• 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!

Do you hold people's political views against them?

Do you hold people's political views against them?

  • Total voters
    74
Russell797 said:
Those countries are not about to renege on the Paris agreement. We are. The Republicans are who will be dismantling U.S. efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As the second leading polluter, the U.S. is very important to the global effort to reduce emissions. The Republicans are in control, they own it. The ball is in their court.
Click to expand...

LOL

Those countries aren't about to follow through with their agreements. Remember, the were initially excluded by the Kyoto Accords. What the rest of the countries are looking for is the billions of dollars they expected to extract from the US under this global economic justice scam.

Not to worry, the US will continue to invest in new forms of energy that will achieve the results you're praying for, they just may not line the coffers of countries like Equatorial New Guinea with taxpayers hard earned cash while doing it.
 
X Factor said:
Poll incoming.
Click to expand...

Any political opinion is fine, if it is not in gross contradiction of established theory and underpinned by persistent ignorance thereof.
 
ocean515 said:
LOL

Those countries aren't about to follow through with their agreements. Remember, the were initially excluded by the Kyoto Accords. What the rest of the countries are looking for is the billions of dollars they expected to extract from the US under this global economic justice scam.

Not to worry, the US will continue to invest in new forms of energy that will achieve the results you're praying for, they just may not line the coffers of countries like Equatorial New Guinea with taxpayers hard earned cash while doing it.
Click to expand...

Not if the Republicans have their way they won't. They seek to strip all subsidies, except for those still going to fossil fuel industries of course. In terms of mitigating global warming, we needed the technologies deployed decades ago....we didn't really have them yet. Now we do but it's getting to be to late. We can't wait another 30 years for clean energy to replace fossil fuels. We need to fast track it now, and not just in this country but everywhere. Of course you don't believe that's the case and therein lies the dispute. The science has spoken. If we don't we fail. That simple.
 
It depends on the view and how they justify it. Stupid people holding stupid, unjustifiable views absolutely get those held against them, and should.
 
Russell797 said:
Not if the Republicans have their way they won't. They seek to strip all subsidies, except for those still going to fossil fuel industries of course. In terms of mitigating global warming, we needed the technologies deployed decades ago....we didn't really have them yet. Now we do but it's getting to be to late. We can't wait another 30 years for clean energy to replace fossil fuels. We need to fast track it now, and not just in this country but everywhere. Of course you don't believe that's the case and therein lies the dispute. The science has spoken. If we don't we fail. That simple.
Click to expand...

Well, if it's too late, we might as well enjoy the time we have left. :2razz:

It's absurd to ignore the economic politics that IS climate change. It has little to do with cutting emissions, and everything to do with distributing wealth from the West to countries eager for the windfall. This is documented and admitted to.

I guess these other countries will have to find some other method to fill their treasuries.
 
ocean515 said:
Well, if it's too late, we might as well enjoy the time we have left. :2razz:

It's absurd to ignore the economic politics that IS climate change. It has little to do with cutting emissions, and everything to do with distributing wealth from the West to countries eager for the windfall. This is documented and admitted to.

I guess these other countries will have to find some other method to fill their treasuries.
Click to expand...

But wealth redistribution is what the political left does. Steal from the rich, pretend to give to the poor, keep a lot of it for themselves.
 
Not generally, no. I tthink you can have views that oppose mine and still be a good person.

However, if you're a dick about it, then yes.
 
X Factor said:
Poll incoming.
Click to expand...

I think this is a little more complicated than it looks in the current climate, where things that have been considered moral and not political issues for 100 years are suddenly back in the "political" camp.

I definitely judge people for some of the positively Victorian things that are coming back into vogue. You will never be able to convince me that people who want segregation back and to put into place government-funded torture of minors just have a "difference of politics." They have a difference of fundamental morality.

Just because we call it "political" doesn't mean it is. Political is economics, military, internal spending -- infrastructure, healthcare, what level of government gets to govern X? But the sorts of things above are not political, and I refuse to lend them more validity than they deserve by pretending otherwise.

It is very en vogue to prove that you're cool by being ok with anything and everything, as long as it's someone's opinion, moral compass be damned. Can't have someone thinking you're a square with actual convictions, who thinks protecting vulnerable questioning 13-year-olds is more important than getting brownie points from some stranger. Well, I have standards. Proud to be an un-cool, judgy asshole with a moral compass.
 
Last edited:
Do you hold people's political views against them?
Click to expand...

for the most part, nah, not unless it gets annoying.
 
It depends on the specific person who holds the political view and the view in question. If I have respect for someone and then I discover that they hold racist or sexist political views, I will lose some respect for them. I will be dissapointed in them. I can still see the qualities that I respected in them before, but my overall esteem for them is lesser because of that political view they hold.
 
I only judge people by the distance between the bottom of their cleftal horizon and the top of their left ear.
 
Regular people? Not those in power?

Never.

I believe I've done a pretty good job demonstrating that on this site.

Others? Eh...not so much.

Will be interesting going through this thread to see who's trying to blow smoke up people's ass, telling them their back's on fire...
 
Cephus said:
But wealth redistribution is what the political left does. Steal from the rich, pretend to give to the poor, keep a lot of it for themselves.
Click to expand...

A strong argument can be made that this is true.

It is most certainly true when it comes to this climate change deal. How many people have dug into the history of it? How many people know who Maurice Strong is, the father of Climate Change?

How many people have taken the time to dig into the U.N. records on the subject? How many have read through the records of meetings where the money that could be extracted under such a program was discussed? How many have read the very words of IPCC officials regarding the global economic justice agenda climate change was actually created to achieve?
 
ocean515 said:
A strong argument can be made that this is true.

It is most certainly true when it comes to this climate change deal. How many people have dug into the history of it? How many people know who Maurice Strong is, the father of Climate Change?

How many people have taken the time to dig into the U.N. records on the subject? How many have read through the records of meetings where the money that could be extracted under such a program was discussed? How many have read the very words of IPCC officials regarding the global economic justice agenda climate change was actually created to achieve?
Click to expand...

Nothing but a load of crap. As in bullsh*t artist. You guys rely on the public buying into your conspiracy theories. You can't win by contesting the science with science so you find other ways. To use a word in vogue these days....deplorable.
 
Russell797 said:
Nothing but a load of crap. As in bullsh*t artist. You guys rely on the public buying into your conspiracy theories. You can't win by contesting the science with science so you find other ways. To use a word in vogue these days....deplorable.
Click to expand...

Spare me the typical BS from the rabid alarmists.

Who is Maurice Strong? Any clue?

Care to summarize the integrated view of climate change as the final part of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5)?

Care to explain the failure of backcasting climate models the "science" has been paid to create?

It's wonderful to see the alarmists squirm and retch at the thought they might be pushed to the back of room. All they have left is insults.
 
ocean515 said:
Spare me the typical BS from the rabid alarmists.

Who is Maurice Strong? Any clue?

Care to summarize the integrated view of climate change as the final part of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5)?

Care to explain the failure of backcasting climate models the "science" has been paid to create?

It's wonderful to see the alarmists squirm and retch at the thought they might be pushed to the back of room. All they have left is insults.
Click to expand...

I'm just a single retired person who enjoyed a career in the Atmospheric Sciences. I come at this from the point of view of science. No, I have no idea who Maurice Strong is and I don't really care. All your talking points are irrelevant to me. We scientists know where this is going. You represent the enemy of humanity and progress. That's all that matters to me. If people can't see through your anti-science position then shame on them.
 
Russell797 said:
I'm just a single retired person who enjoyed a career in the Atmospheric Sciences. I come at this from the point of view of science. No, I have no idea who Maurice Strong is and I don't really care. All your talking points are irrelevant to me. We scientists know where this is going. You represent the enemy of humanity and progress. That's all that matters to me. If people can't see through your anti-science position then shame on them.
Click to expand...

BS to your anti-science meme. It means nothing to me.

Climate Science has rejected the Scientific Method. It attacks and seeks to destroy any dissenting scientific effort that seeks to address the many glaring faults in the theory. That is documented.

What is astonishing is to read the blather from BS artists pushing this agenda who further diminish their credentials by confirming they seem to have blinders permanently welded to their skulls.

Until the multi-billion windfall suddenly fell in the lap of "climate scientists", few other scientific disciplines were as obscure and unknown. Suddenly, "climate scientists" could reap millions on research, as long as they supported the consensus. Remarkable this documented fact is not acknowledged by these "scientific " minds. Why is that?

So you don't know who came up with the UN's effort, you can't address the failure of climate models to backcast without significant alteration and explanation, and you have no comment on the actions of the "climate science" consortium to crush any dissent, a major violation of the scientific method.

Run along and enjoy your retirement. A more reasoned and rational approach will hopefully be adopted, and the global social justice agenda that is the heart of the UN's IPCC effort will have to come up with some other way to scam people out of their money.
 
ocean515 said:
BS to your anti-science meme. It means nothing to me.

Climate Science has rejected the Scientific Method. It attacks and seeks to destroy any dissenting scientific effort that seeks to address the many glaring faults in the theory. That is documented.

What is astonishing is to read the blather from BS artists pushing this agenda who further diminish their credentials by confirming they seem to have blinders permanently welded to their skulls.

Until the multi-billion windfall suddenly fell in the lap of "climate scientists", few other scientific disciplines were as obscure and unknown. Suddenly, "climate scientists" could reap millions on research, as long as they supported the consensus. Remarkable this documented fact is not acknowledged by these "scientific " minds. Why is that?

So you don't know who came up with the UN's effort, you can't address the failure of climate models to backcast without significant alteration and explanation, and you have no comment on the actions of the "climate science" consortium to crush any dissent, a major violation of the scientific method.

Run along and enjoy your retirement. A more reasoned and rational approach will hopefully be adopted, and the global social justice agenda that is the heart of the UN's IPCC effort will have to come up with some other way to scam people out of their money.
Click to expand...

Of course science means nothing to you. That's my point. You have bigger fish to fry.

The remainder of your post is the stuff of conspiracy theorists. You are not the arbitrator of what is good in science. The peer-review literature is. You are all about politics rather than science. Your politics reject the science. You can't overturn the science by doing science, so you seek other means to meet your goal of stalling action and human progress. When the National Academy of Science agrees with you then you can talk. Until then it's all BS.
 
Russell797 said:
Of course science means nothing to you. That's my point. You have bigger fish to fry.

The remainder of your post is the stuff of conspiracy theorists. You are not the arbitrator of what is good in science. The peer-review literature is. You are all about politics rather than science. Your politics reject the science. You can't overturn the science by doing science, so you seek other means to meet your goal of stalling action and human progress. When the National Academy of Science agrees with you then you can talk. Until then it's all BS.
Click to expand...

Nice assumptions, born of ignorance, and belligerence.

I don't reject science, the pushers of climate change do.

It's the height of arrogance to expect that a group of "scientists", feed by billions of research dollars attached to strings, can demand mankind buckle to their decree, and turn over their way of life to a cabal of leaders they are not allowed to question.

Being blind to the effort, and uninterested in it's objective, proves how pathetic those pushing the "theory" truly are.
 
ocean515 said:
It's the height of arrogance to expect that a group of "scientists", feed by billions of research dollars attached to strings, can demand mankind buckle to their decree, and turn over their way of life to a cabal of leaders they are not allowed to question.
Click to expand...

You have a point. Being a climate change scientist is a far more lucrative career path than working in the fossil fuels industry.
 
Tucker Case said:
You have a point. Being a climate change scientist is a far more lucrative career path than working in the fossil fuels industry.
Click to expand...

Only if you're a climate change scientist who supports the "consensus". Question it, and your career is over. Long live the scientific method.....NOT.
 
ocean515 said:
Only if you're a climate change scientist who supports the "consensus". Question it, and your career is over. Long live the scientific method.....NOT.
Click to expand...

Meh, they can write a book about how climate change is a "hoax" and it'll be an instant best seller, even if they are in some field completely unrelated to climate.
 
X Factor said:
But is that holding their views against them or is that holding there jackassedness against them?
Click to expand...

I respect friends and family unconditionally who hold political views contrary to mine UNLESS they insist on being jackasses.

I resent those that get in my face or push their angrily expressed political views in every setting, no matter how inappropriate, whether Facebook or a message board or church or the workplace or just having a relaxing night out at the theater, etc. and/or who make it personal. So I suppose it would be splitting hairs whether this would be their political views or their jackassedness. I would resent that even if they were pushing views I agree with, but people who hold views I agree with rarely ever, if ever, do that.
 
Tucker Case said:
Meh, they can write a book about how climate change is a "hoax" and it'll be an instant best seller, even if they are in some field completely unrelated to climate.
Click to expand...

I guess that shows how pathetic the pushers of AGW are viewed. I imagine it would help if they focused a bit on credibility, rather than how much money they can extract from the gullible.
 
ocean515 said:
I guess that shows how pathetic the pushers of AGW are viewed. I imagine it would help if they focused a bit on credibility, rather than how much money they can extract from the gullible.
Click to expand...

No, that's the deniers who get the instant best sellers. The "pushers" have to go through the process of using peer-reviewed journals and such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom