Can we?

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Dubya, Jan 5, 2013.

  1. Dubya
    Offline

    Dubya Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,056
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +59
    You can delete this if you want to, and I suggest you do, but can we debate AGW deniers in here? How do you make a challenge a debate on this site? Is the site monitored to restrict the rules? In simple English, how or what starts a debate. Is it on other sites of just posting a thread here?

    If this thread is totally stupid, get rid of it or keep it as an example, I don't care.
     
  2. Politico
    Offline

    Politico Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    13,855
    Thanks Received:
    937
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,491
    Just posting an opinon will start a debate around here. As far as monitored goes it's the wild west. But at least in the clean zone you have a chance at a good discussion.
     
  3. AVG-JOE
    Offline

    AVG-JOE American Mutt Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    22,888
    Thanks Received:
    4,882
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Your Imagination
    Ratings:
    +7,017
    The only 'restriction' in the Clean Debate Zone is on personal insults and truly vile language. Keep it 'clean' and nobody will fuck with you.

    As far as discussing "AGW Deniers" goes, I'm all for it. I think that a good first step would be for Mr. Dubya to define "AGW".....

    I may not be alone in having no clue as to who he is accusing of denying what. :dunno:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. freedombecki
    Offline

    freedombecki Let's go swimmin'! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    23,690
    Thanks Received:
    5,926
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    My house
    Ratings:
    +5,935
    AGW = Anthropogenic Global Warming

    Anthropogenic = adjective indicating that something is man-caused

    [​IMG]



    Global Warming: A Closer Look at the Numbers

    Dubya, the scientifically-gathered figures tell us clearly that AGW is a minimal factor in nature's schema. Nature is by far the favorite in this horse race.

    If we decided to omit our small contribution to this problem, trumped up by scientists who needed funding grants and were hell-bent to get them, we'd have to live in the banana belt and swing from trees for survival. That is not a solution.

    Really. :rolleyes:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2013
  5. percysunshine
    Offline

    percysunshine Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    Messages:
    16,664
    Thanks Received:
    2,260
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Sty
    Ratings:
    +5,835
    I am doing my part and am holding in my breath. My face is getting a bit red though.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,168
    Thanks Received:
    14,903
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,904
    Can we close the thread now?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. Wiseacre
    Offline

    Wiseacre Retired USAF Chief Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,025
    Thanks Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Ratings:
    +1,194
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. Wiseacre
    Offline

    Wiseacre Retired USAF Chief Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,025
    Thanks Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Ratings:
    +1,194

    F-bomb = vile language?

    Am I in trouble now? :eusa_pray:
     
  9. freedombecki
    Offline

    freedombecki Let's go swimmin'! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    23,690
    Thanks Received:
    5,926
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    My house
    Ratings:
    +5,935
    Thank you for the other opinion, Wiseacre, and its appreciable summary from your link:

    The trouble with falsifying data as certain AGW proponents emailed their colleagues in the scientific community to do, is that it leaves only their method in tatters, and not their alleged theories of cause. This omission has been egregious in the press, in spite of measurable evidence showing other causes that would seriously threaten the AGW cash cow foundation gifts which basically are foolishly diverting billions of dollars to such pretentious paradigms.
     
  10. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,168
    Thanks Received:
    14,903
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,904
    Why do we still need an Environment Section?

    This should be posted in every AGW thread there too
     

Share This Page