You're right your argument the governmentpicks the outcomes was a bad argument that you dishonesty put forth. Accept it and move on.
You're right your argument the governmentpicks the outcomes was a bad argument that you dishonesty put forth. Accept it and move on.I'm not interested in that topic. The POTUS doesn't personally pick what studies get funded as you dishonestly implied. It was a bad argument, accept it and move on.
Here's how this would go. I provide data. You, then berate the source, berate the data and berate me. That's your M.O. It's as reliable as the sun rising in the East. I'm champing at the bit to participate in yet another one of those exercises in futility. /s
I'd like to say that I am sorry that you are so unhappy the majority of the time but that would be a lie because I really don't care. In between getting banned, you have nothing good to say about anyone and anything here. You contribute nothing that is not tainted with anger and malice and in the process repeatedly declare over and over your superiority. The source of your unhappiness is a mystery to me but I have no empathy. You're just a seemingly perpetually angry individual. Your shtick is beyond tiresome.
Guess who's miserable? It's not me.
Why would they be rescinded if they are giving the government what they want?
no one is giving the government what they want. The money is just there. The results don't matter either way. I know you don't understand how any of this works, but that is a plain fact: Government grants like this are awarded based on the grant, based on the question. It has nothing to do with results. As Paratus said, the only way to lose funding is if the data has been found to be fraudulent. This is actually an extremely important difference, compared to studies funded by industry, that only ever has a long and certain history of protecting its own interests.
I know it is easy to manipulate the primed mind of a GOP voter into thinking that all government bad, therefore government research bad and glorious capitalist industry good, but it simply doesn't work that way. You have been thoroughly conned into believing the exact opposite of the reality. IF you think Industry has no motivation to guard it's profits and its share price and so nobly funds research with a neutral goal to produce valid, unskewed data, then you are far, far dumber than you think you are.
ffs: just think about it for a second. There is essentially no motivation for the Feds to manipulate data in the ways that you are so convinced that they do. And when you further have something like 97% vs 3% of a group claiming one large argument, the 3% aren't some noble upstarts, they are fucking paid shills.
Like Santer's (of Climategate fame) new paper on the hiatus? Great stuff. Glad to see they finally had to acknowledge it.I'll take funding a scientific study and not funding a foregone conclusion for $100 Alex
(Wow a whole $1.1B per year it's amazing how little we spend on science.)
What hiatus would that be?Like Santer's (of Climategate fame) new paper on the hiatus? Great stuff. Glad to see they finally had to acknowledge it.
Certain facts exist-
Nature converted enormous quantities of atmospheric CO2 into complex hydrocarbons over a few hundred million years & sequestered them in the Earth.
Humans are rapidly turning them back into atmospheric CO2 over a few hundred years.
The notion that it won't have an effect on the climate is absurd, but that's what climate change deniers want us all to believe.
The thrust of their argument? We'll all be dead or raptured before it gets very bad, so fuck it.
Umm they pick and choose what to believe from the Bible just like they do with science and facts.Perhaps using truth will never work with the climate change deniers. Is there a bible verse we can interoperate as Jesus loving renewable energy?
The only passage that deniers will look to is when God gives man dominion over the earth, and out of context as well...trying to say it's our God given right to donkey punch the planet.Perhaps using truth will never work with the climate change deniers. Is there a bible verse we can interoperate as Jesus loving renewable energy?
The best part to me is how you lie, every time.What hiatus would that be?
The best part to me is how you lie, every time.
The best part to me is how you lie, every time.
The question was dishonest because you know what he was referring to.It was a question not a statement and a simple one at that. One that you couldn't answer.
Although the best part to me is how you always accuse me of doing what you are doing. Standard dishonest debating tactic.
The question was dishonest because you know what he was referring to.
The question was dishonest because you know what he was referring to.
The question was dishonest because you know what he was referring to.
No my question is to Taj. He should provide the clarification not BS. That way there is no question about what hiatus Taj is talking about.So just answer it & move on. Or keep trolling.
You're right maybe he's talking about the time period that Soundgarden broke up before getting back together.
Arguments this transparently dishonest undermine whatever you're trying to do.
He asked him to specify what he was saying. Any honest and moral person should be happy to do so.
Buckshot knows that. He's just carrying water for Taj until he comes back. Tag team trolling.