Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard

MarkWebles

Members
  • Content Count

    227
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

MarkWebles last won the day on January 1

MarkWebles had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

241 Excellent

About MarkWebles

  • Rank
    Newbie
  • Birthday 02/12/1956

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

890 profile views
  1. My post did not address any point made in the article your originally post on solar minimums. If you re-read both you'll detect a slant contained in the former that doesn't exist in the latter. My point stands. And the planet continues to get warmer regardless of the number of snowballs you might feel inclined to grace the Senate with.
  2. CBN is, according to mediabiasfactcheck.com, in the category of CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE. "Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence." You might want to try for a source with a little more credibility. ETA: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/christian-broadcasting-network-cbn/
  3. I'd love to see some evidence for this claim.
  4. I recall hearing that The Rolling Stones were the greatest threat to the planet. Who to trust?
  5. Now who's living in the past? I think you'll find that the EPA is just a leaky little boat when compared to what was envisioned 50 years ago. As for finger pointing, why not make an example of the American companies dumping in to the Rio Lerma? Do they escape responsibility for their actions simply because the government won't act? Who's at fault here, the companies doing the dumping or the government that signed-on to NAFTA that permits the rape of the environment? I wonder if, under NAFTA, anyone can in fact do anything. Profit over people. As a high-school drop-out, I'd say The US is about to commence the return portion of it's round-trip trip journey from the '70s. People are still suffering in Flint and in Pureto Rico. Push back? Nada. Hypocrisy and American exceptionalism? Same thing.
  6. I think my irony meter just exploded. Again. You're a great and shining example of the easily led. Go read a book. Preferably one on American history. I'd recommend Zinn, but there's no pictures.
  7. The lyrics are not racist, they decry racism as it existed in the '50s, and as it exists right now. The lyrics are meant to be ironic as they are sung by the very Puerto Ricans who are the victims of the casual racism they experience(d). Not knowing this makes you look, I don't know, reactionary, or worse. Putting your head in the sand is never a flattering look.
  8. Do you think the problem is localized to Mexico? I can recall the Cuyahoga River* going up in flames, and the Mississippi and Hudson Rivers never looked terribly inviting. ...and by paying for it, you mean the industries and agricultural entities that are causing the effluent that is compromising these water ways should pay, right? Certainly not the average Mexican who would otherwise have to pay for it through taxes they can ill afford, right. * The fire on the Cuyahoga helped usher in laws for the protection of water ways in the US. The very same environmental laws that Trump is repealing as we speak. Let's raise a glass of cool, clear water in the name of progress, shall we? "Don't you listen to him Dan, He's a devil not a man".
  9. Absolutely right, MC! Such a thing would never happen in a typical American city; at random say... Flint, Michigan, where the well-being of its citizens is paramount. "I like to be in America OK by me in America Everything free in America For a small fee in America... Life can be bright in America If you can fight in America Life is all right in America If you're all white in America"
  10. ...but what bothers me the most is all those people breathing air and drinking water: the nerve. bmh, get well soon.
  11. Well, I guess we all know better than to mess with Ajijic_hiker. She might get sick. Look over there, is that a snowflake?
  12. "who remade himself into a climatologist". No, he did not. His double doctorate is in engineering/economics. "became director of the IPCC". An administrative position, he had no input to any scientific determinations. "Nobel prize". Awarded to the IPCC (well known for it's conservative assessments), not to Dr. Pachauri. He has little credibility in the climate sciences as he does not engage in actual science, and he has questionable integrity overall as is evidenced by allegations made against the Doctor of both financial and sexual transgressions. All this you would know if you wanted to. "scientific research is not based on consensus but on contradictory views". Utter crap. "it says science is never "settled"". Thanks for the laugh. Everyone who cares enough to read for comprehension knows that scientific findings are provisional, subject to revision based on new information, which BTY, is why phrenology isn't in much demand today. Finally, you might want to include some quotes (except of course when not necessary, as in "settled") in your postings if you want to avoid accusations of plagiarism.
  13. The earth revolves around the sun? Wait here, I'll go ask Copernicus. Super great analogy you got there. We are well past the point of dialectics here, at least your own information-free postings suggest as much. Try finding a source the isn't immediately refutable and perhaps we'll discuss it. This isn't difficult. Vetting your sources is easy once you get the hang of it. My goal here, any way, isn't to convince you of anything, but rather to show the fence sitters just how weak the arguments contra-ACD are. Frankly, this has all the satisfaction of discussing the theory* of evolution with an evangelist, and to be sure eventually I will stop bothering, but for now there's always the chance that you'll post something substantive. Hope springs eternal, right? * In science a theory is not a guess, but "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world."
  14. Reiterating what your shill for the Oil industry has said doesn't further your claim. Why is this so difficult for you? "Tide comes in, tide goes out, you can't explain it". -Another !d!o+ of the Right.
  15. Let's see what we can learn about Judith Curry Funding from fossil fuel industry - Check Won't reveal identity of clients - Check Endeavors to create doubt about ACD - Check Uses misleading/false data to support position - Check Yeah, paint me impressed. She certainly has that je ne sais quoi the Right finds so compelling. What does mediabiasfactcheck.com have to say about www.city-journal.org? RIGHT BIAS These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.
×
×
  • Create New...