Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    4:47 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: John Kerry really is nuts! Back to Topics
AFSNCO

Champion Author
Montgomery

Posts:19,937
Points:1,871,540
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2014 10:03:12 AM

To America’s top diplomat, global warming is “the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction” — worse than “terrorism, epidemics, poverty.”

But it gets better...

"Over his weekend in Asia, Mr. Kerry said the eruption of Indonesia’s Mount Kelud was a consequence of the planet’s looming fever. “Because of climate change,” he said, “it is no secret that today, Indonesia is also one of the most vulnerable countries on Earth.”

So a volcano erupting is a consequence of global warming? Hmm....got some facts to back that up? I think we have seen volcanoes erupting since as far back as we can look.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,470
Points:804,325
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 22, 2014 11:52:21 AM


It's interesting that some posters here who ridiculed and slapped at Kerry for the remarks he did not make are apparently among those who reject climate change science.

Maybe it's just coincidence, but look at how it was determined that "Kerry really is nuts!" The evidence (his speech) was completely ignored. Instead, a politically comforting, dishonest description of his statement was gulped whole and repeated while Kerry was mocked for things he didn't say.

I wonder if the behavior is a clue as to how the climate change evidence is itself dismissed and mocked by some of these folks.
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:16,223
Points:3,638,875
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 5:39:30 PM

I agree
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,470
Points:804,325
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 5:03:50 PM


"You know, scientists used to tell people the world was flat too..."

This is perfectly wrong. Scientists never said that. You've confused scientists with priests, witchdoctors and popes of pre-science days.

Read this.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:17,219
Points:568,325
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 1:58:35 PM

"We do understand them better and we understand climate better in 2014 than we did in 1890."

We are also finding out how much we don't know with regards to climate change (ie the various naturally occurring variables which influence it).

Like I said - people were told the Earth was flat for a long time because it was 'known'. Anybody who accepts something blindly shouldn't be surprised when they are blindsided down the road.

The entire purpose of science is to continuously challenge what is 'known'...
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 12:48:08 PM

teacher_tim: "Get that man a hockey stick, lol."

I don't know how many other reconstructions there are but as of the Fourth Assessment Report, there were 7 independently derived hockey sticks. All point the same way. There's also instrumental records that reach back to the mid-1700s. All pointing the same way.

There's a lot of real science that the ignoramuses have to tear down, but they can't or don't do the work and they resort to sneering, repeating errors, repeating lies and ad hominems. What a way to do business.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 12:45:04 PM

Weaslespit: "Ah yes, 'modern' science..."

What are you sneering at? Relativity is over 75 years old. It's still quite relevant. We detonated an atomic weapon in 1945. The principles are still good today. We do understand them better and we understand climate better in 2014 than we did in 1890. But the improved understanding reinforces the original concept; CO2 increase warms the planet. We just have a better idea of how much and what the side effects will be.

If you wish to wash this away as some giant conspiracy, you have to go wayyyy back and you have a lot to prove. You'd have to answer all the questions in my "rant" to describe how the conspiracy works.

Good luck with that.

You also have the option of using the data to prove... something else.

Good luck with that, too.

Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,638
Points:832,230
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 10:49:06 AM

Kerry isn't nuts; he just REALLY believes in GLOBAL WARMING!

Get that man a hockey stick, lol.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:17,219
Points:568,325
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2014 10:43:32 AM

"Who was footing the bills in the late 1800s?"

Ah yes, 'modern' science...

How ridiculous are we going to get here?

"At the moment, direct solar input is decreasing and bears no correlation to what we're seeing for temps.

Next?"

Yes - wait for the 'next' weather event like the rest of the alarmists and blame it on AGW...

"The fact is, we're shooting ourselves in the foot. And people who criticize the science or the motives of the scientists without being able to add to the science are posturing fools."

Funny, I was going to say the same thing about people who blindly believe that man has had any influence on climate change.

You know, scientists used to tell people the world was flat too...

"And I'd remind you, again, that the data is there."

You of all people should know that data can be interpreted into many different conclusions. You do it all the time to bag on the Volt (weird, since it is a green car and you don't want us to 'shoot ourselves in the foot).

"Spending 10 minutes looking stuff up in solid sources and actually learning something would be a much better use of you time than however much you you spend reading crap written by political hacks and cranks."

Which is precisely why your posts carries 'zero' weight with me... see your previous rant with regards to 'conspiracy theories'. It is funny that some zealots cannot separate AGW from GW.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 9:20:23 PM

Weaslespit: "It isn't the research that is biased, nor the facilities built. It is the conclusion made that is, unfortunately, since those who pay the bills for these facilities want it to be so."

And I'd remind you, again, that the data is there. If you don't like the conclusions, if you think they are biased, you're free to analyze the data yourself and find your own answers.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 9:09:19 PM

Weaslespit: "It is the conclusion made that is, unfortunately, since those who pay the bills for these facilities want it to be so."

Who was footing the bills in the late 1800s?

The fact is, that's a pefectly ridiculous comment you've made.

Those "who pay the bills" would be buying the silence of, at a minimum, thousands of people. And that silence would have to be kept. Shhh!! No talking! Either the pay for their silence is strangely poor (if Michael Mann was motivated by money, he has the stats and research chops to make a killing on Wall Street, as would any of his doctoral and postdoctoral assistants and fellows) or they have remarkably good discipline and are *very* carefully hiding any signs of their ill-gotten gains. The IRS would have to be a partner in this, too. What's the IRS' motivation? Are they also on the payroll? The conspiracy went right through the pro-fossil-fuel Bush Administration, too. How did the money get past them and how did the lid not get blown off? What's the long term plan? This is, necessarily, an international conspiracy. Who's going to be Top Dog in the New World Order? How did the arrive at that? If it's not the US, who is it that lives in the US that would be happy to sign over World Domination to someone else? How would he keep the rest of the conspirators in line when they began to suspect their children would live in a second-class country? The "conspiracy" would have to go back to 1890 and relies on observable phenomena that, if it was merely made up, could be contradicted by any physics or chemistry student with access to a decent university lab. How do you keep hundreds of thousands of people from doing the simplest of experiments? How do you counterfeit thousands of old publications with fake supporting data and sneak it into libraries all over the world?

Spending 10 minutes looking stuff up in solid sources and actually learning something would be a much better use of you time than however much you you spend reading crap written by political hacks and cranks.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 8:54:59 PM

"We also are 'just' beginning to understand longer-period cycles that the sun goes through, which is the 'main' driver of climate change on our planet."

At the moment, direct solar input is decreasing and bears no correlation to what we're seeing for temps.

Next?

1) Continent movement
2) Changes in ocean currents
3) Variations in Earth's orbit
4) Volcanic activity

2, 3 and 4 are fairly well understood. Item 1, are you referring to decadal timescale or beyond millenial? Nobody is looking at that on a decadal timescale. If you're referring to continental drift moving land masses closer to the poles or away from them, sure, that's not exactly a pressing problem.

The fact is, we're shooting ourselves in the foot. And people who criticize the science or the motives of the scientists without being able to add to the science are posturing fools.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:17,219
Points:568,325
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 7:37:26 PM

"We understand CO2 quite well. If you can find a better explanation of the way the atmosphere works and the mechanism that opposes the CO2 heating effect, you're welcome to write it up."

We also are 'just' beginning to understand longer-period cycles that the sun goes through, which is the 'main' driver of climate change on our planet.

"Science evolves as understanding develops."

To my previous point above.

Sure, the Earth is warming and I won't be investing in any coastal properties that I hope to have standing in 100 years. That doesn't mean AGW is a factor, or has 'ever' been a factor, in this constant rise in temperature which has been occurring naturally for thousands of years.

Other factors that influence climate change besides the sun;

1) Continent movement
2) Changes in ocean currents
3) Variations in Earth's orbit
4) Volcanic activity
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:17,219
Points:568,325
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 7:31:06 PM

"You feed the cycle of misinformation when you post without checking the facts."

Actually, I doubted what was reported, I did not feed it. Go back and check your facts.

"Even if the research was biased in some way, most of the spend is for information gathering, which is entirely result-neutral (satellites, weather stations) and processing, which is also result neutral. Lindzen is a renowned "skeptic" (in fact, he's not a good one... he believes in the CO2 effect, he's just quibbling ineffectively over the details) and he still gets research sponsored, when he takes the trouble to do some."

It isn't the research that is biased, nor the facilities built. It is the conclusion made that is, unfortunately, since those who pay the bills for these facilities want it to be so.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 4:22:50 PM

"Even if the research was biased in some way, most of the spend is for information gathering, which is entirely result-neutral (satellites, weather stations) and processing, which is also result neutral."

All that data, by the way, is available to you. Sometimes there's a nominal cost for getting it to you, but you can get at all of it. Much of it is simply on web sites, where you can go get it and process it.

Get to it. Show your work.
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 4:20:36 PM

"Let me know when you post facts. So far on the AGW subject you are just parroting the alarmist dogma on the subject.
You follow those people like Maurice strong too?"

The "alarmist dogma," as you call it, on the subject IS the facts. Your Denialist overlords don't do any actual research and don't propose better methods of understanding the way the atmosphere works.

See my explanation to Weaslespit. Science evolves as understanding develops. We understand CO2 quite well. If you can find a better explanation of the way the atmosphere works and the mechanism that opposes the CO2 heating effect, you're welcome to write it up. As my old math teachers used to say, "Show your work."
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 4:17:11 PM

Weaslespit: "You seemed to miss the part where I said I was too lazy/apathetic to care..."

Then why post at all? You feed the cycle of misinformation when you post without checking the facts. If it's just about *any* politician saying something stupid (which can simply happen because they're suddenly tongue-tied), then you still owe it to that politician to check the facts.

"Of course not, AGW pays their salary."

Climate investigation pays their salary. The results are not predetermined, the investigation just looks to see what role is played.

Even if the research was biased in some way, most of the spend is for information gathering, which is entirely result-neutral (satellites, weather stations) and processing, which is also result neutral. Lindzen is a renowned "skeptic" (in fact, he's not a good one... he believes in the CO2 effect, he's just quibbling ineffectively over the details) and he still gets research sponsored, when he takes the trouble to do some.

Few of these guys drive fancy cars. They don't pull in millions, like the lobbyists who want to make sure Congress doesn't put a dent in fossil fuel profits.

The science starts in a lab with observable effects of atmospheric transparency with different levels of CO2. That primary heating effect is *very* well understood. If you want to make a name for yourself, then feel free to find the mechanism that prevents that heating effect from actually having a result.

I don't know what you do for a living or what your area of expertise is, but I suppose you'd be just fine with some untrained and uneducated yahoo coming along and telling you you're doing it wrong or that you don't understand it at all?
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:16,223
Points:3,638,875
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 2:36:41 PM

I agree
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:17,219
Points:568,325
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 1:52:22 PM

"Instead of admitting the mistake, they're now busily compounding it with contorted rationalizations for their own laziness and the Washington Times' dishonesty."

At least you said 'they'... thank-you.

"You should have taken the trouble to verify it before posting about it."

You seemed to miss the part where I said I was too lazy/apathetic to care... I am not a blind Kerry hater. I am glad that this turned out to be false.

"Anthropogenic Climate Change, which is, in fact, not controversial at all to the scientists involved)."

Of course not, AGW pays their salary.

"The current "Polar Vortex" conditions are probably linked to the loss of ice in the Arctic."

SMH...

[Edited by: Weaslespit at 2/20/2014 1:55:47 PM EST]
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,657
Points:606,900
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 1:44:00 PM

Let me know when you post facts. So far on the AGW subject you are just parroting the alarmist dogma on the subject.
You follow those people like Maurice strong too?

[Edited by: theTower at 2/20/2014 1:45:33 PM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,638
Points:832,230
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 1:33:29 PM

But then you have to consider Biden...
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 1:25:30 PM

Well, I can see "theTower" doesn't check facts and has little understanding of science.

"Climate Change" was a Republican term. It sounded less scary. As it happens, it's not inaccurate. Mostly, we're going to see warming. As the weather changes with climate, we're going to see other changes and there are regions that might, in fact, cool.

The current "Polar Vortex" conditions are probably linked to the loss of ice in the Arctic. At the same time that it's quite cold over the Lower 48, Alaska has been setting heat records. In fact, here in MN, we've not set any new cold records at all, we've not even come close. Overall, we may find that Northern Hemisphere temps over the winter remain above average.

In addition, although atmospheric temps haven't risen much since the astonishing outlier year of 1998 (but they *have* risen), ocean temperatures are rising at a very dramatic rate and that heat will eventually come roaring back into the atmosphere. This is all completely in accord with the basic theory of ACC.
Profile Pic
nraacct
Champion Author North Carolina

Posts:9,273
Points:1,788,820
Joined:Jul 2004
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 1:15:54 PM

Just parroting the official company line.
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,657
Points:606,900
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 1:12:47 PM

"Anthropogenic Climate Change, which is, in fact, not controversial at all to the scientists involved"

So not controversial that the purported reference to man made hysteria had to be changed from anthropogenic global warming once it became clear that "warming" couldn't be sold to the sheeple any longer.
For example, you can't lump winter blizzards and the dreaded "polar vortex" into the lie when you keep claiming its warming.
Not even the low information voters will buy that nonsense.
But you're correct.
Deceit about this subject is extremely common from people like Kerry and his pals.

[Edited by: theTower at 2/20/2014 1:14:54 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:17,850
Points:2,162,025
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 12:59:30 PM

Definitely, a loon!
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 12:51:43 PM

"You misinterpreted what I initially posted, not a big deal."

You should have taken the trouble to verify it before posting about it. The tone of AFSNCO's post was clearly a political attack and it involved something people regard as controversial (Anthropogenic Climate Change, which is, in fact, not controversial at all to the scientists involved). Deceit in this subject is extremely common.
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,470
Points:804,325
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 9:35:50 AM


Yes, I "conveniently left out the second part" (your speculation about what he might have said) because it wasn't relevant to the point. My point was this: you slapped at him for a comment he did not make.

The shots taken at Kerry backfired, not because he's a brilliant man who is always correct, or because he's a great and noble leader who should never be questioned, but because the Washington Times lied about his speech.

And people happily gulped down the lie, never bothering to check Kerry's statement for themselves.

Instead of admitting the mistake, they're now busily compounding it with contorted rationalizations for their own laziness and the Washington Times' dishonesty.

Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:17,219
Points:568,325
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 9:08:16 AM

"You did, indeed, slap at him: "Yikes. I would have expected this comment out of Biden, not Kerry. Where do our politicians get these ideas?"

The problem, of course, is that Kerry didn't make the idiotic statement attributed to him."

See how you conveniently left out the second part of my initial post? Your bad. I actually find it funny that given all of the vitriol posted prior to my post, you directed your comments at me although I was the one who asked that the truth be posted and fully admitted I was too lazy (and apathetic to the topic) to look it up and post it for everybody to see...

You misinterpreted what I initially posted, not a big deal.

[Edited by: Weaslespit at 2/20/2014 9:10:54 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 7:34:38 AM

Hey, teacher_tim, if you've got an axe to grind, you go grind it. I'm just pointing out what the facts are in this case and how easy they were to find for anybody who actually cares about the facts. You can draw your own conclusions about papers that do not bother to check very easily checked facts, I've fact-checked the WT before and uncovered similarly easy to correct mistakes.

I'd have to say, though, that a paper that prints such whoppers certainly does have a low opinion of its readers. And, based on the way this discussion went, that low opinion seems justified.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,638
Points:832,230
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 11:39:39 PM

sgm4law,
So what you're saying is that the Washington Times is like MSNBC and CBS with the facts? Sad what "journalism" has become. better have the FCC take over where the IRS left off, eh? You know, just to make sure...
Profile Pic
Charlie_H
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:2,560
Points:47,015
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 10:32:19 PM

sgm4law: "After a pattern of such behavior from the Times, it's more efficient to just ignore the garbage they put out."

Unfortunately, there are plenty of people who would rather believe "mistakes" in the Washington Times than check the facts.

And what Kerry actually said is surprisingly easy to find.

Surprise! He didn't blame the eruption on climate change!

jeskibuff: "The problem, of course is that Kerry is famous for dozens of idiotic and conflicting statements. That's par for the course for pathological liars like Kerry. It makes it quite easy to believe he's responsible for other idiotic statements."

No, the problem is people who'd rather believe a lie they like and believe someone they don't like is a "pathological liar" than go get the facts and learn the truth.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,371
Points:3,035,295
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 9:11:34 PM

"The lying editorial board at the Washington Times counts on the laziness of its readers, apparently. The readers are not only too lazy to look the comments up, but too lazy to think the paper's moronic claims through."

After a pattern of such behavior from the Times, it's more efficient to just ignore the garbage they put out.
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,815
Points:2,086,980
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 8:23:32 PM

PiqueOil said: "The problem, of course, is that Kerry didn't make the idiotic statement attributed to him."

The problem, of course is that Kerry is famous for dozens of idiotic and conflicting statements. That's par for the course for pathological liars like Kerry. It makes it quite easy to believe he's responsible for other idiotic statements.

John Kerry walks into a bar. The bartender says: "Hey John...why the long face?"
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,657
Points:606,900
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 6:09:51 PM

Quoting anything from Maurice Strong certainly puts Kerry in nut job land.
.
There is absolutely no question about that.


[Edited by: theTower at 2/19/2014 6:11:14 PM EST]
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,470
Points:804,325
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 1:46:35 PM


You did, indeed, slap at him: "Yikes. I would have expected this comment out of Biden, not Kerry. Where do our politicians get these ideas?"

The problem, of course, is that Kerry didn't make the idiotic statement attributed to him.

Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,638
Points:832,230
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 1:42:47 PM

Kerry did reference the volcano as a "significant weather event" that disrupts international trade. This is documented in several sources.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:17,219
Points:568,325
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 1:34:09 PM

"Yes, you're too lazy to look it up yourself, but not too lazy to witlessly slap at Kerry for something he did not say."

I didn't witlessly slap Kerry - I actually made a reference as to what he might 'actually' have said...

Thanks all the same.
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,470
Points:804,325
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 11:08:17 AM


"Hmm....or how about when they posted that FoxNews went 'bezerk?' Yep, you were missing in action then, weren't you?"

The word is "berserk," and it should be obvious that the state of being "berserk" is in the eye of the beholder, much like whether or not the beholder believes John Kerry "really is nuts!"

My criticism is not aimed at you over your silly insult, but rather aimed at the lies from the Washington Times and the lazy people who mindlessly repeat the lies.

Consider this: I didn't read that the Washington Times lied about Kerry. I didn't learn of the lies from a blog or article or newscast. I simply listened to Kerry and compared his actual words to the characterization of his comments by the Washington Times.

They lied. You repeated the lies without bothering to check for yourself. So spare the witless attempt to shift blame on me.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,638
Points:832,230
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 10:01:23 AM

I'll believe Kerry and Obama are serious when they restrict their billion dollar Resilience Fund giveaway to companies with NO connection to or donations to Democrats and their PACs.

BTW, that volcano was pumping out more carbon ash than the coal plants in the US. What is the Kerry/Obama plan for stopping volcanic activity? They truly ARE worse than WMDs.

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 2/19/2014 10:04:35 AM EST]
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,470
Points:804,325
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 9:58:05 AM


For those who can't bear to listen to his speech (I'm not a huge fan of listening to him either), you can read the speech here.

If you read it, you can find that the Washington Times lied more than once about the content of the speech, including right here: "To America’s top diplomat, global warming is 'the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction' — worse than 'terrorism, epidemics, poverty.'”

Again, that isn't what Kerry said. Read the transcript. What he really said is this: "the reality is that climate change ranks right up there with every single one of them."

The lying editorial board at the Washington Times counts on the laziness of its readers, apparently. The readers are not only too lazy to look the comments up, but too lazy to think the paper's moronic claims through.

[Edited by: PiqueOil at 2/19/2014 9:58:36 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Zimcity
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:71,045
Points:4,300,735
Joined:Aug 2001
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 9:53:11 AM

"However, he did claim that climate change is worse than WMD."

No he didn't:

"When I think about the array of global climate – of global threats – think about this: terrorism, epidemics, poverty, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction – all challenges that know no borders – the reality is that climate change ranks right up there with every single one of them."

You had me at "shame on me."

Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,937
Points:1,871,540
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 9:44:58 AM

BTW pique, where are you when liberals post misinformation? Hmm....or how about when they posted that FoxNews went "bezerk?" Yep, you were missing in action then, weren't you?
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,937
Points:1,871,540
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 9:43:34 AM

OK, so he did not say that. I posted what the article said so shame on me. However, he did claim that climate change is worse than WMD. That is just as nutty.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,638
Points:832,230
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 9:43:32 AM

48 minutes worth of Kerry?! I guess I'm not THAT strong.
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,470
Points:804,325
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 9:03:15 AM


Yes, you're too lazy to look it up yourself, but not too lazy to witlessly slap at Kerry for something he did not say.

See if you can muster the strength to listen to the speech you criticized.



[Edited by: PiqueOil at 2/19/2014 9:04:43 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:17,219
Points:568,325
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 8:52:13 AM

"The posters aren't necessarily dishonest. Just lazy."

Pique - can you post a link refuting this report please? I'll admit I am too lazy to look it up myself (or apathetic on the subject - probably a combination of the two)...

[Edited by: Weaslespit at 2/19/2014 8:52:51 AM EST]
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,470
Points:804,325
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 8:28:12 AM


No doubt the lies are fun for folks at the Washington Times to tell. I'd guess that most of the posters here aren't really telling lies, but merely thoughtlessly repeating lies they've read in the Washington Times.

The posters aren't necessarily dishonest. Just lazy.
Profile Pic
worryfree
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,439
Points:2,462,955
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2014 12:51:34 AM

But the lies are such fun!!
Profile Pic
PiqueOil
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:6,470
Points:804,325
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2014 3:42:59 PM


"Over his weekend in Asia, Mr. Kerry said the eruption of Indonesia’s Mount Kelud was a consequence of the planet’s looming fever."

Kerry said no such thing, nor did he imply it. The lie by the Washington Times is absurd.

Profile Pic
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,811
Points:140,910
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2014 2:34:11 PM

97% of the scientists he shops agrees with him

lol
Profile Pic
Edger
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:41,958
Points:2,712,210
Joined:Apr 2005
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2014 2:29:34 PM

John Kerry needs a place to invest the monies received when Heinz was sold. Buying and selling carbon credits or something similar per global cooling would be such an opportunity for generations to come!
Post a reply Back to Topics