Good News: Air Pollution Is Raaaaacist

Science is joining the Social Justice Warriors

Unequal air: Pollution from whites disproportionately affects blacks, Hispanics

The air that Americans breathe isn’t equal.

Blacks and Hispanics disproportionately breathe air that’s been polluted by non-Hispanic whites, according to a study. This new research quantifies for the first time the racial gap between who causes air pollution – and who breathes it.

“Pollution is disproportionately caused by whites, but disproportionately inhaled by black and Hispanic minorities,” the study said.

Poor air quality remains the largest environmental health risk in the United States, the study warns. In fact, with 100,000 deaths per year, more Americans die from air pollution than car crashes and murders combined.

“Even though minorities are contributing less to the overall problem of air pollution, they are affected by it more,” said study co-author Jason Hill, an engineering professor at the University of Minnesota, who is white. “Is it fair (that) I create more pollution and somebody else is disproportionately affected by it?”

Hill said that while the air in the U.S. has gotten cleaner in the past decade, pollution inequity has remained stubbornly high.

What is especially surprising is just how large pollution inequity is and has been for well over a decade,” Hill said.

So, wait, this is Obama’s fault?

Other experts agreed with the research: “These findings confirm what most grassroots environmental justice leaders have known for decades, ‘whites are dumping their pollution on poor people and people of color,’” said Texas Southern University public affairs professor Robert Bullard, who was not part of the research. Bullard, often called the father of environmental justice, is African-American.

Researchers say their pollution inequity formula could be used on other types of environmental burdens.

“The approach we establish in this study could be extended to other pollutants, locations and groupings of people,” Marshall said. “When it comes to determining who causes air pollution – and who breathes that pollution – this research is just the beginning.”

Has anyone considered that there are, get this, more white people in America than blacks and Hispanics? Meh, none of that matters, this is all about race-baiting and SJW mule fritters.

“On average, whites tend to consume more than minorities. It’s because of wealth,” Hill said.

Is he saying minorities are too stupid to achieve? Huh. And, yes, this social justice study was actually published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

116 Responses to “Good News: Air Pollution Is Raaaaacist”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Here’s the actual PNAS paper.

    https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2019/03/05/1818859116

    The wealthy in the US generate more air pollution per capita than the poor, so of course the poor are harmed disproportionately. This was intuitively obvious, and the researchers attempted to quantify the effect regarding fine particulate pollution.

    The Teach didn’t address any issue with the paper other than to question the motives of the scientists.

    The Teach typed: Is he saying minorities are too stupid to achieve?

    Actually, that’s the Con position, ignoring their own boots on the necks of minorities. Con Men claim that oppressed minorities have caused their own oppression.

    • StillAlive says:

      Absolutely everything ELChapo typed was beyond stupid. He forest Gumped out on us. He lost his collective mind and became the JERK as portrayed by steve martin. Its the CANS…He hates the cans!!

      The reality is simple in a trolls world. WHITE MEN are NOW RICH. When there are more WHITE AMERICANS ON POVERTY, FOOD STAMPS and WELFARE than minorities. Additonally he says The wealthy generate more pollution per capita than the poor when in fact MOST of the wealthy in this world are DEMOCRATIC LEFTISTS than they are conservative righties. What is left of the middle class is made up of whites and blacks and Asians and Hispanics all working hard every day to feed their families but ELCHAPO would have you believe that somehow WHITE PEOPLE are responsible for ALL POLUTION.

      LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL………White people account for 15 percent of the worlds population and of those at least 90 percent are NOT WEALTHY according to WHO. So again another DUMB, Idiotic TROLL masterpiece of stupidity by the Russian paid Troll resident.

      To believe the ElChapos of the world 10 percent of 15 percent of 100 percent of the world’s problems are caused by White People or in other worlds. ONE PERCENTERS……….lolololololololol…. Its insane how far this troll will go to get a rise out of people for a paycheck.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        SA,

        You’re SO “not worth it.”

        Did you read the PNAS paper? The abstract?

        Let us know. Otherwise, it’s “not worth it” to discuss anything with you.

        • StillAlive says:

          Stupid is as stupid does. El Chapo. We not talking about the paper. We talking about your take on the paper……IE.

          *** Actually, that’s the Con position, ignoring their own boots on the necks of minorities. Con Men claim that oppressed minorities have caused their own oppression.***

          the above statement in context of The wealthy in the US generate more air pollution per capita than the poor, so of course the poor are harmed disproportionately.

          One does not have to read the article cited to respond to your response which is so batshit crazy Trollish nonsense as to be comical. I can understand why you would want to change the subject because trying to defend your above post would require a 1000 page dissertation which would then have to be approved by the KGB before you released it.

          • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

            Shorter version:
            –He’s a nignorant angry little negro fella from st. louis who hasn’t a clue. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

          • Bill Bear says:

            “We not talking about the paper.”

            Actually, we are talking about the paper.

            It’s interesting that every time someone tries to discuss facts with climate deniers, they immediately try to change the subject.

            Gotta wonder why.

        • formwiz says:

          It isn’t worth it.

          Just more faux scientists cooking the books.

    • formwiz says:

      The wealthy in the US generate more air pollution per capita than the poor, so of course the poor are harmed disproportionately.

      My God, what drivel. First, there are more poor than rich, so the poor may be harming the rich more, since most of the poor have a car.

      And notice how every para begins with, “We estimate”. When you estimate, you can say anything you want.

      Actually, that’s the Con position, ignoring their own boots on the necks of minorities. Con Men claim that oppressed minorities have caused their own oppression.

      Another whopper.

      And this is the girl who says some of her best friends…

      And, actually, it’s the position of the real con men, the Lefties. The poor would all starve if the Limousine Liberals didn’t bend down to help their poor brown brothers. It’s why they need constant brainwashing from the Lefty-controlled media and duplicitous thralls like Crusader Rabbit.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “And notice how every para begins with, “We estimate”.”

        False. The phrase occurs only four times in the paper — and not at the beginning of each and every paragraph.

        You didn’t read the paper, did you?

        “When you estimate, you can say anything you want.”

        False. In the sciences, “estimate” does not mean “random guess”.

    • Bill Bear says:

      Elwood P. Dowd wrote:

      “The Teach didn’t address any issue with the paper other than to question the motives of the scientists.”

      Well, to be fair, it is well nigh impossible to address the contents of a paper that one has not read — that one has, in fact, made a determined effort NOT to read.

  2. StillAlive says:

    POWER in the NUREDDEAL

    Now that’s a lot of electricity.
    A New York man reportedly received a Con Edison monthly bill of $38 million on Monday for his 600 square foot apartment.

    Wait was that apartment updated with the latest in money saving technology? Say it ain’t so AOC. I bet with a little bit of pull she can get his bill cut by 10 percent.

  3. StillAlive says:

    Actually in all seriousness the end of the climate hoax is indeed on the horizon. More and more Scientists are speaking out. It’s become apparent that the Globalist new world order narrows everything down to ECONOMICS. As a result everything they are attempting to do is economic related. EU itself is failing. The France riots along with the yellow vest uprising in dozens of countries including Canada is economic based. Carbon Taxation.

    Even the Canadian Prime Minister who passed a 30 percent tax on carbon has now walked it back to only 20 percent in the face of yellow vest movement in Canada not to mention the PM himself is in jeopardy of going to prision for literally doing what HRC did in the USA. But in Canada they dont mess around. They go after you, even their own politicians.

    Merkel in Germany is done. The nationalist/populist movement is sweeping all of east and west Europe and sweeping the globalists out of power.

    When you look at AGW its all about economics. In the interim the EU has taken away rights after rights from their citizens who are now rebelling. Freedom of speech is not tolerated all across Europe. guns are banned except via heavy, heavy restrictions. Cameras everywhere run by the STATE record your every movement and during the daylight hours in certain districts it is mandated you keep your curtains open.

    NO GO zones are beyond a 1000 and climbing daily in Europe as Muslims take over whole sections of their host countries installing Sharia law which hates everything the EU stands for.

    In short. The AGW powered by leftist gun grabbers and money launderers and scientists on the dole by governments desiring to further move to the communist left are losing ground head over heels.

    And all of this can be led right back to one MAN….DONALD TRUMP who stood up and said something really unpopular. Political Correctness be damned. America is great and your countries should be great….Its up to YOU to make them great again.

    And they are and with it AGW is dying an agonizing death as witnessed by the left organizing school children to march in the streets because ADULTS realize how stupid and how USED they have been over the last two decades.

    • Kye says:

      I agree with most of what you said but I think when you look at AGW it’s all about POWER! Economics is just a means to an end, institutionalized communist oppression. Just look at the way the left operates colleges, the media or Hollywood.

      Crazy Elwood believes the conservatives, the patriots who want less government and taxes and more individual freedom are “oppressors”. Once again he thinks lower taxes are oppression and taking people’s guns is liberation. That’s the True Believer of communist propaganda. The Commissar of Projection once again has shown his allegiance to anything but America. This guy never misses a chance to bad mouth America or to degrade white people.

      https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?url=http%3A%2F%2Fanodtothegods.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F03%2Ftumblr_pncjjre8hR1y3quwno1_500.jpg&t=1552397931&ymreqid=d1981f21-fcf0-6f7c-2f0a-120016010000&sig=Fd9EOx5_gs8sZ4xsiD2kSw–~C

    • Bill Bear says:

      “More and more Scientists are speaking out.”

      Odd that you are unable to name a single one of them.

      “NO GO zones are beyond a 1000 and climbing daily in Europe”

      Odd that you cannot name even a dozen actual “NO GO zones”.

      Facts… what a concept.

      • StillAlive says:

        Okay ElChapo via another name.

        Here is an interesting take by the lying douche bags who are trying to fleece the planet for a fake problem.

        1) Depending on exactly how you measure the expert consensus, it’s somewhere between 90% and 100% that agree humans are responsible for climate change, with most of our studies finding 97% consensus among publishing climate scientists

        Anyone see the problem HERE? PUBLISHING CLIMATE SCIENTISTS…….lololol…thats about 20 or 30 men and women. PUBLISHING…remember the AGW crowd PEER REVIEWS EACH OTHER and sit on panels and determine who can and cant publish.

        Names of scientists speaking out:

        Dr. David Evans. Dr. David Evans used to work for the Australian Greenhouse Office
        Dr. Denis Rancourt.
        Freeman Dyson. The 91-year-old mathematical physicist and scientist
        Dr. Judith Curry. Dr. Judith Curry is Professor

        Freeman Dyson,
        Ivar Giaever,
        Steven E. Koonin,
        Richard Lindzen,
        Craig Loehle,
        Ross McKitrick,
        Fritz Vahrenholt,
        Anastasios Tsonis, distinguished professor of atmospheric science
        Harrison Schmitt, geologist, Apollo 17 astronaut

        ** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_who_disagree_with_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming***

        More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

        Global Warming Skeptic Organizations.. so prevalent they have their own organizations opposing AGW.

        I could go on and on but……..

        Oh why not.

        Why isn’t it mentioned in the news that 3 of Japan’s 5 leading scientists reject AGW as a flawed theory?

        And according to a study of 1,868 scientists working in climate-related fields, conducted just this year by the PBL Netherlands Environment Assessment Agency, three in ten respondents said that less than half of global warming since 1951 could be attributed to human activity, or that they did not know. 30 PERCENT NOT 97 percent.

        More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology,

        Dr. Denis Rancourt believes that the idea that global warming, on its own, could negatively impart the environment, is tenuous at best. He describes manmade global warming as a psychological and social phenomenon backed by no solid scientific evidence. The problem is that the AGW movement has become a giant gravy train (estimated to be worth anywhere between $22 billion to $1.5 trillion per year).

        Okay just know folks there are 1000’s of scientists who are not on board the SCAM known as Global Warming and climate change. If it was not a scam then everyone would be terrified based upon the amount of fear mongering involved with the movement.

        • Bill Bear says:

          A four-year-old article from The National review is somehow evidence that “more and more scientists” are speaking out today.

          Suuuure. Got it. Now we know just how useless your standards of evidence are.

          Thanks!

  4. StillAlive says:

    ABC News…2014-03-12 · Transcript for Coldest Winter on Record in the Last 100 Years Now, we turn to the latest battering ram of winter weather. Millions of Americans digging in and digging out once more.

    Will 2019 be the coldest winter on record in the UK?

    Big freeze to hit Scotland in January – as ‘coldest winter on record’ expected

    Coldest March Temperature On Record In Montana

    Thousands of these all across the world. LA faces lowest temperatures in 60 years.

    Of course we all know CO2 is the culprit and it cant possibly be the dormant sun.

    Solar forcing and UV radiation is INSIGNIFICANT ACCORDING TO THE AGW MANTRA…

    Lets discuss this lie for a moment.

    Solar Irradiance of the Earth’s Atmosphere
    Sultana N. Nahar
    Department of Astronomy, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
    nahar@astronomy.ohio-state.edu

    He says a bunch of nothing but lets look at one important aspect of his paper.

    After a long and lengthy blah, blah, blah were all gonna burn up because of UV rays being trapped by increasing CO2 he then posits this most important part of his entire paper.
    Current atmospheric models lack accurate parameters for atomic and molecular processes
    and hence provide predictions which may have large uncertainties. We plan to explore the sensitivity of numerical simulations to accurately predict the response of the earth’s atmosphere
    to changes in elemental and molecular composition. For example, what is the effect of including new high-accuracy photoionization rates and radiative transition in C, N, O, H2O, etc.
    in climate models? How do temporal-spatial and temperature-density dependencies of fundamental physical and chemical parameters and rates affect the absorption of solar radiation
    by the ABC? These studies should lead to an improved understanding of global warming and
    climate change processes, and answers to these questions.
    Acknowledgements: Partially supported by a NASA APRA grant.

    In short they have no idea how all of this should be used in modeling the weather in what is actually happening is that they refuse to take into account the suns influence on weather to reach their perpetually flawed modeling because? Read the bottom line….FUNED BY NASA APRA GRANT.

    If he wants to be paid……start with a premise were all gonna die and then prove it. this is why AGW is dying in the world.

    • Bill Bear says:

      “were all gonna burn up because of UV rays being trapped by increasing CO2”

      That’s not what Nahar’s paper said.

      Since you cannot get even the most basic facts of climate science correct, why should your commentary be granted any credibility whatsoever?

      • StillAlive says:

        Another moron in the climate science bandwagon hooping and hollering.

        From another scientist on solar irradiance.

        Current atmospheric models lack accurate parameters for atomic and molecular processes

        Some very challenging questions concerning total solar irradiance variations and climate have been raised: are total solar irradiance variations from cycle to cycle well represented by sunspot and facular changes? Does total solar irradiance variations always parallel the solar activity cycle? Is there a long-term variation of the total solar irradiance, and closely related to this, is the total solar irradiance output of the quiet sun constant?

        A little disconcerting and then the good doctor speaks these words.

        If there is not a long-term trend of total solar irradiance variations, then we need amplifying mechanisms of total solar irradiance to account for the good correlations found between total solar irradiance and climate. The latter because the observed total solar irradiance changes are inconsequential when introduced in present climate models.

        Notice we have no long term trends therefore we need to MAKE SHIT UP to make our models work: then we need amplifying mechanisms of total solar irradiance to account for the good correlations

        Solar irradiance changes are INCONSEQUENTIAL. Yet the lead sentence of his abstract is: The solar radiation is the fundamental source of energy that drives the Earth’s climate and sustains life.

        Another paper.

        I dont know why I bother other than to show this information to other people who are not Jihadi’s for Climate change.

        Abstract. Regular monitoring of solar irradiance has been carried out
        since 1978 to show that solar total and spectral irradiance varies at different
        time scales. Whereas variations on time scales of minutes to hours are due
        to solar oscillations and granulation, variations on longer time scales are
        driven by the evolution of the solar surface magnetic field. Here the most
        recent advances in modelling of solar irradiance variations on time scales
        longer than a day are briefly reviewed

        To wit:

        However, global climate changes typically
        occur on time scales longer than the length of the available irradiance record. This
        calls for a reconstruction of irradiance variations back to the pre-satellite period over
        as long a period as possible, which is only possible with the help of suitable models.
        Such models should include as much of our understanding of the physical mechanisms
        responsible for irradiance variations as possible and, to be successful, they must reproduce all available observations. Therefore, in the first part of this review (section 2) we
        concentrate on irradiance models aimed at recreating the measured variations in total
        (TSI) and spectral (SSI) solar irradiance. Then, in section 3, reconstructions of solar
        irradiance for earlier times are discussed.

        What is he saying. They RECREATE models based upon what they THINK it is and not upon what it actually IS. This is why all their modeling is always so far off. Because GARBAGE IN EQUALS GARBAGE OUT.

        I substantiate my views. some people just like to use Saul Alinsky methods to simply Isolate the person and defame him and cast doubt on his credibility. I get it. AGW is dying. Along with it the gravey train and the money wagon.

    • Bill Bear says:

      “they refuse to take into account the suns influence on weather”

      Well, that is a truly ridiculous thing to say about a paper entitled “Solar Irradiance of the Earth’s Atmosphere”.

      One is forced to question whether the author of that comment understands the meaning of the word “solar”.

      • StillAlive says:

        To simplify for you. Climate models are not accurate because they do not understand nor do they have long term records of just how much solar irradiance affects the warming of the planet. They say so repeatedly in many, many papers by AGW die hards. Its not me making this stuff up. It is them. So the improvise. They hypothesize and then refuse to release their work and end up with garbage models that are never correct.

        TL:DR YES Climate modeling does not seriously take into account solar irradiance because they simply do not understand all its nuances so they GUESS when modeling.

  5. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    A commenter typed: UV rays being trapped by increasing CO2

    Actually, it’s IR radiation not UV. IR has much longer wavelength profile than UV. Visible light from the Sun is absorbed by the Earth and re-emitted at a longer wavelength (IR). Some wavelengths of the re-emitted IR (aka heat) are absorbed by CO2, blocking the loss to space.

    And then typed this: In short they have no idea how all of this should be used in modeling the weather in what is actually happening is that they refuse to take into account the suns influence on weather to reach their perpetually flawed modeling

    Climate scientists DO take into account the Sun’s influence on climate. It would be scientific “malpractice” if they did not. Their expert conclusion is that changes in the Sun are not driving the current period of rapid warming, nor is there reason to believe we’re on the verge of the next glacial period. You disagree with that. And just because scientists don’t know everything doesn’t mean they know nothing. That’s how science works.

    • formwiz says:

      Hah!

      Harvey talks about scientific “malpractice” when he doesn’t even understand how science works.

      Does they do all this because they’ve reached a “consensus”?

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Hah!

        H&R takes time out from his busy day filling out tax forms to say… nothing.

        Absolutely nothing.

        Why do you bother? It’s just “not worth it”!

        • david7134 says:

          People promoting an obvious hoax would comment malpractice. That is rich. I doubt that these so called scientist have any kind of moral compass.

          Jeff,
          Did you do the greenhouse experiment.? I didn’t think so, that would have shown that CO2 influence is zero.

          • Bill Bear says:

            david7134:

            “CO2 influence is zero.”

            This is, of course, false. Empirical evidence and laboratory measurement of the ability of CO2 to block infrared radiation both confirm that it is a major contributor to the greenhouse effect.

          • david7134 says:

            No, that is not true, do the experiment Jeff and bring the results. Also, we are going to die in 12 years so why worry with it. Your only solution is global communism and killer taxes.

        • formwiz says:

          And as the sun sinks slowly in the East (another “consensus” of climate “scientists”), we say a fast farewell to a rabbit with no charm whatsoever.

          And the only thing “not worth it” is Griselda.

  6. Kye says:

    I was just reading some predictions by all the “experts” at the first Earth Day in 1970. Not one single prediction came to pass. Not one. It’s amazing how the left latches on to such nonsense as AGW and communism. Ever notice it’s the same people too? Seems the idiots who buy into AGW also fall for communism. Weak minds, low moral character and poor self control.

    • Professor Hale says:

      The root of all Communism is the same. Young college kids from nice families are dissatisfied that they are not aristocrats and in the European system of hereditary office, they have no chance of ever becoming the king. So they rebel against the system that they feel is holding them back. Americans do it because they similarly think it is the easy path to unearned wealth. All those wealthy people have to be forced to give up their money so other people can have it. Free college because their useless degrees have zero ROI but they spend a fortune in easy loans to get them. Now they want someone else to pay them off so they can keep their wages instead of paying back loans. It’s always about becoming the King, even in a system that doesn’t have kings. In communist countries, the communists do quite well for themselves.

      • david7134 says:

        PH,
        Good summation, totally agree. Might add that the kids like socialism as they have no vision of the future and are under the impression that the government will save them, like a parent. Most that I have seen seem to be as dumb and naive as occasional cortex. The question is why people like desire communism. From what I have seen jeff can work the system and has taken much of our money for his education and corporation in the form of government grants, so he likes big government. Jeff also thinks that being a big liberal means he is sophisticated and smart, obviously the opposite is true.

  7. Jl says:

    Only way many liberals can win an argument is by not having it. Hence, “everything I don’t like must be racist”.

    • Bill Bear says:

      …said no liberal ever.

      • Jl says:

        Actually, it’s common practice among libs. Turn on any news cast, any day, and one will be subjected to convenient claims of racism. Hence, idiotic thing like “the climate is racist”.

        • Bill Bear says:

          Then you will have no problem providing documented examples of liberals saying, quote: “everything I don’t like must be racist”.

          That was your exact claim. I am holding you to it.

          Cite five documented examples of liberals uttering or writing that exact phrase.

          Go.

          • david7134 says:

            I love it when a liberal starts saying, show me a n example, or give me five exact quotes and then demands, funny as hell. No jl is correct. The news is very biased to liberal positions and has become completely unreliable. Mr. liberal, you show us that the news is fair, can’t do it.

          • formwiz says:

            Stupidity is forgivable, but idiocy outside an asylum requires effort.

            Yogi sets up a straw man nobody falls for.

      • formwiz says:

        He never said they did, Smokey.

        Learn to read someday.

  8. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    I looked over the paper. Biggest bunch of bull I have seen. Actually poor are far bigger polluters than their wealthy counterpart. Most poor I have seen are hughly obese. Despite their being poor, which is rare in the US they consume a significant amount. Many are smokers, more so than wealthy. Their cars are major polluters. In short the paper is worthless.

  9. Bill Bear says:

    “No jl is correct.”

    Then it will be easy for jl to supply examples, won’t it?

    “Actually poor are far bigger polluters than their wealthy counterpart.”

    Yet no hard data is presented to back up this claim. No surprise there.

    • david7134 says:

      I have noticed that liberals require a web site or news article to tell them how to think. They don’t seem capable of accumulating information, observing and drawing conclusions. No one is going to do your home work, but that does not mean the assertions are not true,only that you are not worth the trouble. Jl,s observations are in line with the majority here, if you don’t like that, go away.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “I have noticed that liberals require a web site or news article to tell them how to think.”

        False.

        I have not asked anyone to tell me how to think.

        I have challenged jl to back up his claims with facts.

        I wonder why david7134 is so opposed to any discussion of facts.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “only that you are not worth the trouble”

        I have noticed that when conservatives are unable to back up their claims with facts, their immediate fallback position is to denigrate anyone who asks for those facts.

        They don’t seem capable of discussing facts, and are actually quite dismissive of the etire concept of fact-based discussion.

        Strange.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “Jl,s observations are in line with the majority here”

        Apparently, on the planet that david7134 comes from, facts are decided by majority vote — rather than by studying the facts themselves.

        Interesting.

    • formwiz says:

      No, Honey Boo Boo, you provide the quote where he said Lefties say that.

  10. Bill Bear says:

    david7134:

    “I love it when a liberal starts saying, show me a n example”

    Interesting.

    Do you make it a habit to accept what others say without any factual evidence whatsoever?

  11. Bill Bear says:

    david27134:

    “No, that is not true”

    False. CO2 is known to block infrared radiation.

    This is why climate deniers are called “deniers” — because they deny what is known to be factual.

    • david7134 says:

      Jeff,
      Do the experiment. Otherwise you are keeping the hoax alive.

      • Bill Bear says:

        david7134:

        The absorption spectrum of CO2 is well known. It peaks in several portions of the infrared spectrum.

        https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C124389&Type=IR-SPEC&Index=1#IR-SPEC

        You are welcome to continue spreading falsehoods about science. It marks you as being unable to conduct an honest, fact based discussion, and therefore your arguments are of no merit whatsoever.

        • formwiz says:

          Well, we all know how much we can trust government data.

          Howsomever, several problems exist in this particular dataset, mostly stemming from the fact CO2 is only 1/25 of 1% of the atmosphere.

          More to the point CO2 is a heavy gas which does not remain in the atmosphere. Specific gravity forces it back to earth where that crazy thing called photosynthesis (damn, and I never thought that 4th grade science assignment would ever do me any good) happens.

          Stick that up your falsehood.

          Also, even a Lefty rag like The Hill can’t ignore so called greenhouse gases simply do not absorb enough heat to warm the earth

          • Bill Bear says:

            “CO2 is only 1/25 of 1% of the atmosphere”

            Oops.

            The scientific data on the absorption spectrum of CO2 does not support the false statemets made by david7134.

            So, the answer is: change the subject. Several times.

            That’s called the “Gish gallop”.

            Dismissed. You are incapable of staying on topic.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            A commenter typed: More to the point CO2 is a heavy gas which does not remain in the atmosphere.

            So there’s no CO2 in the atmosphere?? We haven’t heard the theory that CO2 exists in a layer around our ankles in years!!

            The NOAA Mauna Loa Observatory is at 11,155 ft. CO2 measured there is over 400ppm.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            CO2 does not exist pooled around our ankles.

            A commenter typed: Specific gravity forces it back to earth

            “It” being CO2. Specific gravity doesn’t mean what you think it means.

            Specific gravity – The density of a liquid or solid compared to water. For example human urine, with its dissolved solids in water, has a specific gravity of 1.003 to 1.030

            A commenter typed: greenhouse gases simply do not absorb enough heat to warm the earth

            Peter Ward wrote an opinion piece that the conservative The Hill published, and here’s a rebuttal of Ward’s ideas:

            https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-is-a-climate-change-skeptic-headlining-science-conferences

            Ward’s idea that “volcanoes are releasing Cl and Br causing ozone depletion allowing “warming” UV light in” is not supported by evidence.

            Without greenhouse gases the Earth would be covered in ice from pole to pole.

        • david7134 says:

          Jeff,
          Do the experiment. Stop spreading a hoax.

    • formwiz says:

      IOW CO2 makes Earth much cooler than the Moon because it blocks the Sun’s IR, as another “scientist” put it.

    • Kye says:

      We’re called “deniers” because we deny the political propaganda. You’re called “stooges” because you don’t.

      • StillAlive says:

        AGW is a gravey train and a fear mongering scam by the globalist cabal to extract economic chaos on the planet in an attempt to have a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. Any guess as to who runs that government or what method of government it adheres too?

        Unelected bureacrats and billionaires pulling the strings. The more open the borders the more money the rich make.

        I refuse to yield my freedoms to people like Jethro, bear, Elchappo or whatever name he is using.
        I refuse to let the greatest country on earth become a cesspool of communist propaganda disguised as democratic ideals for the utopia of mankind.

        • Bill Bear says:

          ‘StillAlive’ has just made a very important clarification. His views are based not on facts, but on fear and extremist ideology.

          • formwiz says:

            Well, if we read the history of the 20th century, his views are very factual.

            Yours are based on fear and extremist ideology.

          • StillAlive says:

            Ever notice how certain people have started to disappear? Not vagrants or runaways, the usual missing persons. But fairly prominent, well-educated people with dissenting political opinions. One day you’re watching or reading them online. The next time you check, they’re gone. You can’t find their videos. They’re not showing up in your Facebook feed. Suddenly you can’t buy their books on Amazon.
            You Google them to find out what happened and discover they’ve been banned. They’re being called dangerous extremists, bigots and Nazis. For the public good, they’ve been shut down. Disappeared.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            A commenter typed: Ever notice how certain people have started to disappear? Not vagrants or runaways, the usual missing persons. But fairly prominent, well-educated people with dissenting political opinions.

            Do you have an example or two? Are you intimating that the “someone” (e.g., Deep State, Big Climate, Al Gore) is disappearing them?

            Sounds like Deep Paranoia.

      • Bill Bear says:

        False.

        You are called deniers because you deny the facts.

        • formwiz says:

          No, true.

          Actually, you’re called trolls because you live in darkness and hate is all you have. Calling you stooges would elevate you to the level of the Howard brothers and Larry Fine.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            He typed: you’re called trolls because you live in darkness and hate is all you have

            Actually, you and yours are doing the name calling. We’re explaining systems and sharing facts. All YOU have is hate. And ignorance.

            And ignorance. “Specific gravity is causing CO2 to fall to the Earth where it does photosynthesis”

        • Mangoldielocks says:

          @Bill Bear I have been gone for a while now and I can see Jethro has changed his name yet again to try and distance himself from revealing his true name. Your a liberal. A loooney left who has nothing to fear. It is the left who are authoritarians. Demanding all conservatives voices be banned from youtube, twitter, Instagram and facebook.

          You are a scourge. Your very appearance on this website is meant to be divisive as if you actually believe you will change anyones mind.

          There are literally 10’s of thousands of AGW deniers who have degrees in all kinds of science including Climate Science. We are of course all delusional and our VOICES our FREEDOM of SPEECH should be SHUT DOWN because YOU DONT FUKING LIKE IT.

          YOU are the problem with this world. Not deniers. YOU who would silence those you disagree with are the ones who will one day wake up and be really pissed that you have burned your own home to the ground and they, the people you pretend to be a part of are coming for YOU NEXT.

          You are the problem. Not deniers. AGW is a scam. It is fear mongering taken to the next level. YOU are the problem. Not deniers.

          • Bill Bear says:

            “It is the left who are authoritarians. Demanding all conservatives voices be banned from youtube, twitter, Instagram and facebook.”

            Who, specifically and by name, has demanded that all conservative voices be banned from the online services named?

          • MrDeLaGarzenzo says:

            I have monitored these conversations from afar and would like to weight in.

            There is indeed a concerted effort by the left to silence conservative voices on the social platforms.

            Joe Rogan with Tim Pool did a pod cast in which they had the CEO and COO from Twitter on live. In the interview Tim Pool who is a center left and SJW reporter asked many poignant questions including Why are the proud boys banned from twitter but Antifa is not. The answer was simply the proud boys are an organization which can be clearly identified while Antifa is not.

            YouTube has seriously been challenged to Ban Ben Shapiro for his conservative views in which he never goes after anyone viciously but rather with facts which he learned as a lawyer. YouTube is considering banning him for no reason other than immense pressure from many leftist groups.

            Phil Jones has been banned. Milo was banned for his conservative views despite being a Gay.

            Popular British anti-Islamization activist Tommy Robinson had his Twitter account suspended last week after he tweeted that Islam promotes killing.

            A German activist received a 6-month suspended jail sentence for calling Islam a fascist ideology. [ Source: CBN News (Read More…) ]

            Young Cons: This very popular conservative news site had millions of daily readers during the recent election, and the site received nearly all its traffic from Facebook (Lesson: Never put all your marketing eggs in one basket). Facebook has been increasingly censoring Young Cons stories since 2016; now the site struggles mightily and regularly switches domains in order to maintain traffic.

            SaraPalin.com: At one point the former GOP VP nominee and Alaska governor’s website was serving up stories to her four million Facebook followers, but she, too, had to begin switching domains in order to maintain traffic.

            Right Wing News: This site grew to massive proportions over the past few years, in large part thanks to its meteoric popularity on Facebook. During one week in 2015, the site’s Facebook page reached 133 million people. The site was driving about the same amount of web traffic as some of the biggest newspapers in the U.S. But since 2016 Facebook began blocking traffic to the site; its owner, John Hawkins, announced he would shut it down in January (it’s still online but the content is not regularly updated).

            Independent Journal Review: This, too, was a large conservative news and information source, but because it was overly reliant on Facebook traffic, the site had to terminate a number of its employees last week, leaving the fate of the Millennial-focused site in doubt.

            The National Sentinel, was getting decent traffic from our Facebook page from our more than 27,000 followers, but that has largely dried up thanks to the true Fascists at Facebook. But our business model doesn’t rely significantly on Facebook, so there’s that (here’s how you can support us — for free!).

            Now let us not forget that Paypal has banned 1000’s of right wing organizations and individuals from using their platform.

            Wells Fargo bank has told the proud boys they cannot bank with their company anymore.

            PayPal banned Jihad Watch and the American Freedom Defense Initiative from receiving online donations using their platform because of the site’s “activities” after being designated as “hate sites” by left-wing groups. this after a Soros funded group attacked them and threatened Paypal.

            The assault on Jihad Watch began on Friday when Spencer received an email that he described as a “threatening” from ProPublica journalist Lauren Kirchner.

            The email informed Spencer that she was including his site among a list of hate sites identified as such by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) – both widely considered to be left-leaning organizations.

            RE: Notice of PayPal Account Limitation

            Dear Robert Spencer,

            We have recently reviewed your usage of PayPal’s services, as reflected in
            our records and on your website https://www.jihadwatch.org. Due to the
            nature of your activities, we have chosen to discontinue service to you in
            accordance with PayPal’s User Agreement. As a result, we have placed a
            permanent limitation on your account.

            This is not an isolated incident on the internet.

            PayPal notified Pamela Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) on Monday that it was banning her site from its platform in a nearly identical email like the one received by Jihad Watch.
            Soros-linked Leftist groups double down on effort to force conservatives off dominant social media platforms under guise of ending “hate speech”

            Who defines hate speech? In many cases conservative sites advocating for border walls is now considered hate speech against immigrants.

            Facebook Announces they Are Now Banning ALL Talk of Firearms, Ammo, or Gun Parts Trading

            Facebook is purging accounts that carry pro-second amendment and pro-liberty information in a censorship purge that has accelerated over the past few hours, with innumerable pages being disappeared merely for posting legitimate political content.

            Twitter Bans Second Amendment Advocate, Permits Death Threats
            The platform has allowed countless users to threaten her.

            The most disconcerting aspect of this ban is that those who threatened her with death and violence are still using twitter while a young woman was advocating for the Second Amendment.

            The list is legion of thousands of bans of conservatives yet those who advocate violence against conservatives for their beliefs are left totally alone.

            It is clearly known that during the Obama administration the IRS was targeting conservative groups applying for tax free status and their percentage of audits was double those of others applying for non profit status.

            Twitter CEO admits the company as a left leaning bias. I will not comment farther only list the assault on first amendment rights by Silicon valley who has become the new champion of the left. Those people who once despised giant corporations now use those corporations to curtail free speech around not only the United States but the world as well.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            It’s called the free market. It’s simple – businesses (platforms) can’t publish hate and lies and stay in business – there is often a public outcry and advertisers pull out. Pirro and Carlson are finding this out at FOX.

            There is clearly no shortage of right-wing sites on the interwebs – Daily Stormer, Jihad Watch etc – it just platforms are under no obligation to let them advertise on their sites.

  12. Kye says:

    You know the facts, Bill Bear? Are you one of those 97% of scientists? In what field of science is your degree? I bet you believed in the Alar scare (if you are old enough), the acid rain claim, the coming ice age, the “population bomb”,global warming, AGW and now man made climate change. You are college educated, agnostic or atheist, a radical leftist, agree with socialism/communism and hate The Orange Man.

    Listen carefully Bill: there is no proof of detrimental man made climate change. We do not have the technical ability to determine how much or little man effects the climate and whether or not it is actually bad. The climate changes. It always has. Even before man and even before the Industrial Revolution and even before leftist began to use it as their go-to for eliminating both capitalism and freedom.

    If you can tell me what the exact perfect temperature should be then we can talk about how bad it is. And if you really cared about MMCC you would be marching to build 300 Nuclear power plants and eliminating private planes. You would also walk or bike everywhere. Until that occurs you are just another leftist propagandist like Elwood or Al Gore.

  13. Bill Bear says:

    Notice that Kye’s snide dismissal of AGW is based not on any facts, but on a series of entirely baseless attacks on my character.

    This is, of course, an entirely typical denialist tactic.

    • formwiz says:

      Kye challenges Teddy to tell us what her qualifications might be to spout the global nonsense and Teddy can’t answer it, but tries to change the subject by calling Kye’s challenge a series of entirely baseless attacks on my character which is what he tries to do to Kye.

      This is, of course, an entirely typical Commie tactic.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “which is what he tries to do to Kye.”

        formwiz is, of course, lying. I made no comments regarding Kye’s character.

    • Mangoldielocks says:

      Your very verbiage invites attacks as you yourself attack those you disagree with. Don’t pretend to be the victim when you come to a website whose entire membership composes of people who disagree with you politically and then pretend your offended by having your methodology and technique conflated with a personal attack.

      No one asked you to come here. No one wants to hear your point of view but EVERYONE HERE BUT YOU WOULD fight and die to protect your first amendment rights to post here and state your opinions no matter how distasteful they are to those of us here.

      That however is not your concern is it. You want to shut down dissent. You call us names for not believing what you believe. You live in an authoritarian Utopia in which the only desire of your support group is to totally shut down dissent and freedom of speech. You are the danger to this country. Not us.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “You want to shut down dissent.”

        False. At no point have I suggested that anyone who disagrees with the facts of AGW should be silenced.

        On the contrary – denialists have the same right to free speech as anyone else. It is, in fact, essential that they speak up, because once we know that someone is a denialist, it is apparent that their claims can simply be disregarded.

        Mangoldielocks is lying about my expressed views. This is, of course, an entirely typical denialist tactic.

        • formwiz says:

          Smokey wants all whites, especially Conservative heterosexual males, gone. He wants them under the heel of the Brown Wave and subservient to the NGD.

          That means silenced.

          denialists have the same right to free speech as anyone else. It is, in fact, essential that they speak up, because once we know that someone is a denialist, it is apparent that their claims can simply be disregarded.

          Prosecution rests.

  14. formwiz says:

    A commenter typed: More to the point CO2 is a heavy gas which does not remain in the atmosphere.

    So there’s no CO2 in the atmosphere?? We haven’t heard the theory that CO2 exists in a layer around our ankles in years!!

    The NOAA Mauna Loa Observatory is at 11,155 ft. CO2 measured there is over 400ppm.

    Honey Boo Boo uses his scant knowledge of science to prove his scant knowledge of science.

    If CO2 is a quarter of 1 percent, yes, it does exist in the atmosphere, but the point is any given molecule does not last there very long. It is replaced by other molecules wwhich animals exhale.

    Don’t try to think for yourself, Zerelda, especially on science. You only embarrass yourself.

    Just confine yourself to type what your trollmasters tell you.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Commenter typed: If CO2 is a quarter of 1 percent, yes, it does exist in the atmosphere, but the point is any given molecule does not last there very long. It is replaced by other molecules which animals exhale.

      Atmospheric CO2 has been increasing steadily* over the decades, going from 280ppm to over 400ppm now. This is a fact.

      Of course, whether any particular CO2 molecule lasts very long in the atmosphere is not relevant, as it’s the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere that relates to warming.

      This increase is superimposed on the carbon cycle where much of the CO2 is absorbed by the oceans (lowering pH) and green plants (CO2 is the substrate for green plants using the visible light from the Sun to synthesize complex carbohydrates). The increased CO2 has been shown to be from burning fossil fuels, i.e., gas, coal, oil where the carbon has been locked away for 100s of millions of years. When the complex organic chemicals in fossil fuels are burned (oxidized) they enter the atmosphere as CO2. For example, burning a gallon of gasoline generates some 20 lbs of CO2!

      Interestingly, CO2 levels have an annual cycle that correlates with the explosion of green plant biomass every spring in the northern hemisphere, and dormancy in winter.

      • david7134 says:

        Jeff,
        You keep saying that you would do anything to prove your religion. So, have you done the experiment that I suggested? No, as you know that you are perpetuating a hoax. CO2 is a trace gas of absolutely no importance, most of CO2 in the atmosphere comes from nature, tax are not going to lower CO2 or change the climate or weather or whatever you want changed. And we would rather die than have world communism, which is at the heart of your religion.

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          Commenter said: You keep saying that you would do anything to prove your religion.

          Never said that. The scientific basis of global warming is not a religion at all! Do you remember the back and forth about projection? Deniers calling global warming a religion is projection. Anyway, scientific theories are never proven. We do not believe in magic, miracles, gods, demons, angels, clairvoyance, poltergeists, afterlife, heaven or hell. But I could be wrong. Could you?

          What is it you want “proved” by an experiment? That infrared radiation interacts with CO2? It’s been done. Svante Arrhenius conducted this over a century ago and predicted that the Earth would warm if we kept adding CO2 to the atmosphere. Is there some part of IR radiation and CO2 that you don’t understand? The experiment has been replicated many times. Google electromagnetic spectrum of CO2.

          We do not support communism, but support capitalism, regulated to benefit the greatest number, not just the wealthy. It’s a long way from communism.

          When was the last time you made a cogent argument here?

          Here’s a challenge to you! Can you tell us what the temperature of Earth would be with none of those pesky trace greenhouse gases?

          • david7134 says:

            Jeff,
            Based on your comments over the years, you have convinced us that their is a real climate religion. Do the experiment that I suggested and we will see what happens. You can even add additional IR with a lamp. In fact add all the IR you desire.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            Or you can choose to believe the truth and discuss the scientific basis of global warming.

          • formwiz says:

            The scientific basis of global warming is not a religion at all!

            Really? You have the complete and total faith of a fanatic in a cause whose data has been proven to be false and yet you persist in your lies. That’s what you accuse people of religion of being.

            Actually, the religion is Communism and the climate is one of its many scams and come-ons.

            We do not support communism, but support capitalism, regulated to benefit the greatest number, not just the wealthy. It’s a long way from communism.

            Sure, that’s why you want it to be just like socialism. Same old lie.

            When was the last time you made a cogent argument here?

            Just now. You’re the one who can’t express herself cogently.

            Can you tell us what the temperature of Earth would be with none of those pesky trace greenhouse gases?

            Ad you just exposed yourself. Trace gases could not harm the planet the way you contend. Only nitrogen or oxygen could do that.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            -18 C is what the average temp of the Earth would be without greenhouse gases.

  15. Grace says:

    Enough with this news already! It`s getting tragic, not funny!

  16. Kye says:

    First of all, I was not attacking your character I was questioning your credentials. If you consider pointing out all the previous so-called environmental “crises” as personal attack then you have self identified as a “True Believer” as Eric Hoffer would categorize you. That, Bill is Theology, not science and I already have a religion.

    If you, like myself are not a degreed climatologist then your opinion is just that, an opinion. If the “experts” cannot create a standard by which to test their “man made climate theory” which can be duplicated not “models” that can be manipulated they have no scientific credibility. Similarly, if the “man made climate change” movement continues to present itself as a political campaign for the elimination of all practical sources of energy and continues to ignore the most productive, powerful and cleanest form of electric generation, Nuclear power, it also loses all credibility.

    • Bill Bear says:

      Kye wrote: “I was not attacking your character”

      False.

      Quote: “You are college educated, agnostic or atheist, a radical leftist, agree with socialism/communism and hate The Orange Man.”

      Quote: “you are just another leftist propagandist”

      Those are direct attacks on my character — especially coming from a far right extremist like Kye.

      Kye has chosen to be dishonest about what he himself has said. That is also an entirely typical denialist tactic.

      • formwiz says:

        “You are college educated, agnostic or atheist, a radical leftist, agree with socialism/communism and hate The Orange Man.”

        “you are just another leftist propagandist”

        Statements of fact are not attacks on character, although you seem to think so, which says a ton about what you really think of yourself.

        Those are direct attacks on my character — especially coming from a far right extremist like Kye.

        That is also an entirely typical Commie tactic.

        Prosecution rests yet again (if you want somebody to attack your character, come at me)..

        • Bill Bear says:

          “Statements of fact”

          Kye made no statements of fact. He posted speculation as to who and what I am. His clear intent was to attack my character, since everything he listed are attributes that far right extremists despise.

          “That is also an entirely typical Commie tactic.”

          No. That is an accurate description of the ad hominem attacks that Kye made.

          • formwiz says:

            Sorry, Honey Boo Boo, he just recited all the little things you’ve let slip over the years.

            That is an accurate description of the ad hominem attacks that Kye made.

            No, it’s a description n of the ad hominem attacks who made.

            Wasn’t it you who just said, “That is an accurate description of the ad hominem attacks that Kye made.”?

  17. Kye says:

    When I hypothesized “You are college educated, agnostic or atheist, a radical leftist, agree with socialism/communism and hate The Orange Man.” I was basically interpolating my observations of what you write to what others who I observed believe. I wasn’t attempting to insult you, just describe you. If you find that description an insult the fault lies in yourself, not I.

    Similarly when I typed “you are just another leftist propagandist” I explained why I came to that opinion and rather than refute or deny that you are a leftist propagandist, an atheist, a socialist or communist and hate The Orange Man you chose to call me a liar “about what {I} said”.

    You then followed up with the “facts of AGW” which are slim to none, then labeled me a “denier” because I won’t prostrate myself before your false god. I DO NOT DENY THE CLIMATE CHANGES. I don’t believe your argument about how it changes and how much is man caused and you have yet to convince me and millions of others. BTW, you won’t convince people by calling them “deniers”, or liars or stupid, or any other insult frequently cast by you AGW folks.

    BTW, you are a radical leftist but I am not a “far right extremist”. Do you know why, Bill? Because your teem has moved so far left so fast that even half the Democrats are rightists to you. I’m a standard old fashion conservative. Nothing “far” or “extreme” about me unless you consider wanting a secure nation, a prosperous nation and a nation where our Freedoms are not at the whim of the latest leftist craze. To “New Democrat-Communist Party” member of which I can only assume you’re one everybody to the right of Stalin is an extreme right wing racist/homophobe/misogynist/etc, etc, etc. In your world like that of AOC, Omar and Elwood there are only Righteous Leftists and everyone else is disposable. That’s how all those concentration camps pop up in leftist countries.

    You guys are like The Borg. One mind! One state! Everything within the state!. Dissent will be demeaned and not tolerated.

    • david7134 says:

      Kye,
      Jeff is a pharmacist. That is a very easy curriculum though he does claim some graduate experience, again easy. His courses are basically remedial. He has a notch corporation that runs some level 2 drug analysis and maybe 3. But this is mostly getting a handful of doctors that analyse drug effects on patients he writes the papers for the doctors. All this adds greatly to the ultimate cost of drugs and is usually shady as the doctors chosen are under the control of Jeff and group. He claims double blind techniques, but that is a joke in real practice. It is our broken peer review system.
      You can get a sense of his talent as he takes material and twist it for his purposes, the end product being far different from the more honest conclusion. To me he is a nasty piece of work and only gets joy here by getting everyone upset.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Kye,

        He is a licensed practical nurse (LPN). We heard he won the East Baton Rouge Parish Golden Bedpan award 3 straight years – a record. Before that he was a physician, but we’ll leave it up to him to tell you why he had to stop. It was alleged he took payments from drug companies in exchange for favorable clinical trial results, which he never published in peer-reviewed journals. This explains his hostility to police, prosecutors, the AMA, the pharmaceutical industry and the peer review process.

        He is perpetually upset by facts and truths that conflict with his bitter world view, and lashes out.

        Note he never argues facts or evidence, preferring to defame and ridicule those with whom he disagrees.

  18. Bill Bear says:

    “I wasn’t attempting to insult you”

    Kye is, of course, lying about his intent.

    “you are a radical leftist”

    And Kye attacks my character again, thus proving my point.

    • formwiz says:

      No, he nailed it right on your head.

      You hate being exposed. You hate having your accusations turned against you.

  19. Bill Bear says:

    “To “New Democrat-Communist Party” member of which I can only assume you’re one”

    And Kye attacks my character again, thus proving my point.

    “In your world like that of AOC, Omar and Elwood there are only Righteous Leftists and everyone else is disposable.”

    And Kye attacks my character again, thus proving my point.

    • formwiz says:

      You applaud the Democrats and you support Occasional Cortex, so Kye is right.

      And calling somebody a Democrat is an attack on their character? So only the people who voted Trump are those of good character. Have to remember that.

      “In your world like that of AOC, Omar and Elwood there are only Righteous Leftists and everyone else is disposable.”

      And Kye attacks my character again, thus proving my point.

      No, you’ve gloated over white people being washed away in the Brown Wave far too often. It is an attack on what is in place of your character, but an entiirely justifiable one.

      • Bill Bear says:

        “And calling somebody a Democrat is an attack on their character?”

        It is, in the eyes of far right extremists like Kye and formwiz.

        “No, you’ve gloated over white people being washed away in the Brown Wave far too often.”

        And formwiz invents a viewpoint that I have never expressed… thus once again demonstrating the far right predilection for shunning fact-based discussion in favor of fantasy-based ad hominem drivel.

  20. Kye says:

    Okay Bill, I tried to explain my position and how you are coming across. Instead of denying you’re a Democrat, an AGW propagandist and a leftist you chose to call me a liar for pointing out I think you are and I’m impinging your character. I intimated that “I assume” those things because of the positions you take. Tell me I’m wrong and I won’t accuse you of them again. Tell me you’re a PhD in Climatology. Tell me you’re not some snot nosed privileged white leftist and I’ll believe you. I really will. You don’t realize it, do you? You are completely in the ether.

    P.S. When leftists are discovered and accused their programmed response id to call names. Well done, Bill right according to your little Red book.

    • Bill Bear says:

      Kye wrote:

      “you chose to call me a liar for pointing out I think you are”

      False.

      I stated that Kye was lying when he claimed he had not attacked my character. He has done so from the very start.

      Now that he has been called out on his ad hominem attacks, he is backpedaling. He pretends he was merely “hypothesizing”, merely “assuming”.

      He knows what his tactics are. He is upset because those tactics have been correctly described for what they are.

      “Well done, Bill right according to your little Red book.”

      And Kye attacks my character again, thus proving my point.

  21. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    I want to apologize to formwiz for busting his chops on “specific gravity” related to gases.

    In fact, one can relate the “specific gravity” of a particular gas to “air”, e.g., Carbon dioxide – CO2 is 1.5189 compared to air (1.00).

    My bad.

    That said, it doesn’t change the conclusion that gases in the atmosphere are mixed by convection so that denser gases do not settle out.

    • formwiz says:

      Actually, it does because the heavier gases sink to earth and, in this case, take part in photosynthesis.

  22. formwiz says:

    Or you can choose to believe the truth and discuss the scientific basis of global warming.

    OK, it’s a crock.

  23. StillAlive says:

    Of 105 comments 45 are from Jeffery. The very epitome of a troll.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      We counted none from “Jeffery”.

      We submitted 14, now 15 with this one.

      You have 13 (but clearly you typed more words than anyone).

      formwiz had 24.

      We understand you assume that any smart and reasonable comment has to come from us.

      What criteria do you use to define “troll”? Any number of comments over 13?

  24. StillAlive says:

    Twitter Bans Second Amendment Advocate, Permits Death Threats
    The platform has allowed countless users to threaten her.

    I’ve been following this as well. It’s amazing how the left is radically attempting to scrub the internet of conservative voices calling it hate crime to say it is our constitutional right to bear fire arms and yet in this particular case the people threatening her with death are still tweeting away.

    the proud boys were banned while Antifa uses these platforms to rally their minions to rallies where violence breaks out.

    In other news UC Berkley had a million dollars in damage done to its building by thugs on the left because Milo a conservative was going to speak there. Rallying cries on facebook and twitter were found and reported to twitter and facebook. NOT a single one of them were banned to anyones knowledge yet MILO is gone from all social platforms and not one urging of violence in any forms comes from his posts.

    Ann Coulter was invited to speak in Canada. When the authorities found out she was threatened with arrest if she dared show up. A socialist nation in which free speech does not exist. All across Europe the right is rising against the scourge of what they have given up to authoritarianism. They are now rioting and marching in the streets while George Soros funds fights to destroy any dissent of the globalist cabal.

    Evil. Communism and authoritarianism is evil in all its many forms. Jethro’s response to a myriad of proof is it is a free market and EVIL cannot be tolerated. Who defines evil when it comes to free speech? Why the left of course.

    Be afraid. Be very afraid.

    • david7134 says:

      Do you really think that social media has the impact of changing someone’s mind or conceiving people that the communist are any good? I question the value of social media. My wife writes, so she watches social media and the great majority who post clearly have their minds made up and are significantly into socialism, but they have no idea what it is or its impact on them. Most of the people are pseudo intelectuals. The person that got me into Trump was a nurse. So it is important to speak up especially with those that work as most liberals don’t seem to care for that activity.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Advertisers are not obligated to have their products and services linked to racist or sexist views that are no longer tolerated in normal society.

      Until twitter and The Facebook are made public utilities, they’re allowed to exhibit editorial control over the content. Newspapers aren’t obligated to publish every letter they receive. Bloggers don’t have to allow defamation, obscenities, outright lies, etc. Think of the liability associated with doxing someone and having a lunatic breaking into someone’s house or business based on that.

      Do you object to Facebook not allowing the DailyStormer? Antifa? KKK?

      Do you suggest that the government takeover twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, GAB, Pinterest etc?

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Should a platform such as Facebook be forced to allow posts from foreign spy agencies as happened around the 2016 election?

        • StillAlive says:

          A platform such as Facebook is not owned by the United states government. it is a world wide platform used by all 200 countries. Same with Twitter, YouTube and Instagram.

          Should Facebook allow Jihadi’s to recruit new terrorists? Should they allow death threats to people clinging to constitutional rights? Obviously you only want to curtail spy agencies when EVERY spy agency in the world is active on all social media platforms. YOU are a troll.

          Should Facebook data mine and sell your personal information to ALL buyers including foreign governments. Should the federal government be allowed to know you personal home address and what your name is Jeffery? Rest assured they do. They know who you are, where you live and what you did yesterday. Why? Because you are a massive troll who kicks off an algorithm. Changing you name does not change the alogritm nor does buying a VPN and trying to hide your IP address.

          Should every nation’s spy agency be allowed to do that to YOU? You think you advocate in anonymity but as a computer programmer I can assure you that I could easily trace your IP address even through an encrypted VPN if I was with the NSA or the FBI.

          AS FOR YOUR FAMOUS RUSSIAN COLLUSION….Nancy Pelosi just answered your question. HE IS NOT WORTH IT in answer to impeaching Trump. Meaning they know their is no collusion by Trump. Only leftist Resistance to Orange man bad.

          Secondly should the USA be allowed to curtail free speech even if it is hate speech? Then who defines hate speech. What constitutes hate speech. Is a twitter post that says….KILL ALL WHITE MEN and then KILL THEM AGAIN…..hate speech?

          What about all white men are human trash? Or all white men are racists.
          Well guess what according to Facebook WHITE MEN are NOW a protected group and as such people posting disparaging remarks aimed at white men are being banned from Facebook. Should that be allowed? Why can’t you post what you want?

          You are such a troll that the only reason I am responding to your post is that other people who read it will get a general idea of how important free speech is.

          The left is Furious now as their Infringing on the free speech of others with the generic tag of HATE SPEECH HAS NOW BACKFIRED ON THEM and SUDDENLY THEY….THEY…..THEY are the targets of FACEBOOKS RAGE.

          What goes around comes around. That is why all Americans no matter how much they hate each others political views should always be on the side of free speech. I can walk down the street and say all GAYS are FAGS and it is perfectly legal. If I say that on any social platform that is considered hate speech. Well now all White men are scum…….IS HATE SPEECH. How do you like those apples?

  25. StillAlive says:

    48 posts out of 113 from Jeffery/Elwood/BillBear and whatever other names he uses.

    The epitome of a troll.

Bad Behavior has blocked 7700 access attempts in the last 7 days.