User Tag List

Page 2 of 25 FirstFirst 1234512 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 363

Thread: Steven Crowder - Popular Right Wing Conservative

  1. #16
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    near Olympic National Park
    Posts
    12,459
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 667 Times in 587 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    198158
    "Climate change" is a 'safe' term that will offend no one, lol!
    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Interplanner For Your Post:

    ClimateSanity (September 10th, 2017),patrick jane (September 10th, 2017)

  3. #17
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    near Olympic National Park
    Posts
    12,459
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 667 Times in 587 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    198158
    Jonah, this is probably the correct link:

    http://www.dennisprager.com/global-warming-file/
    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

  4. #18
    Over 5000 post club rexlunae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The high desert
    Posts
    5,014
    Thanks
    977
    Thanked 2,099 Times in 1,344 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    796224
    Crowder is an expert in working back from a conclusion to a set of "evidence", mostly consisting of convenient distortions and exaggerations. It's no surprise you'd like him, but he casts confusion as a trade. He's a disinformer, like Alex Jones but with less garbage to sell.
    Global warming denialists are like gravity denialists piloting a helicopter, determined to prove a point. We may not have time to actually persuade them of their mistake.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to rexlunae For Your Post:

    Rusha (September 10th, 2017)

  6. #19
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,155
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 556 Times in 381 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    230481
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    Yes the link is just to that one, but the Prager page is a whole file of articles, Jonah. Perhaps you were unaware of that.

    Just ask yourself: after 30 years, why does Patrick Moore do videos for Prager U, not NatGeo or CNN?
    I dont know why Moore does that. You seem (and that "you" includes many here) seem to get really excited when someone with scientific credentials says something you agree with, whether or not it makes any sense.

    Maybe he just likes to be different.

    All but a few climate scientists agree that the climate is changing, in general becoming warmer. There seems to be no real dispute about that. And all but a few agree that man's impact on that change is substantial and caused primarily by the release of green house gases as a result of industrialization.

    Sort of the same as the vast, vast majority of biologists accept evolution as a fact. The vast, vast majority of geologists accept a 4 billion + year old earth and the vast vast majority of astronomers accept a 13 Billion + old universe.
    Those who do not are either wackjobs or so wedded to their theology that they are irrational.

  7. #20
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,155
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 556 Times in 381 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    230481
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    Jonah, this is probably the correct link:

    http://www.dennisprager.com/global-warming-file/
    Yep, saw that. Prager is not worth the time. But I realize he gets you excited. That is a shame.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Jonahdog For Your Post:

    Rusha (September 10th, 2017)

  9. #21
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    near Olympic National Park
    Posts
    12,459
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 667 Times in 587 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    198158
    It's not Prager. It's many, many articles by scientists.

    that seems to be your MO. You don't think it is worth anything if it is not your fav source. So why does Patrick Moore do videos for Prager U instead of Nat Geo and CNN?
    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Interplanner For Your Post:

    ClimateSanity (September 10th, 2017),jsanford108 (September 12th, 2017)

  11. #22
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,364
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,235 Times in 2,423 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1102432
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    I dont know why Moore does that. You seem (and that "you" includes many here) seem to get really excited when someone with scientific credentials says something you agree with, whether or not it makes any sense.

    Maybe he just likes to be different.

    All but a few climate scientists agree that the climate is changing, in general becoming warmer. There seems to be no real dispute about that. And all but a few agree that man's impact on that change is substantial and caused primarily by the release of green house gases as a result of industrialization.

    Sort of the same as the vast, vast majority of biologists accept evolution as a fact. The vast, vast majority of geologists accept a 4 billion + year old earth and the vast vast majority of astronomers accept a 13 Billion + old universe.
    Those who do not are either wackjobs or so wedded to their theology that they are irrational.
    I could have sworn IP rightly holds to The Gap Hypothesis (that the Scripture holds to an Earth way older than most within the Religious "Right" conclude).

    Then again, the guy often reveals an inconsistency within his views he is ever willfully blind to.

    Par for the course in a Trump supporter.

  12. #23
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,364
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,235 Times in 2,423 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1102432
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    It's not Prager. It's many, many articles by scientists.

    that seems to be your MO. You don't think it is worth anything if it is not your fav source. So why does Patrick Moore do videos for Prager U instead of Nat Geo and CNN?
    That question is not only obviously asked by you from within your ever obvious narrow vacuum, but is asked by you in your hope of sucking another into your same old narrow minded view of what is actually behind such things.

  13. #24
    Over 5000 post club ClimateSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,669
    Thanks
    4,232
    Thanked 1,953 Times in 1,465 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    682885
    And all but a few agree that man's impact on that change is substantial and caused primarily by the release of green house gases as a result of industrialization....Jonahdog

    The “97 percent” statistic first appeared prominently in a 2009 study by University of Illinois master’s student*Kendall Zimmerman*and her adviser, Peter Doran. Based on a two-question online survey, Zimmerman and Doran concluded that “the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific bases of long-term climate processes” — even though only 5 percent of respondents, or about 160 scientists, were climate scientists. In fact, the “97 percent” statistic was drawn from an even smaller subset: the 79 respondents who were both self-reported climate scientists*and*had “published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change.” These 77 scientists agreed that global temperatures had generally risen since 1800, and that human activity is a “significant contributing factor.”

    And according to a study of 1,868 scientists working in climate-related fields, conducted just this year by thePBL Netherlands Environment Assessment Agency, three in ten respondents said that less than half of global warming since 1951 could be attributed to human activity, or that they did not know.

    https://www.google.com/amp/amp.natio...ion-ian-tuttle

    Sent from my XT1254 using TOL mobile app

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to ClimateSanity For Your Post:

    jsanford108 (September 12th, 2017)

  15. #25
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    near Olympic National Park
    Posts
    12,459
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 667 Times in 587 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    198158
    Quote Originally Posted by rexlunae View Post
    Crowder is an expert in working back from a conclusion to a set of "evidence", mostly consisting of convenient distortions and exaggerations. It's no surprise you'd like him, but he casts confusion as a trade. He's a disinformer, like Alex Jones but with less garbage to sell.




    Find us a disinform about the extent of Islamic conquest. Do you know what the term 'mamluk' means? Slave soldiers. Besides each Islamic family having the legal right to consist of 1 man and 4 wives (in which each wife has only 1/4 the legal power of the husband), they also produce about 30 kids per generation. The mamluk's and the big families was the plan to caliphatize the world.
    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Interplanner For Your Post:

    ClimateSanity (September 12th, 2017)

  17. #26
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,155
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 556 Times in 381 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    230481
    Quote Originally Posted by ClimateSanity View Post
    And all but a few agree that man's impact on that change is substantial and caused primarily by the release of green house gases as a result of industrialization....Jonahdog

    The “97 percent” statistic first appeared prominently in a 2009 study by University of Illinois master’s student*Kendall Zimmerman*and her adviser, Peter Doran. Based on a two-question online survey, Zimmerman and Doran concluded that “the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific bases of long-term climate processes” — even though only 5 percent of respondents, or about 160 scientists, were climate scientists. In fact, the “97 percent” statistic was drawn from an even smaller subset: the 79 respondents who were both self-reported climate scientists*and*had “published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change.” These 77 scientists agreed that global temperatures had generally risen since 1800, and that human activity is a “significant contributing factor.”

    And according to a study of 1,868 scientists working in climate-related fields, conducted just this year by thePBL Netherlands Environment Assessment Agency, three in ten respondents said that less than half of global warming since 1951 could be attributed to human activity, or that they did not know.

    https://www.google.com/amp/amp.natio...ion-ian-tuttle

    Sent from my XT1254 using TOL mobile app
    The Netherlands study is really interesting. I suggest you read the whole thing and not rely on the comments of a kid who writes for National Review.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jonahdog For Your Post:

    Rusha (September 10th, 2017),User Name (September 10th, 2017)

  19. #27
    Over 1500 post club User Name's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,765
    Thanks
    290
    Thanked 267 Times in 191 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    151081
    Quote Originally Posted by ClimateSanity View Post
    The “97 percent” statistic first appeared prominently in a 2009 study by University of Illinois master’s student*Kendall Zimmerman*and her adviser, Peter Doran.
    .

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to User Name For Your Post:

    Rusha (September 11th, 2017)

  21. #28
    Over 5000 post club ClimateSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,669
    Thanks
    4,232
    Thanked 1,953 Times in 1,465 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    682885
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    The Netherlands study is really interesting. I suggest you read the whole thing and not rely on the comments of a kid who writes for National Review.
    It undermines your whole claim.

    Sent from my XT1254 using TOL mobile app

  22. #29
    Over 5000 post club ClimateSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,669
    Thanks
    4,232
    Thanked 1,953 Times in 1,465 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    682885
    [QUOTE=

  23. #30
    Over 5000 post club ClimateSanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,669
    Thanks
    4,232
    Thanked 1,953 Times in 1,465 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    682885
    Quote Originally Posted by User Name View Post
    .
    And???

    Sent from my XT1254 using TOL mobile app

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 13 users browsing this thread. (3 members and 10 guests)

  1. RealityJerk,
  2. patrick jane,
  3. WizardofOz

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us