also, what you said was blatantly racist. now, since you're probably too fucking stupid know which part, its your obvious hit at BLM and the repeated unjustified shootings:
Whenever there's a disgusting crime anywhere, we all have to stop and consider the melanin content of the perp's skin before we can decide if he's a piece of shit or not.
nice sockpuppet you got there. doesnt change the fact that both you, and the people that modded you, are delusional. that or just really really ignorant as to the meaning of words...as in most of the words you used and continue to use.
nothing you stated is even remotely connected to reality. if ODS was an actual disease you'd be terminal. sadly, you're just braindead.
don't want to be accused of hate speech? then don't use it.
examples: calling them "invaders" IS hate speech. falsely indicating that its mostly "uneducated and extremist fighting age men swarming into Germany" is also hate speech. calling it "criminality and incompatible culture" is hate speech. "soak up free benefits while Germany goes bankrupt" is hate speech. saying they're gonna rape everyone is also, you guessed it, hate speech.
the idea of unpopular speech needing protection refers primarily to the market of ideas, particularly around political and philosophical thought. hate speech doesn't really qualify at the same level of intellectual thought. why? because along with our valuation of free speech we also implicitly value equality. hate speech adds nothing of value to a discussion, and in fact only seeks to undercut that equality and ultimately deprive another of their equality. in the end saying we must value allow hate speech is little different from saying that in the name of tolerance we must tolerate intolerance, which is rubbish.
Oh, he did the honorable thing? After he did the dishonorable thing...but he apologized so that makes it ok? the Carson flap isn't the only thing he did, unless of course you weren't aware of the fake voter violations he sent out, or the fake checks.
Cruz is the best liar in politics today, and possibly ever. He makes slick willy look like an amateur.
Hillary the soon to be indicted felon? Mishandling classified information is no laughing matter. Ordering underlings to strip classification markings to send information via unsecure email is even more serious.
(note that the third sentence is completely made up, probably by yourself)
but yeah...we should stick to the issues, and not BS that comes from crazies, right?
trump's crazy makes them look sane. except he's mostly espousing things they espouse too, simply taken to the extreme. they actually believe the things they say (turning back gay rights, with letting businesses run wild, allowing a slip towards theocracy, having people go broke over medical bills and no insurance), whereas when trump says it, it's much more likely that he's merely pandering for votes.
I think he's pandering by taking the typical viewpoints to the extremes. I don't think he actually believes much o what he says; his past is full of much more soft moderate positions. his focus is simply on winning, all the time, and right now that means saying crazy, bigoted, palin-esque word salad.
I think he did it originally as a publicity stunt, just like before, planning to ride the train as far as it went, but not expecting to be this successful. so now he's still just riding the train as far as it will go, only now it looks like it might actually go all the way.
but how he would actually act as president is an open question: would he be more moderate in practice? or would his continual desire to win (his superiority complex) drive him to continue with the demagoguery, and behave dangerously and recklessly? it'd be scary to find out. but equally scary is if someone like Cruz wins the office.
there's quite a bit of difference between a patchwork of localized regulations that change every few miles, and a universal regulation applicable to the entire nation.
He may be LGBT, but when a CEO actions just happen to be in the best interests of his company's stock price, I'm more inclined to believe it's rooted in his being a CEO and the typical concerns those types have over stock prices, company valuations, etc, rather than necessarily being rooted a personal conviction.
no thats not entrapment. but what you wrote is ignorance. and as long as language is a thing, regardless of its level of complexity, lawyers will be needed.
-the effect of el nino on the GLOBAL AVERAGE is tiny. even with el nino it still would have been the hottest year. http://www.slate.com/content/d...
-the urban heat island effect isn't a factor. IE, remove all urban stations from the data and the trend still remains the same. https://www.skepticalscience.c...
-your continual pointing to the RSS satellites show only that you are ignorant of what that data is and what it is capable of showing, let alone its relation to the overall picture from all the data. https://www.skepticalscience.c...
-the corrections actually reduce the amount of warming shown in the data, by ~20%.
-there are no observations which "falsify AGW all the time". there are only cranks like yourself who misinterpret the data (deliberately) in order to spread misinformation.
Slashdot Mirror
Bingo.
also, what you said was blatantly racist. now, since you're probably too fucking stupid know which part, its your obvious hit at BLM and the repeated unjustified shootings:
Whenever there's a disgusting crime anywhere, we all have to stop and consider the melanin content of the perp's skin before we can decide if he's a piece of shit or not.
nice sockpuppet you got there.
doesnt change the fact that both you, and the people that modded you, are delusional.
that or just really really ignorant as to the meaning of words...as in most of the words you used and continue to use.
nothing you stated is even remotely connected to reality.
if ODS was an actual disease you'd be terminal.
sadly, you're just braindead.
So what you're saying is you're a fool in either case.
We just had 8 years of a Marxist racist divider who despises the American people, and we're still here.
This level of delusion really, really should qualify you for institutionalization.
I believe Mr. Trump is for Trump first.
Much more accurate.
Get an axe.
Bingo.
Amen.
not much, but more than I believe the GOP who blatantly advertised their NN killing bill as a NN protecting one.
a ~9% tax increase in trade for not spending ~15-20% of your income on insurance premiums.
I fail to see how that isn't a worthy trade.
don't want to be accused of hate speech?
then don't use it.
examples:
calling them "invaders" IS hate speech.
falsely indicating that its mostly "uneducated and extremist fighting age men swarming into Germany" is also hate speech.
calling it "criminality and incompatible culture" is hate speech.
"soak up free benefits while Germany goes bankrupt" is hate speech.
saying they're gonna rape everyone is also, you guessed it, hate speech.
the idea of unpopular speech needing protection refers primarily to the market of ideas, particularly around political and philosophical thought.
hate speech doesn't really qualify at the same level of intellectual thought.
why? because along with our valuation of free speech we also implicitly value equality.
hate speech adds nothing of value to a discussion, and in fact only seeks to undercut that equality and ultimately deprive another of their equality.
in the end saying we must value allow hate speech is little different from saying that in the name of tolerance we must tolerate intolerance, which is rubbish.
by Ann Coulter i'll wager.
Yeah...no.
all you did was prove that you are very unfamiliar with BOTH books and with each religions theological teachings of the books.
Oh, he did the honorable thing?
After he did the dishonorable thing...but he apologized so that makes it ok?
the Carson flap isn't the only thing he did, unless of course you weren't aware of the fake voter violations he sent out, or the fake checks.
Cruz is the best liar in politics today, and possibly ever.
He makes slick willy look like an amateur.
But we should criticize on issues only and not the character of the man and thing's he's done, right?
Even though you yourself don't follow your own advice:
Hillary the soon to be indicted felon? Mishandling classified information is no laughing matter. Ordering underlings to strip classification markings to send information via unsecure email is even more serious.
(note that the third sentence is completely made up, probably by yourself)
but yeah...we should stick to the issues, and not BS that comes from crazies, right?
corporations don't exist without consumer demand.
no consumer demand, no corporations.
we aren't beholden to them.
they are beholden to us.
Cruz is probably the best, most skilled liar to ever run for President.
which is really saying something.
he's also pretty gutsy, like with that fake voter violation mailer in Iowa, and a few other stunts.
he truly is scary, and god help us if he's elected.
trump's crazy makes them look sane.
except he's mostly espousing things they espouse too, simply taken to the extreme.
they actually believe the things they say (turning back gay rights, with letting businesses run wild, allowing a slip towards theocracy, having people go broke over medical bills and no insurance), whereas when trump says it, it's much more likely that he's merely pandering for votes.
I think he's pandering by taking the typical viewpoints to the extremes.
I don't think he actually believes much o what he says; his past is full of much more soft moderate positions.
his focus is simply on winning, all the time, and right now that means saying crazy, bigoted, palin-esque word salad.
I think he did it originally as a publicity stunt, just like before, planning to ride the train as far as it went, but not expecting to be this successful.
so now he's still just riding the train as far as it will go, only now it looks like it might actually go all the way.
but how he would actually act as president is an open question:
would he be more moderate in practice? or would his continual desire to win (his superiority complex) drive him to continue with the demagoguery, and behave dangerously and recklessly? it'd be scary to find out. but equally scary is if someone like Cruz wins the office.
there's quite a bit of difference between a patchwork of localized regulations that change every few miles, and a universal regulation applicable to the entire nation.
He may be LGBT, but when a CEO actions just happen to be in the best interests of his company's stock price, I'm more inclined to believe it's rooted in his being a CEO and the typical concerns those types have over stock prices, company valuations, etc, rather than necessarily being rooted a personal conviction.
a known nonscientist repeatedly refuted and proven wrong isn't a valid counter.
in essence, the GP said 2+2=4.
you replied with: 2+2=Cake.
no thats not entrapment.
but what you wrote is ignorance.
and as long as language is a thing, regardless of its level of complexity, lawyers will be needed.
he only exists to troll.
best to ignore him.
The unedited data before the past is tweaked cooler and the present hotter.
not what happens.
-the effect of el nino on the GLOBAL AVERAGE is tiny. even with el nino it still would have been the hottest year.
http://www.slate.com/content/d...
-the urban heat island effect isn't a factor. IE, remove all urban stations from the data and the trend still remains the same.
https://www.skepticalscience.c...
-your continual pointing to the RSS satellites show only that you are ignorant of what that data is and what it is capable of showing, let alone its relation to the overall picture from all the data.
https://www.skepticalscience.c...
-the corrections actually reduce the amount of warming shown in the data, by ~20%.
-there are no observations which "falsify AGW all the time". there are only cranks like yourself who misinterpret the data (deliberately) in order to spread misinformation.