Slashdot Mirror

Some scientist who've worked in the industry have been bullied, forced to resign, and generally shunned over doing just what you said.
https://www.thenewamerican.com...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne...

Seriously, there's groups - some of which have more traction than they should - that believe you should be arrested and jailed for questioning it.
https://www.newsweek.com/shoul...
https://theoutline.com/post/22...

Since you're too lazy to oogle it yourself, how about the one where Snopes Lies About the Glorious State of California’s Plan To Teach 5-Year-Olds Transgenderism?

"Denialists lost the severity gamble, HARD"
Really?
As far as I can tell, nearly EVERY prediction about Global Warming from flooded NY to hundreds of millions of climate refugees has been wrong.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/t...
https://www.foxnews.com/scienc...
http://www.aei.org/publication...
https://www.thenewamerican.com...

Citation needed.

Different AC here, but I think this is what he was referring to.

Also, from TFA:

While China has emerged as the lead suspect in the case, the sources cautioned it was possible somebody else was behind the hack because other parties had access to the same hacking tools, some of which have previously been posted online.

Identifying the culprit is further complicated by the fact that investigators suspect multiple hacking groups may have simultaneously been inside Starwood’s computer networks since 2014, said one of the sources.

So we have possibly multiple perpetrators, over the span of four years, meaning both before and after Marriott acquired Starwood. I am not saying China's government did not participate. I am saying lots of people could have put their hands into the cookie jar, over a long period of time. If they did participate, they may be one of many, including somebody who wants to divert attention by pointing a finger.

It's called a hack. Rather than fix the root problem, just work around it.

Sea levels rose 400 feet in the last 20,000 years. Pretending that climate isn't going to change is the short-sighted approach.

Some other things to consider:

o CO2 increases are greening the earth.

o Carbon powers the world's economy. Is the cost of reducing carbon emissions worse than the cost of hypothesized problems?

o We're already changing the planet in many other ways. Just look at pictures of Earth from space. Environmentalists and world-government authoritarians aren't going to be happy until we're all living under worldwide socialism (UN agenda 2030).

In olympics and world champion ships, people with an Y chromosome can not compete in women's leagues.

Breaking News! You are wrong. Rachel McKinnon (shown), an assistant professor of philosophy at the College of Charleston, who started life as a man, but now identifies as a woman, has won the women's only 2018 UCI Masters Track Cycling World Championships in Los Angeles on Sunday.

McKinnon, is very very proud of defeating the women, and tweeted “First transgender woman world championever,”

And make no mistake, if you have any sort of reservations, Rachel has branded you a transphobic bigot.

Source: https://www.thenewamerican.com...

So celebrate with us as males say they identify as women, and we must allow them to compete in women's sports. Rachel demands it!

AGW, or "Climate Change", or whatever the Nom de Jur is for it, isn't science. Science isn't "settled" and "settled science" isn't science. Climate Change is closer to Lysenkoism than it is to real science. The most disturbing aspect of today's climate change scientists is their willingness to go back into historical data and "correct" it to agree with their theories about CO2. The changes always cool the past and warm the present to make it appear that we are getting warmer. Yet, all their predictions about the disasters they claim would happen failed to materialize. Al Gore quoted an AGW scientist who predicted in 2007 that "within 5 years" ice would be gone from the North Pole for parts of the summer. It never happened. In fact, ice sheets have waxed and waned as they always have, even with AGW folks cooking, trimming and creating data out of thin air.
https://www.investors.com/poli...

Hansen and fellow scientist Michael Oppenheimer reported that if the buildup of carbon dioxide and methane continued at the current rate, the Earth would be between three and nine degrees Fahrenheit warmer by the years 2025-2050, and that sea levels would rise between one and four feet in the same time frame. They've got only 5 years left and our globe has to warm 2.5 to 8.5 degrees during that time.

https://www.thenewamerican.com...
Gore’s film predicted a 20-foot sea-level rise in the “near future” owing to ice melt from Greenland and Antarctica. As you can see, it hasn’t happened yet. Gore also predicted the devastation of low-lying Pacific Island nations such as Tuvalu because of sea-level rise. But Tuvalu and some other island nations have actually grown in size since Gore’s pronouncement. A British judge concluded in 2007 that the film contained at least nine factual errors and was, therefore, a political film — not a scientific one.

Whenever these predictions of doom don’t pan out, the climate charlatans simply move the prediction back another few decades, long past the time when they’ll actually have to answer for them. It’s a shell game. The real global warming is always under a different cup.

https://polarbearscience.com/2...

http://www.aei.org/publication...

https://casf.me/3-decades-fail...

There was only ONE BIG REASON for the climate hysteria of the last 20 years, which was revealed in the 2009 and 2011 whistleblower release of the CRU emails: redistribute wealth from the Western nations to those ruled by Marxists. So arrogant are they about it that a member of the UN-ICCP stated:
"We (UN-IPCC) redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy ... One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is an environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore ..."
-Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer. IPCC co-chair of Wkring Group 3, November 13, 2010 interview (with Dr. Charles Battig)

I have not been to Europe since the 70s. So I have to rely upon reporting.

In 2013 this was a thing

And in 2017, so was this

And then this year...

Imagine my surprise that this began in the 90s, around Strasbourg apparently...

Reuters, reasonably reliable, offers some more insight. Many reasons, even insurance fraud. Apparently the term 'youths' isn't very precise.

But they do not refute the reality that car burnings are a New Years' celebration in some areas of France, and even for general frivolity or riots. At least France doesn't seem to suffer from the Friday Night Fights so common in other parts of the world. And there are in fact incidents of car burnings in Sweden, who knew?

So tell us, which one of your doomsday scenarios have come truth yet? Ice Caps should have been melted like two times over, a couple of cities are supposed to be under water by now, and little baby seals should be clubbing themselves due to going nuts from all the extra heat they have to experience.

If you believe those were actual scientific predictions you're just listening to hyperbolic rants from climate science deniers, not any actual scientific predictions.

The real predictions of climate change alarmists have proven wrong again and again. The evidence shows convincingly that yours is the side of the debate reliably proven to get the facts wrong.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

http://yournewswire.com/top-sc...

https://www.naturalnews.com/04...

http://www.thenewamerican.com/...

http://www.americanthinker.com...

Vote Hillary in 2016.

Really, that 'white male lead is the problem' meme started as fucking joke in progressive circles. I was there, I saw the first appearance of it, and I had to chuckle, as I just knew the screams of rage that would cause from the knuckle-dragging basement dwellers.

As you just went on to prove. Thank you.

Problem is, every time the far left gets caught in some racist and sexist moment. it automagically becomes a joke

But allow this knuckle dragger to go on here.

We live in an age where one's commentary lives forever once on the internet.

It is not remotely difficult to find examples of people claiming that white men are the problem a simple DDG search or Google search will provide examples - try it

Huff Post White Men Of Academia Have An ‘Objectivity’ Problem https://www.huffingtonpost.com...

White males are a problem population, according to Saida Grundy of Boston U. https://www.thenewamerican.com...

https://www.damemagazine.com/2...

Here's one that is an interesting read https://www.huffingtonpost.com... Authored by a woman of African descent, it is both racist and has a kernal of truth in it.

I'm bored now - you want any more do the work yourself.

Are there people that are considered "white" who are obvious racists? Oh hell yes. And history is littered with their crimes.

But yes Virginia, there are people of all races and creeds and political affiliations that are racist. "white" is considered a race. Men are considered a sex. Unless you are referring to medical issues that might affect one group over another like the issues fair skinned people have in tropical sunny environments to issues faced by people with dark pigmentation face with Vitamin D shortage in northern environments, referring to angry white men is the same as referring to angry black men.

And y'all can deny you are racist just as well as the guy who likes to dress in bedsheets and burn crosses on the lawns of people they have identified by race.

tl;dr version: The far left shouldn't make jokes that look and read exactly how they feel. If you make a "joke" that reads exactly how people who are serious racists write, you'll have to forgive people who look at your "joke" and believe you mean the same.

They actually did that - https://www.thenewamerican.com... . No shit. 2009.

Let's hope other countries do the same thing too.

Remember, agencies of the US government regularly attempt to influence elections overseas, and, oppose the natural desires of their electorate

Below are a selection of links about the same, from across the political spectrum that are quite well-documented.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

https://www.channel4.com/news/...

https://www.straitstimes.com/w...

https://www.telesurtv.net/engl...

http://www.latimes.com/nation/...

https://www.wnyc.org/story/his...

http://www.truth-out.org/opini...

https://www.foreignaffairs.com...

https://www.thenewamerican.com...

https://www.npr.org/2016/12/22...

https://www.politico.eu/articl...

https://www.strategic-culture....

scientists revealed it could [emphasis mine] also release massive amounts of mercury

And 15 minutes could save you 15% or more...

When, 10 years from now, this latest scare-mongering fails to materialize like countless others before it, the respectable scientists among Slashdotters will refuse to own it, because it was not a scientific statement.

Indeed, it is not.

scientists revealed it could [emphasis mine] also release massive amounts of mercury

And 15 minutes could save you 15% or more...

When, 10 years from now, this latest scare-mongering fails to materialize like countless others before it, the respectable scientists among Slashdotters will refuse to own it, because it was not a scientific statement.

Indeed, it is not.

The cleansing of the FBI, which you accuse Trump of performing/contemplating, would target people to for being disloyal to him, but those so loyal to Hillary Clinton, that they were willing to subvert the democratic process by any means necessary, including leaks and other abuses of their offices.

To allude, as you do, that this is simply Trump's vendetta against "true patriots", is exactly the bullshit you claim to be so adept at discerning.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk...

http://volokh.com/2013/05/03/l...

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-eng...

https://www.theguardian.com/la...

https://www.cnet.com/news/lond...

https://www.amren.com/news/201...

https://www.reuters.com/articl...

https://www.thenewamerican.com...

continually wanted to protest some action and kept pushing the clock closer

Kind of like predictions of Global Warming killing off humanity in N years — for the last 2N years...

Some of the protesters may be scientists, but their protests aren't scientific and thus not any more valid than those by engineers, nurses, or musical directors.

These countries are NOT America. They may have their own issues (and certainly do), however they are a very very different place.
Unfortunately they are being slowly infected by 'American Exceptionalism' and all the BS that seems to drag along with it, however they are less far along that diseased path.

You've got it backwards. The Scandinavian countries have been infected by "socialist exceptionalism" but may be throwing it off to return to Scandinavian exceptionalism.

Debunking the Myth of Socialist “Success” in Scandinavia

As Sanandaji explains clearly in his meticulously sourced book, though, what most Big Government advocates see as desirable outcomes in Scandinavia — relative prosperity, high levels of income equality, long lifespans, good health, low levels of poverty, and more — all predate the welfare state. On life expectancy, for example, four out of the top five OECD nations were in Scandinavia in 1960, with Norway at the very top. On income, meanwhile, most of the shift toward “equality” happened between 1870 and 1950 — long before the welfare state took over. Ironically, the emergence of Big Government even put some of that at risk, along with the long-established cultural norms such as the Protestant work ethic, honesty, social trust, entrepreneurship, innovation, and more that made those advances possible to begin with.

Indeed, before the emergence of welfare-state policies beginning in the 1960s and 1970s, Sweden was among the most prosperous and fast-growing economies on the planet. Between 1870 and 1936, when Sweden was characterized by relatively free markets, the nation enjoyed the highest rate of growth in the industrialized world. Innovation and entrepreneurship flourished, making Sweden one of the richest countries on Earth. Then came the radical Social Democratic period characterized by an ever-larger and more expensive government. Between 1975 and the mid-1990s — marked by the radical, if short-lived, experiment in “Third Way” socialism — Sweden dropped from being the fourth richest nation in the world down to the 13th richest.

Fortunately for Swedes, as the giant welfare state's harmful effects became increasingly obvious, the Swedish political class began to reverse course. From lowering taxes and government spending to deregulating and privatizing broad swaths of the economy, policymakers realized that the nation's continued success depended on freer markets — not total government. Still, the damage was severe. As Sanandaji explains, citing his earlier research on the subject, the rate of business formation during the “third-way era” was “dreadful.” In 2004, none of the 100 largest firms ranked by employment were founded within Sweden after 1970. “Furthermore, between 1950 and 2000, although the Swedish population grew from 7 million to almost 9 million, net job creation in the private sector was close to zero,” he observed.

Today, Denmark, despite higher taxes, has more economic freedom than the United States. Sweden and Finland are both catching up, too. And interestingly, despite Sanders' recent pronouncements on ABC News about Scandinavia having “more income and wealth equality,” Sweden still has a great deal more “wealth inequality” today than the United States, according to a study cited in the monograph.

Wait -- so some Buzzfeed editor's twitter feed ...

I offered two links, not one. And there are lots more. Communism is cool again — even if not everyone at Buzzfeed think so.

Heck, most of the "Antifa" are not-so-crypto Communists...

... is how you find out what is socially acceptable?

Make an experiment — walk through Greenwich Village in a Che Guevara T-shirt. Then change and walk back in a Trump one. Keep track of the number of middle-fingers and other expressions of hostility.

Citing batteries in an electric car as things that destroy the ecosystem seems disingenuous at best. Can you provide references from someone other than the fossil fuel industry and auto manufacturers?

Next are you going to try to sell us on the idea that the nasty toxic chemicals used to make silicon solar cells are ruining the planet, and we need to stick to good 'ol coal fired power plants because they put 'Muricans back to work??

Coal power is used to charge the EVs and coal ash has the same problems when the coal ash lakes spill into rivers.

Here's a reference:

https://www.environmentalleade...

Here's another one:

https://www.thenewamerican.com...

The FUDstream never ends with these guys, does it?

https://www.thenewamerican.com...

http://www.nationalreview.com/... ...has a great video link to a report from 2008 that predicted BY 2015 "Manhattan is disappearing under rising seas, milk is almost $13 per âoecarton,â and gas prices skyrocketed to more than $9 per gallon..."

Seriously, man: there are actual climate changes that we have to seriously cope with. That isn't being helped by alarmist bullshittery like this.

http://www.truthrevolt.org/new...

http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/06/...

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fp...

http://forums.sherdog.com/thre...

http://www.topix.com/forum/who...

https://pjmedia.com/andrewklav...

https://www.thenewamerican.com...

https://www.therebel.media/top...

Let's hope you historical about climate change because so many predictions have been hogwash

I'm happy to have a discussion with anyone on any topic, even if I think they're a climate alarmist.
I think climate panic is bullshit because those conclusions and predictions have been countered by the science:
http://petitionproject.org/gw_...

Furthermore most fear mongering climate predictions follow the following pattern:
1. Make a vague prediction
2. Get lots of attention
3. Make new prediciton(s) before it turns out the previous one is false.
https://www.thenewamerican.com...

It's very similar to Christian preachers predicting the end of the world and then getting more victims when it doesn't happen.
Only the 'predictions' are far worse, they don't include a verifiable outcome or time when it will supposedly occur.
Thus they should be rejected out of hand.

It's interesting that the media are having more and more trouble pushing this propaganda:
1. The term has changed from global warming to climate change, did anyone explain you why? Climate change is redundant because the climate is defined as the average weather over the past 30 years. So it will always change, by definition.
2. They almost never show charts of how environmental weather extremes changed over time. They probably know it would prove their bullshit wrong. Like the hurricane energy that hasn't increased: http://www.globalwarming.org/2...
3. They never talk about the positives of fossil fuels or CO2. Like with fossil fuels enabling us to defend ourselves against the climate, greatly reducing the number of climate deaths, while the population grows. Or how CO2 made the planet greener: https://climate.nasa.gov/news/.... When people are always and only telling you about one side of an argument, it's a hint of propaganda.

Please honestly investigate this stuff, don't just believe what the establishment tells you.

There was no ideological friendliness.

Things aren't quite so simple.

"Lenin is the greatest man, second only to Hitler, and that the difference between Communism and the Hitler faith is very slight." - Joseph Goebbels, “Hitlerite Riot in Berlin: Beer Glasses Fly When Speaker Compares Hitler to Lenin,” New York Times, November 28, 1925

“I know how much the German nation loves its Fuhrer, ... I should therefore like to drink to his heath.” -- Joseph Stalin

From: p. 37, The Collapse of Communism in the USSR: Its Causes and Significance, by Doug Lorimer

Stalin's foreign minister, Vyacheslav Molotov, even denounced a war against Hitlerism as "criminal". In a speech to the Supreme Soviet on October 3, 1939 he stated:

The English government has declared its war aims as nothing more nor less than the annihilation of Hitlerism ... A war of this kind cannont be justified in any way. The ideology of Hitlerism, like any ideological system, can be accepted or rejected -- this is a question of political opinion. But anyone can understand that an ideology cannot be destroyed by force. ... This is why it is sensless, indeed criminal, to wage any such war for the elimination of Hitlerism."

German–Soviet military victory parade in Brest-Litovsk

In these sad times it is exceptionally comforting to see many Parisian workers talking to German soldiers as friends, in the street or at the corner café. Well done, comrades, and keep it up, even if it displeases some of the middle classes - as stupid as they are mischievous. The brotherhood of man will not remain forever a hope: it will become a living reality. --- L 'Humanite, 4 July 1940

Watch The Soviet Story from 38:57 - 44:45

Nazis & Communists: Ideological Bedfellows (Read the whole thing.)

. . . . Max Eastman, an early communist who later saw the light and rejected communism, wrote in his 1937 book The End of Socialism in Russia that the Soviet Union was “a totalitarian state not in essence different from that of Hitler and Mussolini.” Eastman later wrote in a subsequent book, Reflections on the Failure of Socialism (1955): “Stalin’s totalitarian police state is not an approximation to, of something like, or in some respects comparable with Hitler’s. It is the same thing, only more ruthless, more cold-blooded, more astute, more extreme in its economic policies, more explicitly committed to world conquest, and more dangerous to democracy and civilized morals.”

Erica Mann in 1938 noted the common war waged by Bolsheviks and Nazis against God and family, and wrote: “Again, all we have to do is replace ‘Bolshevism’ with ‘National Socialism’ to get a fairly exact picture.” Sir Arnold Lunn wrote in his 1939 book Communism and Socialism: “The quarrel between Communists and Nazis or between Stalin’s Communists and Trotsky’s Communists is not an economic controversy, but a struggle for the spoils of office.”

Herman Rauschning, the Danzig Nazi leader who later repudiated Nazism, wrote in his 1939 book The Revolution of Nihilism: “It is in the nature of things that the planning and methods of work of the Soviet State and the Fascist and the National Socialist States should be growing more and

I still don't know what you mean by tyranny of the weak. I gave it my best shot, and missed. Could you explain further?

Seriously? Okay. Let us speak of the concept of banning words "Ban Bossy". http://banbossy.com/ This project has the very bizzare concept of presumable leaders of people (just females) of being devastated and rendered impotent when people call them bossy. The irony is that teh women promoting this fit the 'bossy" moniker to a T. In my own experience, people have called my wife "Bossy" her reply is "Right, that's why I'm the boss!" Because that is the inherent nature of being a boss. Being too weak to withstand such a word means you are too weak to be a boss. And banning the word will not make a weak preson one bit stronger, merely show that they cannot withstand simple words. Tyranny of the weak. I was listening to an NPR story this afternoon with a younf lady who wants those who utter the word "Retarded" prosecuted for Hate speech. It's rude, but a hate crime? If that were enacted, it would show how people are devastated by the very word, and must be proteced from it. Tyranny of the weak.

But that is merely a proposal, I only offer it as an example of the mindset.

However, Let us speak of the town in England where a man can be prosecuted and convicted of a hate crime, the wording so vague that the mere act of saying hello to a woman can get you arrested. Quoting Winston Churchill gets you arrested for a hate crime. https://www.thenewamerican.com...

A woman was arrested for swearing in front of her children. http://www.mommyish.com/2014/0... Low life lady and no doubt, but apparently it completely destroys children to hear the word fuck, and must be punished to the maximum extent of the law. We need a street harassment law. https://www.nytimes.com/roomfo...

Anther place in England is turning "Misogyny" into ahate crime. Even when no crime is committed, you can be investigated. Not certain how "investigations" go across the pond. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-eng... The wording of the law is:

The crime of misogyny is defined as “any incidents against women that are motivated by an attitude of a man towards a woman, and includes behaviour targeted towards a woman by men simply because they are a woman.”

Other parts of the law are:

Unwanted or uninvited sexual advances, Physical or verbal assault, Unwanted or uninvited physical or verbal contact or engagement, Use of mobile phones to send unwanted or uninvited messages, Take photographs without consent"

Yes David Thornley, you can go to jail for saying "hello" to a a woman. There are some other issues with the law. Unwanted sexual advances - of course. Tell the guy to shut it down and he needs to shut it down. But "uninvited"? That means that no man had better ever tell a woman that he thinks she is cute or attempts to hold her hand (religious in the US consider hand holding as a gateway to sex)

Assault - of course. phones? if you send a message disagreeing with her, welcome to the UK prison system.

Photographs without consent? SRSLY? In the UK, the home of massive surveillance? Take all those cameras down

Now between you and me and the capybaras in the back yard, almost all women don't give a rats putout about most of this weakling stuff. My wife is dare I say, pretty fetching, and gets catcalls on occasion. and she gets called bossy (all by women) and she gets comments about her weight - turn

Might odd definition of "they have".

You can at least start with the IPCC report

I'm sorry, but that's a rather discredited organization.

then look at the scientific journals that have been published since then

No proof, in other words. As suspected...

You can at least start with the IPCC report

I'm sorry, but that's a rather discredited organization.

then look at the scientific journals that have been published since then

No proof, in other words. As suspected...

Pretty much the entire US Senate,

a 1994 U.S. law passed by Congress and signed by then-President Bill Clinton. Among other elements, the law prohibits the distribution of U.S. taxpayer funds to “any affiliated organization of the United Nations which grants full membership as a state to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood.” Last month, though, the UN climate bureaucracy, known as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), decided to admit the U.S. taxpayer-funded “State of Palestine” as a member. That means no more American money may legally be disbursed to the UN's climate bureaucracy, Oops! Federal Law Prohibits Obama Funding UN Climate Bureaucracy

huh. Went looking to call bullshit on some flimsy anonymous coward's lie. ...But here you go. He meet with Softbank who is... investing in the deal with foxconn? They leaked some information about a deal with Foxconn investing in PA. Foxconn's CEO Gao admitted to the plan shortly after.

I wonder what sort of incentive was given to make this thing happen. I mean, I imagine that's why it's happening. Trump needs to show some results and he can certainly buy business. Pay $11 for every $10 in wages or investment it brings in. But it's tax breaks or profit guarantees, so it's hard to count. And hey, end of the day, it might be a net win. But if they get paid $5 million to talk about a $7 Billion plant that never gets built, it's a scam.

Sorry for being skeptical. I'll call it a win once people start collecting paychecks and the deal is transparent.

Can you supply any references for the debunked consensus? When I originally looked into the matter, I found several papers confirming the consensus, but it has been a few years since I looked

Comment on ‘Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature
a 2016 survey of american meteorological society members about climate change Initial Findings graph on page 11 shows 33% of AMS members believe the climate change is at least equally or more attributable to natural causes.
Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis
Climate Consensus and ‘Misinformation’: A Rejoinder to Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change
Climate Consensus Con Game
Sorry, global warmists: The ‘97 percent consensus’ is complete fiction
The claim of a 97% consensus on global warming does not stand up
Global Warming “Consensus”: Cooking the Books
Climategate 3.0: Blogger Threatened for Exposing 97% "Consensus" Fraud

Can you supply any references for the debunked consensus? When I originally looked into the matter, I found several papers confirming the consensus, but it has been a few years since I looked

Comment on ‘Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature
a 2016 survey of american meteorological society members about climate change Initial Findings graph on page 11 shows 33% of AMS members believe the climate change is at least equally or more attributable to natural causes.
Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis
Climate Consensus and ‘Misinformation’: A Rejoinder to Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change
Climate Consensus Con Game
Sorry, global warmists: The ‘97 percent consensus’ is complete fiction
The claim of a 97% consensus on global warming does not stand up
Global Warming “Consensus”: Cooking the Books
Climategate 3.0: Blogger Threatened for Exposing 97% "Consensus" Fraud

Not really. The FBI did a really good job over the decades. So did European governments. Problem is, they're bringing in a lot of people that have been taught from the age of 3 that it's ok to kill infidels. They teach them that every year. A few people they can deal with, 10's of thousands is a lot harder.

It's simple, don't let them into the country. Send 'em back.

The alternative is we won't have a Europe in probably 10 years. Probably won't have a United States either. We'll all be slaves, under Sharia law.

Before you mark this troll or respond like an idiot, check it out. European "no go zones"
https://www.gatestoneinstitute...
https://www.gatestoneinstitute...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/...

How about a former British Ambassado saying Russia Not the WikiLeaks Source that it was someone in the DNC disgusted by how corrupt they were? BTW anybody want to bet it was the guy that got a bullet in the back of the head in that fake robbery where they execute the victim without actually bothering to carry out the robbery part of the robbery?

As for Pizzagate? Dude don't know WTF he is talking about but Podesta is OBVIOUSLY talking in code because frankly most of the sentences make absolutely ZERO SENSE in English. Maps to Pizza? Wanting to know which is a Domino, a Pizza or a Pasta? You read the actual emails and they make zero fucking sense and the few that aren't in code, like the one with the hot tub and the 7 and 9 and 11 year old? Yeah there is something fucking going on there, because why would a grown man be getting into a hot tub with a bunch of strange kids,...something is seriously whack there and the fact that the MSM has all, almost from the nanosecond that it hit, started reading from the same "fake news" script, just like they did when they lied their asses off about Hillary's health AND again with her enjoying DNC rigging against Bernie? Yeah the whole fucking thing stinks and to anybody who says it couldn't be true? Two words....Dennis Hastert

Maybe true for banks, but for health care? 109+ new regulations alone with 11 million words. That's a lot of regulations and restrictions that have been implemented in the last few years...

First point: In my original post above, I did not specify who the outsiders are. Unless the protests are being paid for by the actual protesters, then there must be an outside source of funds. That isn't conspiracy theory, that's economics 101, someone has to pay the bills. Whether is is George Soros or someone else, and whether the outsiders funded thousands of dollars or millions, the point stands that someone with money is funding the protests.

Second point: A Google search for "funding of black lives matter" shows numerous links to articles debating the truth and falsehood of particular persons and groups funding Black Lives Matter in particular, and other similar/related groups in general. Go read a few, and you'll find more than white supremacy to keep you occupied.

Here are a few interesting ones.
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/...
http://www.snopes.com/ford-mot...
http://www.politico.com/story/...

Third point: I also did not limit my statement to any specific protest group that has happened lately. So how about a Google search for "funding of protests"?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...
http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...
https://www.lewrockwell.com/20...

I'm sure you will use your cop-out line of "white supremacists" and "alt-right", and whatever hand-waving you have to do, to ignore reports that you don't like. There were certainly links to the sites you mentioned, and others you will also ignore. But it would take a strong will to ignore all of them.

Have a nice day.

Democracy, two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

It never works out in the end.

And it hasn't worked out in Scandinavia.

https://fee.org/articles/the-m...
https://www.bostonglobe.com/op...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/...

If all you listen to is Left-wing news and Bernie, you'd never know socialism doesn't work.

You forgot the word 'or'. It's not certain at all yet whether he's a shill or not.

So, on October 2nd the countries, where it is Ok to block the entire populace from foreign Internet-resources, where "hate speech", "blasphemy", and mocking the president or king are criminal offences — they will all have more say in how the network is operated than before. Yay!

They can start be dismantling the USA PATRIOT Act. A bad idea, always was. Tell the security services they need to play by the same rules everyone else does.

Justin Amash recently prevented it from being expanded, at least in the short term. This guy is as principled as they come in the House of Reps.

... "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize" - Voltaire ...

In Europe and Canada criticizing the Jews is of no consequence. In fact the Jews have become their standard boogieman to be attacked

The killing of Jews is no problem either - in actual fact, part of the European continent becomes hyper-euphoric every time Jews got murdered

But if you ever dare to criticize the moslems, or Islam, you will get into trouble

BIG TROUBLE !

http://www.businessinsider.com...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

https://news.vice.com/article/...

http://gatesofvienna.net/2014/...

http://www.breitbart.com/natio...

http://www.thenewamerican.com/...

http://www.gatestoneinstitute....

During Clinton's SoS tenure, the post of Inspector General was intentionally left vacant the entire time. The IG is a presidential appointee position and the OIG pointed out that the SoS IG vacancy was the longest of any of the IG posts. Had the IG been in place at that time, that official would had not allowed Clinton to exploit the private server and abuse the classification system without government oversight.

AGW, in fact, IS a political clusterfuck enabler.

You are an aggront douchelord. EABOD

http://www.thenewamerican.com/...

If you look carefully, you'll realize, the gloomy predictions tend to include non-committal words like "may" or "could":

Sea Rise Could Force Millions In Florida To Adapt Or Flee

This makes them non-falsifiable and thus unscientific...

Unscientific, but convenient... Years later, when the earlier peddled fears fail to materialize, the peddlers offer you new ones without having to blush about the past ones: we never said, it will stop snowing in Scotland, only that it could .

Polar Ice Caps: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja...

Hurricane Lull: http://www.livescience.com/507...

Greening of Africa: http://news.nationalgeographic...

These are "facts", and the "speculation" from the "Global Warming" nuts is also clearly documented. Here are a few good articles on exaggerated claims that never panned out:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/201...

http://www.thenewamerican.com/...

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03...

Please go ahead and make excuses as to why nearly 97% of all Global Warming Projections are wrong : http://www.westernjournalism.c...

Or perhaps you'll simply parrot someone else who doesn't actually know anything, or continue to believe "consensus = Science"

Just going to leave this right here: http://www.thenewamerican.com/...

Which satellites were they using for data in 1880? Who monitored data at the North pole? Obvious problems with the claims in just the blurb on /. A good question to ask is "Who benefits from AGW?" It leads to more government control and more $ for "scientists". http://www.thenewamerican.com/...