Messages

26

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Trump Presidency

« on: July 12, 2017, 03:12:41 PM »

Hahahaha this is what America has become

Land of the free and home of the chiefs?  It will be as soon as all the libtards who said they were moving to Canada actually go.  Also take the lazy unemployed minorities with you.  Leave the white ones, we need approx 5% unemployment for the economy to function properly.

Can we get a racist POS added to this socks sig please? Mods?

My posts and this forum are not a spot for your safe space.  If you can't handle facts and don't want to make america great again I suggest you stfu and gtfo someone who makes me uncomfortable.

Gotta be wacky... All the tell-tale signs. Racism, ignorance, blindly spewing MAGA support. All we need now are some boot-strapping and marijuana-hating posts and it's all but verified.

27

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Trump Presidency

« on: July 12, 2017, 12:53:54 PM »

Hahahaha this is what America has become

Land of the free and home of the chiefs?  It will be as soon as all the libtards who said they were moving to Canada actually go.  Also take the lazy unemployed minorities with you.  Leave the white ones, we need approx 5% unemployment for the economy to function properly.

Can we get a racist POS added to this socks sig please? Mods?

My money is that it's wacky

28

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: July 10, 2017, 01:42:55 PM »

Just another well-cited, extensively reviewed article outlining the projected future of climate change and how mumped up everything is going to be. But please, continue the blind defense of leaving global treaties and pacts that begin to start a global effort to combat the effects and causes... Grasping at straws and digging your head in the sand further.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/climate-change-earth-too-hot-for-humans.html

 

that article leads me to believe if the entire planet cut off 100% of fossil fuels tomorrow cold turkey, we'd still be F'd

Agreed. From everything I have read up to this point, my understanding is that it's not if we are going to get f'd but how bad. Basically, in a manner of speaking we can take climate change out to dinner, romance it a bit, wear protection and add lube by changing our current systems and trajectory OR we can get jumped in an alley and raw-dogged by an STD infested gang by continuing our behaviors and ignoring the science.

29

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: July 10, 2017, 11:52:57 AM »

Cam might turn me into a daxian denier type just out of spite

Cool.

30

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: July 10, 2017, 10:55:32 AM »

Just another well-cited, extensively reviewed article outlining the projected future of climate change and how mumped up everything is going to be. But please, continue the blind defense of leaving global treaties and pacts that begin to start a global effort to combat the effects and causes... Grasping at straws and digging your head in the sand further.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/climate-change-earth-too-hot-for-humans.html

 

31

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: July 06, 2017, 11:35:47 AM »

Pruitt = Corporate Stooge

From the "liberal media rag" the Chicago Sun-Times
"In his five months on the job, Pruitt has tried to block, delay or entirely uproot more than 30 environmental regulations. He is shredding the Clean Power Plan, designed to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas. He wants to revoke plans to reduce pollution in waterways. He has ended a ban on a pesticide the EPA had found was dangerous to children. He has delayed a rule to stop chemical plant explosions and spills. He has become Donald Trump’s point man in undermining America’s compliance with the Paris climate change accord and wants to gum up the works by starting a debate on whether human-caused climate change is real."

http://chicago.suntimes.com/opinion/scott-pruitts-short-tenure-as-epa-chief-already-a-scandal/

A real poster boy for the party that started the National Park Service and EPA.
SAD!

 

32

Essentially Flyertalk / Re: Kansas City things

« on: July 05, 2017, 02:22:35 PM »

'clams is sadly becoming the roger stone of kansas city, it's sad but he has no actual facts to back up his lies so "by any means necessary" smdh

I am completely for a new airport terminal... But to say Mayor James and certain council members aren't shady in some of their dealings with private entities and public projects is a naive and ignorant viewpoint to take considering all the things that have come to light in recent years.

Having said that, would I rather have a new airport terminal and streetcar than a completely squeaky clean municipal government? Begrudgingly yes, however, I do wish they were a little more on the up-and-up, transparent, and out in front of issues rather than reactionary or oblivious to criticism. I mean for f-sake, why did they have a massive pr/media/education campaign for the GO bond for months in advance, but to date have tripped all over themselves on the airport? So small-time and incompetent.

33

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Political Facebook Posts/Tweets From People

« on: June 28, 2017, 10:21:32 AM »

#murica #freedom #maga

34

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Trump owns Russia

« on: June 27, 2017, 09:46:15 AM »

Look at CAMspittleSOCK trying to get to the bottom of things.

I mean, if there's one thing that a Supervising Producer at CNN wouldn't have access to is the daily call to action by senior executives.

Look at daxipad glossy over questionable bona-fides of a medical segment producer, republican from kansas, speaking on information way out of his element or expertise... Not to mention O'Keefe's history of ever more questionable video editing practices.

Sad.

From Kansas?

Yes CAMspittleSock, someone responsible for producing a daily segment on your beloved CNN wouldn't have the first clue of the edicts coming down from executives trying to run a reactive highly competitive 24/7 news entity.  Great point.

Oh you stubborn numb-skull! You pull me in every time!

The reason I bring up that he is a republican from kansas is that maybe, just maybe, he is showing his bias for his guy Trump. Also, we know how obtusely ignorant republicans from kansas can be, i.e. brownbackistan and kkk-kobach.

Well, Kansas could be bankrupt like (yet another) Democrat stronghold, like Illinois for example.  But I digress. (I won't mention California's $400 billion in unfunded mandates, I digress again). 

Yes, yes, I'm sure he's a hardcore conservative, lots of those producing at CNN, CAM.

Cool stories, dax.

Back to russia and trump... The pressure sure is building. They are really pulling out all the stops to try and relieve it. I sure hope Mueller isn't obstructed any further and that no other witnesses are tampered with, i.e. saying there are tapes to try and influence testimony.

35

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: June 27, 2017, 09:41:03 AM »

eff the poor, right CAM?

No, no... That's the gop's stance remember? Who do you think is going to suffer the most under global warming and rising seas? The rich?

36

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: June 27, 2017, 09:34:41 AM »

Just a little dumpster diving to remind CAMspittleSOCK that energy poverty is very real.   

Sad that such a denialist continues to post on this board.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/06/energy-poverty-low-income-households/486197/

In other news, highly taxpayer/user subsidized "green" energy is being sold by California to neighboring states for either next to nothing or even free on the days that Solar and Wind are producing too much energy, because the infrastructure is not in place to properly regulate too much energy production when the sun shines and the wind blows, and then the need to dial back traditional energy is there . . . only to have to dial it back up again when the wind doesn't blow and it's cloudy.  Too much is just as bad, as not enough (which can happen often with wind and solar as well.   Both issues only reinforce that the road to green utopia is paved with fossil fuels).

Why u mad tho?

Everything you just posted is better than the alternative of burn baby burn, and you are absolutely right that the road to a sustainable and renewable future is paved with finite fossil fuels, no one is saying to full stop all fossil fuels entirely world wide tomorrow, but it is going to take regulations and a concerted international coalition to get us closer and faster to where we need to be.

 

I don't know if I should continue responding to the resident energy poverty denialist.

37

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Trump owns Russia

« on: June 27, 2017, 09:33:53 AM »

Look at CAMspittleSOCK trying to get to the bottom of things.

I mean, if there's one thing that a Supervising Producer at CNN wouldn't have access to is the daily call to action by senior executives.

Look at daxipad glossy over questionable bona-fides of a medical segment producer, republican from kansas, speaking on information way out of his element or expertise... Not to mention O'Keefe's history of ever more questionable video editing practices.

Sad.

From Kansas?

Yes CAMspittleSock, someone responsible for producing a daily segment on your beloved CNN wouldn't have the first clue of the edicts coming down from executives trying to run a reactive highly competitive 24/7 news entity.  Great point.

Oh you stubborn numb-skull! You pull me in every time!

The reason I bring up that he is a republican from kansas is that maybe, just maybe, he is showing his bias for his guy Trump. Also, we know how obtusely ignorant republicans from kansas can be, i.e. brownbackistan and kkk-kobach.

38

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: June 27, 2017, 09:23:01 AM »

Just a little dumpster diving to remind CAMspittleSOCK that energy poverty is very real.   

Sad that such a denialist continues to post on this board.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/06/energy-poverty-low-income-households/486197/

In other news, highly taxpayer/user subsidized "green" energy is being sold by California to neighboring states for either next to nothing or even free on the days that Solar and Wind are producing too much energy, because the infrastructure is not in place to properly regulate too much energy production when the sun shines and the wind blows, and then the need to dial back traditional energy is there . . . only to have to dial it back up again when the wind doesn't blow and it's cloudy.  Too much is just as bad, as not enough (which can happen often with wind and solar as well.   Both issues only reinforce that the road to green utopia is paved with fossil fuels).

Why u mad tho?

Everything you just posted is better than the alternative of burn baby burn, and you are absolutely right that the road to a sustainable and renewable future is paved with finite fossil fuels, no one is saying to full stop all fossil fuels entirely world wide tomorrow, but it is going to take regulations and a concerted international coalition to get us closer and faster to where we need to be.

 

39

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Trump owns Russia

« on: June 27, 2017, 09:16:41 AM »

Look at CAMspittleSOCK trying to get to the bottom of things.

I mean, if there's one thing that a Supervising Producer at CNN wouldn't have access to is the daily call to action by senior executives.

Look at daxipad glossy over questionable bona-fides of a medical segment producer, republican from kansas, speaking on information way out of his element or expertise... Not to mention O'Keefe's history of ever more questionable video editing practices.

Sad.

40

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Trump owns Russia

« on: June 27, 2017, 08:53:27 AM »

http://www.veritaslive.com/06-26-2017/americanpravdacnn.html

(NEW YORK) -- Project Veritas has released a video of CNN Producer John Bonifield who was caught on hidden-camera admitting that there is no proof to CNN's Russia narrative.

"I mean, it's mostly bullshit right now," Bonifield says. "Like, we don't have any giant proof."

He confirms that the driving factor at CNN is ratings:

"It's a business, people are like the media has an ethical phssssss... All the nice cutesy little ethics that used to get talked about in journalism school you're just like, that's adorable. That's adorable. This is a business."

According to the CNN Producer, business is booming. "Trump is good for business right now," he concluded.

Bonifield further goes on to explain that the instructions come straight from the top, citing the CEO, Jeff Zucker:

"Just to give you some context, President Trump pulled out of the climate accords and for a day and a half we covered the climate accords. And the CEO of CNN (Jeff Zucker) said in our internal meeting, he said good job everybody covering the climate accords, but we're done with that, let's get back to Russia."
Bonifield also acknowledged: "I haven't seen any good enough evidence to show that the President committed a crime." He continues:

"I just feel like they don't really have it but they want to keep digging. And so I think the President is probably right to say, like, look you are witch hunting me. You have no smoking gun, you have no real proof."

Selectively edited!!!!

KSU-W... Can you tell me what he is a producer of? What are his responsibilities and purviews? Just trying to figure out if I should give any credence to what the lunch hour fashion producer says. TIA

41

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: June 26, 2017, 07:10:31 PM »

Weird, the warmest alarmist also basically admitted that the pause in increasing temps (I won't get into their persistent data manipulation that cools the past to make the today look warmer) that went on for twenty years (while they were saying it was getting warmer) was in fact real.

#settledscience

So... You're not going to address the study or the science? Got it.

#daxipad

I didn't notice any science in that article.

It's almost as if you are blind to what is right in front of you, deniers.

"There’s just no reasoning with Perry’s kind of denial. After watching spats like this for more than a decade now, I’ve come to the realization that there is no graph, no chart, no international consensus statement, no engraved stone tablet lowered from heaven that could convince someone who — by choice — refuses to believe a fact. It doesn’t matter to them how confident the scientific community is. And we’ve reached the point where debating denial is a waste of time."

https://grist.org/article/the-fact-is-facts-dont-matter-to-climate-deniers/amp/

42

Essentially Flyertalk / Re: Kansas City things

« on: June 26, 2017, 04:59:06 PM »

Yeah this process did too. There was not the financial risk to the city with this the b&m proposal which is why initially going out for RFP wasn't a huge deal (the deal was already within the financial agreed terms with the airlines)...but once multiple companies expressed interest the city asked for proposals.

You act like that was the plan all along... Which isn't the case. The selection was opened up only after questions of legality and ethics were raised by those in the media (and after one company large enough to not fear retribution from B&M expressed interest). And let's not forget that city officials tried to give B&M right of first refusal and a RFQ window of three weeks, which they had to backpedal on as well.

It's been a shitshow from the beginning and Schulte should absolutely lose his job over it. Your blatant and blind defense of the city is almost starting to sound like dax and the other knuckle-draggers unwavering support of trump and the gop. 

43

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: June 26, 2017, 04:26:04 PM »

Weird, the warmest alarmist also basically admitted that the pause in increasing temps (I won't get into their persistent data manipulation that cools the past to make the today look warmer) that went on for twenty years (while they were saying it was getting warmer) was in fact real.

#settledscience

So... You're not going to address the study or the science? Got it.

#daxipad

44

Essentially Flyertalk / Re: Kansas City things

« on: June 26, 2017, 04:24:23 PM »

“There’s no question we had a rocky start to this,” Justus said.

it's because you're all rough ridin' amateurs

Schulte said if the city can’t move ahead soon with a new terminal, it would likely resort to some type of renovation. That’s assuming the airlines would agree to it, but they’ve said they won’t.

what a beta


anyone who can't see that this city is being run by the ringling brothers clown show is seriously blind

What a coincidence that Jolie Justus and Mike Tallboy (Director of Government Affairs at B&M) are good friends from their time in Jeff City!

Schulte should absolutely lose his job over the debacle and circus the rollout and selection process has devolved into. So small-time and embarrassing for this city.

Oh you mean the process that has never been done for a major airport in the country? Yeah what a bewb

With good reason, Phil! Public projects go out to RFQ/P to get the best ideas out of competition... Not to mention that it is that way so that there is some semblance of a fair and even playing field. Corruption and wheel greasing just seem to be the KC-way tho 

45

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: June 26, 2017, 03:18:10 PM »

Scientists again confirm through multiple sources in multiple locations that the oceans (and thus the globe) are warming... Rapidly.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/jun/26/new-study-confirms-the-oceans-are-warming-rapidly

46

Essentially Flyertalk / Re: Kansas City things

« on: June 26, 2017, 02:41:21 PM »

“There’s no question we had a rocky start to this,” Justus said.

it's because you're all rough ridin' amateurs

Schulte said if the city can’t move ahead soon with a new terminal, it would likely resort to some type of renovation. That’s assuming the airlines would agree to it, but they’ve said they won’t.

what a beta


anyone who can't see that this city is being run by the ringling brothers clown show is seriously blind

What a coincidence that Jolie Justus and Mike Tallboy (Director of Government Affairs at B&M) are good friends from their time in Jeff City!

Schulte should absolutely lose his job over the debacle and circus the rollout and selection process has devolved into. So small-time and embarrassing for this city.

47

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: Trump owns Russia

« on: June 20, 2017, 04:27:28 PM »

Sounds like things on the world stage are really ratcheting.   Russian planes to within five feet of U.S. monitoring aircraft.  Defacto declarations of no-fly zones in Syria.  U.S. becoming more aggressive in Syria.

The New McCarthyites (channeling their inner McCain) are just a little closer to getting their war with Russia.

You guys must be fully at midnight right now.  'Grats!

Putin has the exact guy he wants in the WH for this war, a total incompetent buffoon incapable of putting in place a functioning state department with whom he has blackmail on. Pure genius.

48

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: June 20, 2017, 11:19:16 AM »

Links to those headlines? Must have been a lot of them to make such an impression on you and not just one article once that the author retracted a year later

LOL, AGW propagandists (like you) have been trying to make this go away for years. 

LOL, you're implying that global warming propagandist articles (white papers) are not ever retracted and that there hasn't been a steady admission that the models were way off.

Dax, do you think science changes based on new information? Or do you view science as static? What about Exxon admitting that CO2 is heavily impacting climate change?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/

You're so dumb, you don't get that I basically just showed that science changes all the time.   That's why your propaganda that the "science is settled" on AGW is patently absurd and anti-science.

And exxon knowing about manmade CO2 climate impacts since 1977, but pumping out propoganda contrary to it?

First off, what you're implying is that they everybody duped.   I don't recall any Exxon campaign on any broad scale to convince people CO2 wasn't a problem.   I mean, you guys can't answer simple (but actually extremely complex) questions, like, "What is the optimal level of CO2 PPM in earths atmosphere?"  If your science is "settled' then certainly you can tell us what is the best level of CO2 content in the atmosphere, is, right?   Of course you are so dumb you don't see that this is how fear mongering propaganda is born.    You want to fix a problem that you can't even properly define or even categorically say is a problem (if you're being truthful).

Flailing... Wildly.
http://exxonknew.org/timeline/
http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/got-science/2016/got-science-may-2016
http://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/12/13188/rex-tillerson-and-exxon-spent-big-climate-change-denial-while-misleading-public

That's what I call playing fast and loose with "lying to the public", you implied that there was some sort of broad based consumer disinformation campaign.   That's nothing more than stuff out of beltway lobbying 101, which the vast majority of American's pay no attention to or don't even know even exists.

Ok, Dax. Do you have a tattoo on your forehead that says "gullible"? How about "In Exxon We Trust"? 'Cause you sure do put a lot of trust in them!

No, I just understand the difference between a mass consumer driven marketing campaign, and what corporations send their lobbyists up from K street to talk to congress people about most behind closed doors.

It's so hard to keep up with what you view as normal k-street stuff and what you view as corruption/disinformation! It's almost like if they are republicans it is cool and if they are democrats it's bad.

 

49

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: June 20, 2017, 11:13:32 AM »

Links to those headlines? Must have been a lot of them to make such an impression on you and not just one article once that the author retracted a year later

LOL, AGW propagandists (like you) have been trying to make this go away for years. 

LOL, you're implying that global warming propagandist articles (white papers) are not ever retracted and that there hasn't been a steady admission that the models were way off.

Dax, do you think science changes based on new information? Or do you view science as static? What about Exxon admitting that CO2 is heavily impacting climate change?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/

You're so dumb, you don't get that I basically just showed that science changes all the time.   That's why your propaganda that the "science is settled" on AGW is patently absurd and anti-science.

And exxon knowing about manmade CO2 climate impacts since 1977, but pumping out propoganda contrary to it?

First off, what you're implying is that they everybody duped.   I don't recall any Exxon campaign on any broad scale to convince people CO2 wasn't a problem.   I mean, you guys can't answer simple (but actually extremely complex) questions, like, "What is the optimal level of CO2 PPM in earths atmosphere?"  If your science is "settled' then certainly you can tell us what is the best level of CO2 content in the atmosphere, is, right?   Of course you are so dumb you don't see that this is how fear mongering propaganda is born.    You want to fix a problem that you can't even properly define or even categorically say is a problem (if you're being truthful).

Flailing... Wildly.
http://exxonknew.org/timeline/
http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/got-science/2016/got-science-may-2016
http://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/12/13188/rex-tillerson-and-exxon-spent-big-climate-change-denial-while-misleading-public

That's what I call playing fast and loose with "lying to the public", you implied that there was some sort of broad based consumer disinformation campaign.   That's nothing more than stuff out of beltway lobbying 101, which the vast majority of American's pay no attention to or don't even know even exists.

Ok, Dax. Do you have a tattoo on your forehead that says "gullible"? How about "In Exxon We Trust"? 'Cause you sure do put a lot of trust in them!

50

The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit / Re: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

« on: June 20, 2017, 11:05:52 AM »

Links to those headlines? Must have been a lot of them to make such an impression on you and not just one article once that the author retracted a year later

LOL, AGW propagandists (like you) have been trying to make this go away for years. 

LOL, you're implying that global warming propagandist articles (white papers) are not ever retracted and that there hasn't been a steady admission that the models were way off.

Dax, do you think science changes based on new information? Or do you view science as static? What about Exxon admitting that CO2 is heavily impacting climate change?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/

You're so dumb, you don't get that I basically just showed that science changes all the time.   That's why your propaganda that the "science is settled" on AGW is patently absurd and anti-science.

And exxon knowing about manmade CO2 climate impacts since 1977, but pumping out propoganda contrary to it?

First off, what you're implying is that they everybody duped.   I don't recall any Exxon campaign on any broad scale to convince people CO2 wasn't a problem.   I mean, you guys can't answer simple (but actually extremely complex) questions, like, "What is the optimal level of CO2 PPM in earths atmosphere?"  If your science is "settled' then certainly you can tell us what is the best level of CO2 content in the atmosphere, is, right?   Of course you are so dumb you don't see that this is how fear mongering propaganda is born.    You want to fix a problem that you can't even properly define or even categorically say is a problem (if you're being truthful).

Flailing... Wildly.
http://exxonknew.org/timeline/
http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/got-science/2016/got-science-may-2016
http://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/12/13188/rex-tillerson-and-exxon-spent-big-climate-change-denial-while-misleading-public