• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

brainwashing 101

lizzie said:
Technically, you're right. The problem is that so few people these days have brains to wash. ;)

They pick up on little buzzwords and put 2 and 2 together, then decide that it must equal 5.
Click to expand...

Oh Please. That's just Ronulan talk.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I have learned one lesson in life, give women the last word so the last word on this is yours. And before you say it, yes I know what the little blue arrow means. :lol:
Click to expand...

The first problem with your logic is that I am not female.

The second problem with your logic is that you imply that there is something wrong with being female as you seem to want to use gender as an insult. This says far more about you and your outlook than it will ever say about your opponent.

The third problem with your logic is that it completely does not address the topic of the OP, in which you were shown to be completely wrong and that you did not understand the article that you posted or why the statement you had a problem with was completely within context.
 
Last edited:
sawyerloggingon said:
This is a perfect example of media bias in favor of global warming and is there for people to read and make up their own minds.
Click to expand...

No it's not.

Unfortunately libs have closed minds and I never expected the article to wake them from their stupor.
Click to expand...

Insults.

I expected exactly what I got, insults, defensiveness, distortion and an inability to see the truth.
Click to expand...

You got lots of substantive argument too, which you ignored.

You guys are nothing if not predictable.
Click to expand...

You are engaging in Freudian projection.
 
lizzie said:
Technically, you're right. The problem is that so few people these days have brains to wash. ;)

They pick up on little buzzwords and put 2 and 2 together, then decide that it must equal 5.
Click to expand...

Interesting way to say "yes, it's still brainwashing."

The problem with the "brainwashing" claim is that anyone can say it. I can just as easily accuse my opponent of it. Sawyerlogginin? Brainwashed! Those who don't believe in global warming? Brainwashed! It's a worthless non-argument.
 
This entire thread was a transparent attempt by a desperate, closed-minded, biased poster to find bias in others, and to claim his opponents are all closed-minded and biased, regardless of evidence to the contrary.

It's really ironic.
 
They inserted the word climate change once into an article because it was relevant to the owl decline. However, they never said man-made, or even overall average change, or global warming, or warming at all. BRAINWASHING!
 
Last edited:
MadLib said:
They inserted the word climate change once into an article because it was relevant to the owl decline. However, they never said man-made, or even overall average change, or global warming, or warming at all. BRAINWASHING!
Click to expand...

Climate change is as relevant to insert into the story about owl decline as Ron Paul is as relevant to insert into the story about the story about the owl decline. I can insert anything I want into the story, you know, even Ron Paul, see I did it twice in only 2 sentences and didn't even flinch.
 
Matt Foley said:
Climate change is as relevant to insert into the story about owl decline as Ron Paul is as relevant to insert into the story about the story about the owl decline. I can insert anything I want into the story, you know, even Ron Paul,l see I did it twice in only 2 paragraphs and didn't flinch.
Click to expand...

Ok, so when discussing an ecology, the ecological concept, such as climate change is as relevant as a nonecological concept such as a politician???
 
Matt Foley said:
Climate change is as relevant to insert into the story about owl decline as Ron Paul is as relevant to insert into the story about the story about the owl decline. I can insert anything I want into the story, you know, even Ron Paul, see I did it twice in only 2 sentences and didn't even flinch.
Click to expand...

The article explicit explained how climate change could potentially be responsible for decreasing snowy owl populations. What precisely makes it irrelevant?
 
StillBallin75 said:
The article explicit explained how climate change could potentially be responsible for decreasing snowy owl populations. What precisely makes it irrelevant?
Click to expand...

Climate Change, or lack thereof, is potentially responsible for Ron Paul's rise in the polls.
 
megaprogman said:
Ok, so when discussing an ecology, the ecological concept, such as climate change is as relevant as a nonecological concept such as a politician???
Click to expand...

Leaving Ron Paul out of the equation is like leaving Algore out of a disgusion on global warming, unthinkable.
 
Oh, I get it. You are trying to use the Chewbacca defense.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
First of all the term climate change in the media has become synonymous with man being the cause but I agree that climate change is naturally occurring event and we do seem to be in a nice warm era comparatively speaking.You have to admit though that ending the article with a dooms day attitude that warming is killing grasses that is destroying the snowy owls food source is like a formula approach that completely contradicts the rest of the article. It's way out of left field, literally. The formula is, end every article and nature show with climate change so as to keep pounding into peoples brains that the whole global warming theory is fact. I am with Jamesrage on this, I too have stopped watching nature shows because every one of them ends just like this article. Having said all this I hope I get too see one of these owls, they look awesome.
Click to expand...

You mistakenly think ti is one or the other when it fact both are true. Ideaology should not get in the way of actual science.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
This is from the middle of the story.



This is from the end of the story.



A perfect example of lib media inserting global warming into every nature article they write in an attempt to brainwash the masses. It's like the second line I quoted was just auto inserted at the end of the story with no regard whatsoever to the entire article.
Click to expand...

Those danged Libs! Is there no end to their perfidity? Oh the humanity!
 
LMAO

well heres the whole article here:
Snowy owls soar south from Arctic in rare mass migration | Reuters

Sorry but there is absolutely no brain washing in this article what so ever to anybody logical and objective.

Now with that being said, there are things out there that do TRY and brainwash people this simply is NOT one of them. If you think it is you are already brainwashed in the the opposite direction from which you falsely claim the article is LOL Theres no other logical conclusion to come to from you ability to so incorrectly twist what is actually being said.
 
MadLib said:
They inserted the word climate change once into an article because it was relevant to the owl decline. However, they never said man-made, or even overall average change, or global warming, or warming at all. BRAINWASHING!
Click to expand...

Did you even read the article? The owl is not in decline, there are record numbers of them.
 
For those that refuse to read the article.

"An especially plentiful supply of lemmings last season likely led to a population boom among owls that resulted in each breeding pair hatching as many as seven offspring. That compares to a typical clutch size of no more than two, Holt said."
 
sawyerloggingon said:
For those that refuse to read the article.

"An especially plentiful supply of lemmings last season likely led to a population boom among owls that resulted in each breeding pair hatching as many as seven offspring. That compares to a typical clutch size of no more than two, Holt said."
Click to expand...

we read the article, the difference is WE understand it. LMAO
Seems your vision is already bias, blinded and brainwashed.
there is ZERO brain washing in the article at all. I already posted the link and now Ill post the whole article.

Nobody objective reads the articular and comes to your false conclusion.

(Reuters) - Bird enthusiasts are reporting rising numbers of snowy owls from the Arctic winging into the lower 48 states this winter in a mass southern migration that a leading owl researcher called "unbelievable."

Thousands of the snow-white birds, which stand 2 feet tall with 5-foot wingspans, have been spotted from coast to coast, feeding in farmlands in Idaho, roosting on rooftops in Montana, gliding over golf courses in Missouri and soaring over shorelines in Massachusetts.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sawyerloggingon said:
Did you even read the article? The owl is not in decline, there are record numbers of them.
Click to expand...


the article does NOT say this the way you are TRYING and failing to imply. LMAO

at most the article says owl numbers and offspring are up CURRENTLY, they are having a CURRENT boom

not that owl numbers are up overall over what they used to be or have ever been LOL
 
Objective-J said:
the article does NOT say this the way you are TRYING and failing to imply. LMAO

at most the article says owl numbers and offspring are up CURRENTLY, they are having a CURRENT boom

not that owl numbers are up overall over what they used to be or have ever been LOL
Click to expand...


Reuters) - Bird enthusiasts are reporting rising numbers of snowy owls from the Arctic winging into the lower 48 states this winter in a mass southern migration that a leading owl researcher called "unbelievable."

That sure sounds like record numers of owls too me.



He said snowy owl populations are believed to be in an overall decline, possibly because a changing climate has lessened the abundance of vegetation like grasses that lemmings rely on.


The global warming line is the only line in the article that says the owl is in decline because of lack of vegetation that lemmings rely on but that follows this.

An especially plentiful supply of lemmings last season likely led to a population boom among owls that resulted in each breeding pair hatching as many as seven offspring. That compares to a typical clutch size of no more than two, Holt said.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Reuters) - Bird enthusiasts are reporting rising numbers of snowy owls from the Arctic winging into the lower 48 states this winter in a mass southern migration that a leading owl researcher called "unbelievable."

That sure sounds like record numers of owls too me.



He said snowy owl populations are believed to be in an overall decline, possibly because a changing climate has lessened the abundance of vegetation like grasses that lemmings rely on.


The global warming line is the only line in the article that says the owl is in decline because of lack of vegetation that lemmings rely on but that follows this.

An especially plentiful supply of lemmings last season likely led to a population boom among owls that resulted in each breeding pair hatching as many as seven offspring. That compares to a typical clutch size of no more than two, Holt said.
Click to expand...


thank you for proving my point and yourself wrong.

You are the brainwashed one and you are GUESSING lmao

"RISING numbers THIS winter" makes you think RECORD numbers as in ever??? LMAO

based on what?

and yes he said "numbers OVERALL (has in NOT one season/winter LMAO) are int decline because of limited number of lemmings". As in OVERALL and in the PAST and NOT as in A plentiful supply of lemmings LAST season (as in RECENT/ONE season)

like I said NOBODY objective gets from the article what you are clearly making up LOL

The disconect is with you
 
Apparently the snowy owl population is quite stable. :)


Conservation


This species has a large range, with an estimated global Extent of Occurrence of 1,000,000-10,000,000 km2. It has a large global population estimated to be 290,000 individuals (Rich et al. 2003). Global population trends have not been quantified, but populations appear to be stable so the species is not believed to approach the thresholds for the population decline criterion of the IUCN Red List (i.e. declining more than 30% in ten years or three generations). For these reasons, the species is evaluated as Least Concern.
Nyctea scandiaca is an irregular breeder in Greenland, Iceland, Fennoscandia and arctic Russia, with Europe accounting for less than a quarter of its global breeding
range. Its European breeding population is small (as few as 1,400 pairs), but fluctuated widely between 1970-1990. Although populations continued to fluctuate in most European countries during 1990-2000, the species remained broadly stable overall. Nevertheless, its population size still renders it susceptible to the risks affecting small populations.
This large owl has a circumpolar distribution in open tundra between 60 degrees N and 83 degrees N. Its populations fluctuate widely according to climatic conditions and prey density, which fluctuates periodically. The total European population amounts to between 16 and 244 breeding pair, the Russian population not included. During the winter it moves somewhat to the south, and some birds appear irregularly in Scotland where several breeding cases have been recorded since the 1970′s.
While there is little information available about long-term population shifts or trends, most Snowy Owl breeding areas in North America are remote from human disturbance. Of course increased access to Arctic areas allows more shooting of owls. Winter sightings are increasing in some areas of Washington, perhaps because of the development of large agricultural fields that attract rodents and waterfowl.

Snowy Owl (Nyctea scandiaca) » Planet of Birds
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Apparently the snowy owl population is quite stable. :)


Conservation


This species has a large range, with an estimated global Extent of Occurrence of 1,000,000-10,000,000 km2. It has a large global population estimated to be 290,000 individuals (Rich et al. 2003). Global population trends have not been quantified, but populations appear to be stable so the species is not believed to approach the thresholds for the population decline criterion of the IUCN Red List (i.e. declining more than 30% in ten years or three generations). For these reasons, the species is evaluated as Least Concern.
Nyctea scandiaca is an irregular breeder in Greenland, Iceland, Fennoscandia and arctic Russia, with Europe accounting for less than a quarter of its global breeding
range. Its European breeding population is small (as few as 1,400 pairs), but fluctuated widely between 1970-1990. Although populations continued to fluctuate in most European countries during 1990-2000, the species remained broadly stable overall. Nevertheless, its population size still renders it susceptible to the risks affecting small populations.
This large owl has a circumpolar distribution in open tundra between 60 degrees N and 83 degrees N. Its populations fluctuate widely according to climatic conditions and prey density, which fluctuates periodically. The total European population amounts to between 16 and 244 breeding pair, the Russian population not included. During the winter it moves somewhat to the south, and some birds appear irregularly in Scotland where several breeding cases have been recorded since the 1970′s.
While there is little information available about long-term population shifts or trends, most Snowy Owl breeding areas in North America are remote from human disturbance. Of course increased access to Arctic areas allows more shooting of owls. Winter sightings are increasing in some areas of Washington, perhaps because of the development of large agricultural fields that attract rodents and waterfowl.

Snowy Owl (Nyctea scandiaca) » Planet of Birds
Click to expand...


again I ask you for LOGICAL PROOF to your false claims that you made up in the OP?

how does a "stable" population (not declining more than 30% in 10 years) and your own article stating that "populations fluctuate widely according to climatic conditions and prey density, which fluctuates periodically."

do ANYTHING to support YOUR made up OP?

thats right they dont LMAO

thanks for AGAIN proving your OP to be false :shrug: :D
 
Objective-J said:
again I ask you for LOGICAL PROOF to your false claims that you made up in the OP?

how does a "stable" population (not declining more than 30% in 10 years) and your own article stating that "populations fluctuate widely according to climatic conditions and prey density, which fluctuates periodically."

do ANYTHING to support YOUR made up OP?

Here you say overall owl populations are declining. Your quote.


"and yes he said "numbers OVERALL (has in NOT one season/winter LMAO) are int decline because of limited number of lemmings". As in OVERALL and in the PAST and NOT as in A plentiful supply of lemmings LAST season (as in RECENT/ONE season"







You
thats right they dont LMAO

thanks for AGAIN proving your OP to be false :shrug: :D
Click to expand...


and yes he said "numbers OVERALL (has in NOT one season/winter LMAO) are int decline because of limited number of lemmings". As in OVERALL and in the PAST and NOT as in A plentiful supply of lemmings LAST season (as in RECENT/ONE season)

My link provides evidence to the contrary, apparently you were mistaken. Face facts, the owl population is stable so the inserted line in the article claiming they are in overall decline is false. Check and MATE. Get some sleep. you seme tense.:lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom