refused to pass the bill unless healthcare spending was cut massively, even though the healthcare bill had already passed.”
The R's and D's could not come to an agreement on healthcare. Both sides refused to give in, but the R's actually made effort funding every single aspect of the government except Obamacare. Obama refused to budge. All of this is legal. All of this has been done many times. If you truly believe compromise is right, then blame Obama who would not give an inch. The Republicans caved.
“The amount of adoptions is already not enough to meet demand, and if you add over 1 million more to that, it definitely won't meet it.”
There is also foster care. It's not the best, but it's better than death.
“In 1970-80 abortion rarely occurred and crime rate was very high as many children were being born into bad environments where parents could not support children and there was no one to adopt them, but when abortion was slowly introduced, this got far better as the children weren't being born into such cruel environments.”
Yes, the eugenics movement also figured out if you kill of undesirables the crime rate will go down. That doesn't justify murder. For every one criminal that was aborted, there were hundreds of great people that could have done incalculable good in the world.
“IIRC, the brain only develops 9 weeks in.”
I thought I was prepared to prove you wrong, but in looking into things a little deeper, I find that the situation is murky. I do firmly believe that brain activity proves human life and humans should be protected, but there is apparently a debate about whether brain activity starts at six weeks or twenty-five weeks. The nervous system is being put in place by five weeks and brain waves can be detected at six weeks, but some say that a brain dead patient shows similar background activity and without a steady set of brain waves which are inagruably present by 25 weeks, it is not truly thinking. I'll have to look on this and consider it some more.
“Not business experience, but the fact that he is involved in businesses that can be easily affected by law, and sometimes it can affect judgement, like many times in the House of Lords etc”
No matter what their background, politicians can and usually do have investments in businesses from which they can profit when making laws.
“I'm just giving a source, as you said originally you could not find a source.”
The source did not back up SuperDrummer's point though.
“You said he had given money to companies who had supported him and donated to his campaign, which is corruption.”
Almost all government funding goes to private companies. Almost all companies donate to political parties. This may or may not be a kickback depending on whether it was done for political reasons or just because they happened to be the best people for the job. It's impossible to prove either way unless there is something evidence of a prearranged agreement.
“Ok, give me corruption kick backs for Xi Jing Ping.”
I meant in the United States. I'm out of my wheelhouse in China, and I'm not sure the typical understanding of kickbacks, money put in businesses pocket in exchange for campaign contributions, even applies in China. Do they run for office? Do they have campaign contributions? How is money distributed in China? I have little idea.
If you want to look at kickbacks in the sense of, “I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine,” there are examples but it's paying back a debt owed to his political faction rather than a business. Jinping has lead a strong anti-corruption campaign, yet he's only targeted people in the opposite faction which obviously benefits the team that got him into power. This article mentions this fact and other ways in which he is corrupt.
If they truly want a 'socialist' healthcare system, it would be nationalised and the healthcare cost need not to go up, so I fail to see why this 'socialist' healthcare is so bad.
When you nationalize the system, the government picks up the tab, and of course the government gets money from the people, so the people still end up paying for the cost of healthcare. The government can enforce price controls which means that either the businesses increase costs in non-price controlled areas or decrease profits which hurts medical professionals and decreases their incentive to work.
“IIRC, I don't think foetuses have a thinking brain until about 9 weeks in.”
It's complicated apparently.
“And many corrupt dictators in the middle east agree, but that doesn't make it right.”
Fair enough, but I see no harm in a politician having religious belief. Most people do.
“Fair enough, but the burn in hell bit is sort of a bit off putting.”
How does someone else believing I will go to Hell when I die hurt me? If it doesn't, why should I care?
“I have heard some stuff about it, but they are mostly rumours, but I agree.”
Just overblown fear mongering. It happens with some people on all sides of every issue.
“In many places across the world have had forests cut down so fast, with nothing replacing them, that now it is almost too late.”
I'm not aware of that particular situation. It's smart to put more trees in the ground as you cut them down, and I'm pretty sure there is more planting than cutting being done overall.
“Those that don't are less than 12%”
The stats on U.S. abortion I saw actually has it less than twelve percent are aborted after babies definitively feel pain which is at twenty weeks, but the more pressing issue is not whether it feels pain but whether it thinks. If brain activity starts at six weeks, then nearly two-thirds of abortions occur after this point. If activity starts at twenty-five weeks, then only about 1% occur after brain activity.
Even if we take the 1% statistic, that's still over 120,000 murders of thinking, feeling children every year, and of course the world wide death toll is exponentially larger. Can't we agree at least that these abortions are wrong?
“I don't think 'p****' is a curse word, at least not in Britain.”
It general is regarded as a curse in the United States. I'm not offended, but I thought you'd want to be aware.
“Racism is a thing of the past, and should not be tolerated,”
If someone didn't want me to come into their home because I'm white, I would say they are in the moral wrong, but it's their right to discriminate since it is their home. The same is true with their business.
“and even with ten employers doing good, they don't have infinite jobs, and many will have to turn to the racists and be discriminated against.”
Actually, for every stupid racist that picks a worse white man over a skilled black man, that increases the more skilled worker's chance of getting hired at a non-racist business. Also, laws preventing discrimination in hiring only make it where a racist employer would lie about why he didn't hire someone.
“I was mainly asking which majority thinks that global warming is a lie, I cannot think of any majority.”
I never said it was a majority that were skeptical. In my OP, I meant the general understanding of GW is wrong not that GW is generally understood as wrong.
“Climatology is not only for global warming, it studies events such as El Nino, the Madden–Julian Oscillation etc and also studying long term weather patterns.”
You can study anything, but there is little demand (profit) for climatology info outside of global warming research. Before Global Warming gained steam in the 1970's, very few scientists went into the field.
“And no, quite a lot of people go into the field regardless of their belief in global warming, and they aren't always told by people who 100% believe in it, at least in the UK and China.”
I'm not going to pretend I have research to back this up, but I would be shocked if the majority of people going into the study and teaching of climatology did not embrace whole heartedly global warming fears.
“Well, no. Many countries have paid scientists to study and observe climate change and it has almost always come up with it is a serious threat. And many reports that have not, one major report was made by a scientist working for Royal Dutch Shell, so this can go both ways.”
If you get paid to research or promote awareness of Global Warming, it destroys your career if you produce information that shows global warming is not a genuine threat. It would be like the Ghost Hunters saying there is no evidence of ghosts.
Yes, some skeptical reports do come out, but these “Global Warming deniers” are lambasted, so it takes real balls to risk your career in breaking with the consensus.
“I think Cap and Trade is mostly to stop harmful emissions, it doesn't have much to do with climate change.”
Cap and Trade is theoretically intended to limit greenhouse gases.
“What do you mean by control citizens?”
It's an excuse for a bunch of new regulations and a bunch of new taxes both of which shackle people.
“And in the end, the money spent in new, clean, cheaper energy”
It's not cheaper. We will come back to that.
“is still less than the military budget, so you could argue that terrorism gives the government more power, it literally spies on its own citizens and observes their emails.”
That's a fair point, and believe me, I hate that too. That being said, I'm not sure which is worse between skyrocketing cost of energy and many other products alongside increased regulation vs domestic spying.
“When we do develop the clean energy it means energy costs will not rise so much as it will be renewable, and last vast amounts more time than our current fuels.”
Yes, when we develop these forms of energy, they will be amazing, but they are not yet developed. Hurting oil and gas to promote the growth of green energy is like choking the horse and bicycle industry to promote the growth of the auto industry years before the auto industry is up to speed.
“Yes, let us join together to enjoy the modern world, how we can build and make new technologies that barely scathe the landscape and have the technology to clean it up”
So for the record, you aren't willing to give up all your technology that comes from scathed landscape?
I'm all about new technology, but I'm not going to give up old technology until the new proves itself superior.
“but these are more expensive and in the end companies are for profit and most people want the cheapest and will not pay so much for something that is very expensive, so the cleaner way becomes un profitable, but the environment gets extremely polluted etc”
Now here is the rub. Earlier, you said that these new technologies were cheaper, but in fact, they are actually much more expensive, and yes, companies do want to maximize their profits just like everybody else, so they go for the tried and true methods that work.
As far as the environment being extremely polluted, I do not concur. Look at some third world countries without modern technology, and I'd say they are much more polluted as they live in squalor.
“If this was not allowed, than companies would have to opt for the cleaner method,”
If this was not allowed, than companies would be forced to use more expensive methods which would increase the cost of the good they produced which would hurt the pocket book of every citizen.
“and there would be more research into cheaper and even cleaner ways, meaning the planet no longer has to be polluted nor the landscape destroyed.”
Companies already make more money if they can find new, cheaper ways of making a product so they are already researching new methods.
“I agree, but I can't see where it says high power rifles, just guns, so why should everyone have high power rifles? (as the original statement said)”
The Second Amendment says, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Infringed means limited. Arms means weapons of any sort.
“Also, a lot of the time these old texts that says how countries should be governed do not age very well, such as sharia law.”
Saying the Constitution is bad because sharia law is bad and they are both old documents is like saying the United Kingdom is bad because Iran is bad and they are both old nations. It's nonsense.
The United States Constitution is the longest lasting constitution. It has stood the test of time. As times changed, it can be amended, but it cannot be ignored without throwing out the rule of law altogether.
“So why should social security need to be cut so much more than healthcare?”
When did I say it should?
“I know, but I think if you earn below living wage I do not think you should pay as much of a percentage as the very well off, as it is called a living wage for a reason, and the well off should understand, as most of them will have been in the same situation.”
If poor people do not pay the same tax rate, they don't have any skin in the game. They can vote for a million government programs costing trillion of dollars, (U.S. debt 18 trillion) and it means nothing to them because they never have to pay for it. The second people see tax increases affecting them, they start thinking about how much better it would be if they could spend their money for themselves.
Also, you shouldn't be scraping by if you've put any effort into working. I worked for six months part-time at McDonald before I was offered something above minimum wage.
“The Republicans refused to pass the bill unless healthcare spending was cut massively, even though the healthcare bill had already passed.”
The R's and D's could not come to an agreement on healthcare. Both sides refused to give in, but the R's actually made effort funding every single aspect of the government except Obamacare. Obama refused to budge. All of this is legal. All of this has been done many times. If you truly believe compromise is right, then blame Obama who would not give an inch. The Republicans caved.
“The amount of adoptions is already not enough to meet demand, and if you add over 1 million more to that, it definitely won't meet it.”
There is also foster care. It's not the best, but it's better than death.
“In 1970-80 abortion rarely occurred and crime rate was very high as many children were being born into bad environments where parents could not support children and there was no one to adopt them, but when abortion was slowly introduced, this got far better as the children weren't being born into such cruel environments.”
Yes, the eugenics movement also figured out if you kill of undesirables the crime rate will go down. That doesn't justify murder. For every one criminal that was aborted, there were hundreds of great people that could have done incalculable good in the world.
“IIRC, the brain only develops 9 weeks in.”
I thought I was prepared to prove you wrong, but in looking into things a little deeper, I find that the situation is murky. I do firmly believe that brain activity proves human life and humans should be protected, but there is apparently a debate about whether brain activity starts at six weeks or twenty-five weeks. The nervous system is being put in place by five weeks and brain waves can be detected at six weeks, but some say that a brain dead patient shows similar background activity and without a steady set of brain waves which are inagruably present by 25 weeks, it is not truly thinking. I'll have to look on this and consider it some more.
“Not business experience, but the fact that he is involved in businesses that can be easily affected by law, and sometimes it can affect judgement, like many times in the House of Lords etc”
No matter what their background, politicians can and usually do have investments in businesses from which they can profit when making laws.
“I'm just giving a source, as you said originally you could not find a source.”
The source did not back up SuperDrummer's point though.
“You said he had given money to companies who had supported him and donated to his campaign, which is corruption.”
Almost all government funding goes to private companies. Almost all companies donate to political parties. This may or may not be a kickback depending on whether it was done for political reasons or just because they happened to be the best people for the job. It's impossible to prove either way unless there is something evidence of a prearranged agreement.
“Ok, give me corruption kick backs for Xi Jing Ping.”
I meant in the United States. I'm out of my wheelhouse in China, and I'm not sure the typical understanding of kickbacks, money put in businesses pocket in exchange for campaign contributions, even applies in China. Do they run for office? Do they have campaign contributions? How is money distributed in China? I have little idea.
If you want to look at kickbacks in the sense of, “I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine,” there are examples but it's paying back a debt owed to his political faction rather than a business. Jinping has lead a strong anti-corruption campaign, yet he's only targeted people in the opposite faction which obviously benefits the team that got him into power. This article mentions this fact and other ways in which he is corrupt.
If they truly want a 'socialist' healthcare system, it would be nationalised and the healthcare cost need not to go up, so I fail to see why this 'socialist' healthcare is so bad.
When you nationalize the system, the government picks up the tab, and of course the government gets money from the people, so the people still end up paying for the cost of healthcare. The government can enforce price controls which means that either the businesses increase costs in non-price controlled areas or decrease profits which hurts medical professionals and decreases their incentive to work.
“IIRC, I don't think foetuses have a thinking brain until about 9 weeks in.”
It's complicated apparently.
“And many corrupt dictators in the middle east agree, but that doesn't make it right.”
Fair enough, but I see no harm in a politician having religious belief. Most people do.
“Fair enough, but the burn in hell bit is sort of a bit off putting.”
How does someone else believing I will go to Hell when I die hurt me? If it doesn't, why should I care?
“I have heard some stuff about it, but they are mostly rumours, but I agree.”
Just overblown fear mongering. It happens with some people on all sides of every issue.
“In many places across the world have had forests cut down so fast, with nothing replacing them, that now it is almost too late.”
I'm not aware of that particular situation. It's smart to put more trees in the ground as you cut them down, and I'm pretty sure there is more planting than cutting being done overall.
“Those that don't are less than 12%”
The stats on U.S. abortion I saw actually has it less than twelve percent are aborted after babies definitively feel pain which is at twenty weeks, but the more pressing issue is not whether it feels pain but whether it thinks. If brain activity starts at six weeks, then nearly two-thirds of abortions occur after this point. If activity starts at twenty-five weeks, then only about 1% occur after brain activity.
Even if we take the 1% statistic, that's still over 120,000 murders of thinking, feeling children every year, and of course the world wide death toll is exponentially larger. Can't we agree at least that these abortions are wrong?
“I don't think 'p****' is a curse word, at least not in Britain.”
It general is regarded as a curse in the United States. I'm not offended, but I thought you'd want to be aware.
“Racism is a thing of the past, and should not be tolerated,”
If someone didn't want me to come into their home because I'm white, I would say they are in the moral wrong, but it's their right to discriminate since it is their home. The same is true with their business.
“and even with ten employers doing good, they don't have infinite jobs, and many will have to turn to the racists and be discriminated against.”
Actually, for every stupid racist that picks a worse white man over a skilled black man, that increases the more skilled worker's chance of getting hired at a non-racist business. Also, laws preventing discrimination in hiring only make it where a racist employer would lie about why he didn't hire someone.
Rand Paul is the best choice.
Rand Paul.
“I was mainly asking which majority thinks that global warming is a lie, I cannot think of any majority.”
I never said it was a majority that were skeptical. In my OP, I meant the general understanding of GW is wrong not that GW is generally understood as wrong.
Ah, ok, I understood it wrong.
“Climatology is not only for global warming, it studies events such as El Nino, the Madden–Julian Oscillation etc and also studying long term weather patterns.”
You can study anything, but there is little demand (profit) for climatology info outside of global warming research. Before Global Warming gained steam in the 1970's, very few scientists went into the field.
I don't know the exact situation in the US, but in the UK and China I have a few friends who went on to be climatologists and in China one of their main jobs is to assist the governments in ways they can to stop major weather catastrophes affecting crops.
“And no, quite a lot of people go into the field regardless of their belief in global warming, and they aren't always told by people who 100% believe in it, at least in the UK and China.”
I'm not going to pretend I have research to back this up, but I would be shocked if the majority of people going into the study and teaching of climatology did not embrace whole heartedly global warming fears.
I wouldn't say the majority, but quite a lot do not fully embrace it, at least that is what some of my friends tell me, they were pretty surprised.
“Well, no. Many countries have paid scientists to study and observe climate change and it has almost always come up with it is a serious threat. And many reports that have not, one major report was made by a scientist working for Royal Dutch Shell, so this can go both ways.”
If you get paid to research or promote awareness of Global Warming, it destroys your career if you produce information that shows global warming is not a genuine threat. It would be like the Ghost Hunters saying there is no evidence of ghosts.
If you are paid to research global warming, it is not always to promote awareness, and it will not destroy your career.
Yes, some skeptical reports do come out, but these “Global Warming deniers” are lambasted, so it takes real balls to risk your career in breaking with the consensus.
You don't really risk you career, and yes you do get lambasted, but if you can argue well, no one is going to say you are just ignorant etc
“I think Cap and Trade is mostly to stop harmful emissions, it doesn't have much to do with climate change.”
Cap and Trade is theoretically intended to limit greenhouse gases.
I'll research it later.
“What do you mean by control citizens?”
It's an excuse for a bunch of new regulations and a bunch of new taxes both of which shackle people.
I wouldn't say the shackle people.
“And in the end, the money spent in new, clean, cheaper energy”
It's not cheaper. We will come back to that.
I'm not saying it is cheaper yet, but in the long term it definitely is.
“is still less than the military budget, so you could argue that terrorism gives the government more power, it literally spies on its own citizens and observes their emails.”
That's a fair point, and believe me, I hate that too. That being said, I'm not sure which is worse between skyrocketing cost of energy and many other products alongside increased regulation vs domestic spying.
I agree.
“When we do develop the clean energy it means energy costs will not rise so much as it will be renewable, and last vast amounts more time than our current fuels.”
Yes, when we develop these forms of energy, they will be amazing, but they are not yet developed. Hurting oil and gas to promote the growth of green energy is like choking the horse and bicycle industry to promote the growth of the auto industry years before the auto industry is up to speed.
Well no, hurting the most harmful oil and gas to fund the cleanest most efficient, for example some coal is extremely inefficient, while some kinds are very efficient, however these cost more, but if they are promoted and the inefficient polluting ones much less, it means we can make best of what we have as we develop the new.
“Yes, let us join together to enjoy the modern world, how we can build and make new technologies that barely scathe the landscape and have the technology to clean it up”
So for the record, you aren't willing to give up all your technology that comes from scathed landscape?
I'm all about new technology, but I'm not going to give up old technology until the new proves itself superior.
I'm saying that we have the technology to make new products without such scathing effects to the landscapes, and we should use them now.
“but these are more expensive and in the end companies are for profit and most people want the cheapest and will not pay so much for something that is very expensive, so the cleaner way becomes un profitable, but the environment gets extremely polluted etc”
Now here is the rub. Earlier, you said that these new technologies were cheaper, but in fact, they are actually much more expensive, and yes, companies do want to maximize their profits just like everybody else, so they go for the tried and true methods that work.
No, I talked about cheaper and more efficient energies in the future, nothing about these technologies.
As far as the environment being extremely polluted, I do not concur. Look at some third world countries without modern technology, and I'd say they are much more polluted as they live in squalor.
That is because their equipment is even more outdated and polluting, technology has come a long way, but it still has a long way to go.
“If this was not allowed, than companies would have to opt for the cleaner method,”
If this was not allowed, than companies would be forced to use more expensive methods which would increase the cost of the good they produced which would hurt the pocket book of every citizen.
Sometimes it takes hardship to get towards a better future.
“and there would be more research into cheaper and even cleaner ways, meaning the planet no longer has to be polluted nor the landscape destroyed.”
Companies already make more money if they can find new, cheaper ways of making a product so they are already researching new methods.
In the end, the current research is minimal.
“I agree, but I can't see where it says high power rifles, just guns, so why should everyone have high power rifles? (as the original statement said)”
The Second Amendment says, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Infringed means limited. Arms means weapons of any sort.
Does that mean that those with mental problems should have guns as otherwise their right is limited?
“Also, a lot of the time these old texts that says how countries should be governed do not age very well, such as sharia law.”
Saying the Constitution is bad because sharia law is bad and they are both old documents is like saying the United Kingdom is bad because Iran is bad and they are both old nations. It's nonsense.
The United States Constitution is the longest lasting constitution. It has stood the test of time. As times changed, it can be amended, but it cannot be ignored without throwing out the rule of law altogether.
I'm not comparing it to Sharia law, I'm saying that sometimes it things like this need to be amended as the world has changed, there is no need for everyone to have guns.
“So why should social security need to be cut so much more than healthcare?”
When did I say it should?
I understood what you said wrong.
“I know, but I think if you earn below living wage I do not think you should pay as much of a percentage as the very well off, as it is called a living wage for a reason, and the well off should understand, as most of them will have been in the same situation.”
If poor people do not pay the same tax rate, they don't have any skin in the game. They can vote for a million government programs costing trillion of dollars, (U.S. debt 18 trillion) and it means nothing to them because they never have to pay for it. The second people see tax increases affecting them, they start thinking about how much better it would be if they could spend their money for themselves.
Also, you shouldn't be scraping by if you've put any effort into working. I worked for six months part-time at McDonald before I was offered something above minimum wage.
The thing is, there are only so many people earning below living wage that in the end, the difference is small, and 'just scraping by' doesn't mean you don't earn the living wage..
“The Republicans refused to pass the bill unless healthcare spending was cut massively, even though the healthcare bill had already passed.”
The R's and D's could not come to an agreement on healthcare. Both sides refused to give in, but the R's actually made effort funding every single aspect of the government except Obamacare. Obama refused to budge. All of this is legal. All of this has been done many times. If you truly believe compromise is right, then blame Obama who would not give an inch. The Republicans caved.
Fair enough.
“The amount of adoptions is already not enough to meet demand, and if you add over 1 million more to that, it definitely won't meet it.”
There is also foster care. It's not the best, but it's better than death.
Foster care coupled with adoption still can't meet demand.
“In 1970-80 abortion rarely occurred and crime rate was very high as many children were being born into bad environments where parents could not support children and there was no one to adopt them, but when abortion was slowly introduced, this got far better as the children weren't being born into such cruel environments.”
Yes, the eugenics movement also figured out if you kill of undesirables the crime rate will go down. That doesn't justify murder. For every one criminal that was aborted, there were hundreds of great people that could have done incalculable good in the world.
The murder bit is a bit iffy. And in most of these cases the children would of been born into poverty stricken, apathetic environments.
“IIRC, the brain only develops 9 weeks in.”
I thought I was prepared to prove you wrong, but in looking into things a little deeper, I find that the situation is murky. I do firmly believe that brain activity proves human life and humans should be protected, but there is apparently a debate about whether brain activity starts at six weeks or twenty-five weeks. The nervous system is being put in place by five weeks and brain waves can be detected at six weeks, but some say that a brain dead patient shows similar background activity and without a steady set of brain waves which are inagruably present by 25 weeks, it is not truly thinking. I'll have to look on this and consider it some more.
Fair enough.
“Not business experience, but the fact that he is involved in businesses that can be easily affected by law, and sometimes it can affect judgement, like many times in the House of Lords etc”
No matter what their background, politicians can and usually do have investments in businesses from which they can profit when making laws.
Not always.
“I'm just giving a source, as you said originally you could not find a source.”
The source did not back up SuperDrummer's point though.
I was just giving a likely source of where he got it.
“You said he had given money to companies who had supported him and donated to his campaign, which is corruption.”
Almost all government funding goes to private companies. Almost all companies donate to political parties. This may or may not be a kickback depending on whether it was done for political reasons or just because they happened to be the best people for the job. It's impossible to prove either way unless there is something evidence of a prearranged agreement.
I doubt almost all government funding goes to private companies, nowhere near the case in the UK and China.
“Ok, give me corruption kick backs for Xi Jing Ping.”
I meant in the United States. I'm out of my wheelhouse in China, and I'm not sure the typical understanding of kickbacks, money put in businesses pocket in exchange for campaign contributions, even applies in China. Do they run for office? Do they have campaign contributions? How is money distributed in China? I have little idea.
If you want to look at kickbacks in the sense of, “I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine,” there are examples but it's paying back a debt owed to his political faction rather than a business. Jinping has lead a strong anti-corruption campaign, yet he's only targeted people in the opposite faction which obviously benefits the team that got him into power. This article mentions this fact and other ways in which he is corrupt.
I'm mostly out of my wheelhouse in the US. There is quite a lot wrong with the article, Zhong Yong Kang was one of his most powerful supporters, the cleric had links to terrorism etc
If they truly want a 'socialist' healthcare system, it would be nationalised and the healthcare cost need not to go up, so I fail to see why this 'socialist' healthcare is so bad.
When you nationalize the system, the government picks up the tab, and of course the government gets money from the people, so the people still end up paying for the cost of healthcare. The government can enforce price controls which means that either the businesses increase costs in non-price controlled areas or decrease profits which hurts medical professionals and decreases their incentive to work.
But it can mean the people end up paying less for healthcare.
“IIRC, I don't think foetuses have a thinking brain until about 9 weeks in.”
It's complicated apparently.
Yeah, it is.
“And many corrupt dictators in the middle east agree, but that doesn't make it right.”
Fair enough, but I see no harm in a politician having religious belief. Most people do.
Fair enough.
“Fair enough, but the burn in hell bit is sort of a bit off putting.”
How does someone else believing I will go to Hell when I die hurt me? If it doesn't, why should I care?
I mean it is a bit extreme, but on the whole, I agree.
“I have heard some stuff about it, but they are mostly rumours, but I agree.”
Just overblown fear mongering. It happens with some people on all sides of every issue.
Fair enough.
“In many places across the world have had forests cut down so fast, with nothing replacing them, that now it is almost too late.”
I'm not aware of that particular situation. It's smart to put more trees in the ground as you cut them down, and I'm pretty sure there is more planting than cutting being done overall.
The forests in Russia, Indonesia, Burma are being devastated much faster than they can replenish.
“Those that don't are less than 12%”
The stats on U.S. abortion I saw actually has it less than twelve percent are aborted after babies definitively feel pain which is at twenty weeks, but the more pressing issue is not whether it feels pain but whether it thinks. If brain activity starts at six weeks, then nearly two-thirds of abortions occur after this point. If activity starts at twenty-five weeks, then only about 1% occur after brain activity.
Even if we take the 1% statistic, that's still over 120,000 murders of thinking, feeling children every year, and of course the world wide death toll is exponentially larger. Can't we agree at least that these abortions are wrong?
1% is nowhere near 120,000, there are only about a million a year, a closer figure would be 120,00.
“I don't think 'p****' is a curse word, at least not in Britain.”
It general is regarded as a curse in the United States. I'm not offended, but I thought you'd want to be aware.
Ah, ok.
“Racism is a thing of the past, and should not be tolerated,”
If someone didn't want me to come into their home because I'm white, I would say they are in the moral wrong, but it's their right to discriminate since it is their home. The same is true with their business.
Not allowing someone into your home doesn't affect them too much, not employing someone of paying them less has huge ripple effects.
“and even with ten employers doing good, they don't have infinite jobs, and many will have to turn to the racists and be discriminated against.”
Actually, for every stupid racist that picks a worse white man over a skilled black man, that increases the more skilled worker's chance of getting hired at a non-racist business. Also, laws preventing discrimination in hiring only make it where a racist employer would lie about why he didn't hire someone.
Or they end up with no job at all.
And Merry Christmas.
Rubio
We Appalachian America's find the term "Hillbilly" bigoted and offensive. A lot of us Appalachian American's vote for democrats. After all we are all on the "draw" from the government after Obama destroyed all the coal jobs.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment