2016 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - All Politics & Dumb Opinions Here

[coltsnsox07]

I wonder how many members will get suspended next Monday during Hillary & Trump's first debate!

[chezball]

Originally Posted by coltsnsox07

I wonder how many members will get suspended next Monday during Hillary & Trump's first debate!

Don't think any, after Nov. 8th that's another story.
What happened to ssbled?

[TheHeel]

Originally Posted by notsublime

Welcome to the Republican party.

Ha!

I actually vote for the best candidate that I feel is fit to run this country. I do not identify as democrat or republican. Whoever the best person is for that time and my future projection.

Some of my votes since 2000 (20 years old) may surprise some.

[xbignick]

LOL

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/co...tons_tech_guy/

"Hello all- I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a PST file. Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out.
I am not sure if something like this is possible with PowerShell, or exporting all of the emails to MSG and doing find/replaces with a batch processing program of some sort.
Does anyone have experience with something like this, and/or suggestions on how this might be accomplished?"

House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...clinton-emails

[xbignick]

Why did it take a user from pol or reddit to find this when there was an 'investigation'?

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by Clarka3

99% of the world's scientists in the area agree. there is no controversy that we are affecting the climate. please post in the controversial topics thread with this subject so we can discuss it further, because it is not (and should not be) a political agenda item.

NASA Exposed in ?Massive? New Climate Data Fraud - Principia Scientific International

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by Clarka3

dude, teachers are conservative nightmares because us bleeding heart libs always talk nothing but politics, even in our science classrooms.

Correct. Prime example was your 99% comment on climate change. Not all teachers, but the majority are liberals like yourself who are indoctrinating political bias. Two of my children are currently in high school and politics is brought into discussion on a daily basis. Luckily my children question most things. I guess I am lucky as my children have common sense and can already see through the political correctness and liberal bull #@#@#@#@ taught in their school.

THEHEEL- Perfect example of why I did not reply to your comment earlier.

[Boo]

Originally Posted by chezball

Don't think any, after Nov. 8th that's another story.
What happened to ssbled?

SSB got nabbed in another thread...football related (off the field issues of a certain TB QB).

[Panthersfans]

Originally Posted by coltsnsox07

I wonder how many members will get suspended next Monday during Hillary & Trump's first debate!

Hopefully none. The thoughts and opinions of this thread I feel like overall have been well handled and debated. If you think about it we could even teach our politicians a thing or two about trying to be opinionated and still get along.

[VeedonFleece]

It can be worrying placing the education of your children in the hands of people who may have their own agenda. For example, they teach religion at my kids' school on a daily basis. Luckily my kids have been brought up to question things so don't just blindly accept that because it's in the bible it must be true, like most conservatives seem to believe.

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by VeedonFleece

It can be worrying placing the education of your children in the hands of people who may have their own agenda. For example, they teach religion at my kids' school on a daily basis. Luckily my kids have been brought up to question things so don't just blindly accept that because it's in the bible it must be true, like most conservatives seem to believe.

Religion should not be taught in a public school. If parents want religion taught it should be in a private school only.

[quackhead]

Hillary still having problems, in more ways than one.

Hillary Holds Small Rally at Temple=> Is Helped Up the Stairs


One more week until first debate. What if she can't get up the stairs to the podium?

[rman112]

Originally Posted by quackhead

Hillary still having problems, in more ways than one.

Hillary Holds Small Rally at Temple=> Is Helped Up the Stairs


One more week until first debate. What if she can't get up the stairs to the podium?

She's healthy. Anything else is a conspiracy created by alt-right, racist xenophobes.

[Clarka3]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

NASA Exposed in ?Massive? New Climate Data Fraud - Principia Scientific International

nope. where is the data and sources on this. just, nope.

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Correct. Prime example was your 99% comment on climate change. Not all teachers, but the majority are liberals like yourself who are indoctrinating political bias. Two of my children are currently in high school and politics is brought into discussion on a daily basis. Luckily my children question most things. I guess I am lucky as my children have common sense and can already see through the political correctness and liberal bull #@#@#@#@ taught in their school.

THEHEEL- Perfect example of why I did not reply to your comment earlier.

Here is a graph showing the "warming and cooling cycles" that is constantly said in defense of rising temperatures today. As you can see, we're driving an elevator to the death of our planet.




Go to page 6 of this and take a look at the graph, i don't know much about the source, but this graph and data is all over the place. Sure, we have cycles, but ever since the Industrial Revolution, our cycles have been getting warmer and warmer.

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-re..._SPM_FINAL.pdf

here's another look at the amount of CO2 we've been pumping into the atmosphere lately, compared to the natural amount before we humans started burning dino juice.




there is no controversy. I would rather err on the side of caution than ignore the 97% of scientists that agree things are warmer, 84% that think humans have a hand in it.

But don't let those numbers stop you, the people publishing peer reviewed papers (which, if it isn't peer-reviewed it shouldn't count because that's how we got the #@#@#@#@#@#@#@#@ vaccines=autism movement):

"James L. Powell, a former member of the National Science Board and current executive director of the National Physical Science Consortium, analyzed published research on global warming and climate change between 1991 and 2012 and found that of the 13,950 articles in peer-reviewed journals, only 24 rejected anthropogenic global warming.[32] This was a follow-up to an analysis looking at 2,258 peer-reviewed articles published between November 2012 and December 2013 revealed that only one of the 9,136 authors rejected anthropogenic global warming." (that was an excerpt from wikipedia- here's the link to the actual article: http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astro...ic_papers.html)

if you want to complain about peer review, i don't know what to tell you. Peer review is in place to stop #@#@#@#@#@#@#@#@ from being taken as science. It's how science checks itself. If something is published that is outrageous and unsubstantiated, it shouldn't make it through that process. that's why a LOT of the Climate Change Denial "studies" are published on the web and not in peer reviewed journals.

So, sorry for teaching my students what the science is saying.

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Religion should not be taught in a public school. If parents want religion taught it should be in a private school only.

we agree 100%

Originally Posted by xbignick

LOL

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/co...tons_tech_guy/

"Hello all- I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a PST file. Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out.
I am not sure if something like this is possible with PowerShell, or exporting all of the emails to MSG and doing find/replaces with a batch processing program of some sort.
Does anyone have experience with something like this, and/or suggestions on how this might be accomplished?"

House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server | TheHill

I have no reason to doubt that this did happen because i DO think some fishy stuff was hidden, but i'm also dubious until it's picked up and investigated further (if only because it originated on reddit)

[quackhead]

Originally Posted by Clarka3

99% of the world's scientists in the area agree. there is no controversy that we are affecting the climate. please post in the controversial topics thread with this subject so we can discuss it further, because it is not (and should not be) a political agenda item.

Tell that to Al Gore.

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by Clarka3

nope. where is the data and sources on this. just, nope.





Here is a graph showing the "warming and cooling cycles" that is constantly said in defense of rising temperatures today. As you can see, we're driving an elevator to the death of our planet.




Go to page 6 of this and take a look at the graph, i don't know much about the source, but this graph and data is all over the place. Sure, we have cycles, but ever since the Industrial Revolution, our cycles have been getting warmer and warmer.

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-re..._SPM_FINAL.pdf

here's another look at the amount of CO2 we've been pumping into the atmosphere lately, compared to the natural amount before we humans started burning dino juice.




there is no controversy. I would rather err on the side of caution than ignore the 97% of scientists that agree things are warmer, 84% that think humans have a hand in it.

But don't let those numbers stop you, the people publishing peer reviewed papers (which, if it isn't peer-reviewed it shouldn't count because that's how we got the #@#@#@#@#@#@#@#@ vaccines=autism movement):

"James L. Powell, a former member of the National Science Board and current executive director of the National Physical Science Consortium, analyzed published research on global warming and climate change between 1991 and 2012 and found that of the 13,950 articles in peer-reviewed journals, only 24 rejected anthropogenic global warming.[32] This was a follow-up to an analysis looking at 2,258 peer-reviewed articles published between November 2012 and December 2013 revealed that only one of the 9,136 authors rejected anthropogenic global warming." (that was an excerpt from wikipedia- here's the link to the actual article: Climate Change Denial: Why don’t they publish scientific papers?)

if you want to complain about peer review, i don't know what to tell you. Peer review is in place to stop #@#@#@#@#@#@#@#@ from being taken as science. It's how science checks itself. If something is published that is outrageous and unsubstantiated, it shouldn't make it through that process. that's why a LOT of the Climate Change Denial "studies" are published on the web and not in peer reviewed journals.

So, sorry for teaching my students what the science is saying.






we agree 100%




I have no reason to doubt that this did happen because i DO think some fishy stuff was hidden, but i'm also dubious until it's picked up and investigated further (if only because it originated on reddit)

We can go back and forth on this, but not worth my time. 99% is false and should end this discussion.

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

We can go back and forth on this, but not worth my time. 99% is false and should end this discussion.

What would convince you that Global Warming is man-made and exists BFP? I'm just curious. Are you so grounded in your beliefs that no amount of evidence would?

[Brobocop]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

We can go back and forth on this, but not worth my time. 99% is false and should end this discussion.

so, proof was provided and you just brushed it off by saying, "99% is false....." Can you provide support for that claim?

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by Brobocop

so, proof was provided and you just brushed it off by saying, "99% is false....." Can you provide support for that claim?

Yes. Open up google and type global warming myth. You are welcome.

Will be nice and post a link based on 97% Clarka is going with.

http://www.commdiginews.com/politics...ge-myth-45412/

NOAA manipulated data.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/04/no...arming-hiatus/

[RossOK]

2016 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - All Politics & Dumb Opinions Here

You really nailed it with the thread title, man.

[Brobocop]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Yes. Open up google and type global warming myth. You are welcome.

Don't tell me to do the research. You make a claim, you back it up.

That's how you have a discussion or debate. You don't tell the other side they are wrong and walk away. You come with something to back up your side of argument.

You are welcome.

[jstephens24]

Originally Posted by Brobocop

Don't tell me to do the research. You make a claim, you back it up.

That's how you have a discussion or debate. You don't tell the other side they are wrong and walk away. You come with something to back up your side of argument.

You are welcome.

Here are 30

30 Global Warming Myths vs Facts - Conserve Energy Future

I don't have a dog in this fight so instead of getting heated I did exactly what he said. Googled global warming myths. One of the first links

[Clarka3]

at this point, i wish Obama would say climate change is a myth so the habitual contrarians would use their powers for good.

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by Brobocop

Don't tell me to do the research. You make a claim, you back it up.

That's how you have a discussion or debate. You don't tell the other side they are wrong and walk away. You come with something to back up your side of argument.

You are welcome.

I am 100% sure the discussion/debate was between Clarka and myself. If you want to join the debate/discussion feel free to post some facts yourself and don't really on others to further your knowledge. With that said " I did go back and post some links showing NOAA changed its data to fit their agenda. I also showed how they claim 97% percent of scientists believe in Global Warming aka Climate Change aka Gore Money Maker aka Tax Payer Pension. Here is an excerpt for one of the articles:

Another problem with this survey was that the “scientists” who were surveyed were scientists in the same way Bill Nye the Science guy is a scientist (he’s not, his highest level of education is a bachelor’s degree in engineering). Strangely, only 79 of the 3100 responses to this poll were from people who considered themselves experts in climate science. This survey was clearly not the landslide statement that climate change believers made it out to be.

[Clarka3]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Yes. Open up google and type global warming myth. You are welcome.

Will be nice and post a link based on 97% Clarka is going with.

Debunking the "97% of scientists agree on man made climate change" myth | Communities Digital News

NOAA manipulated data.

NOAA Tampers With Data To Erase The Global Warming 'Hiatus' | The Daily Caller

it seems like the sticking point is how people think we are complaining about the recent decades impact on climate change, but then are still ignoring the overall trend from the 1800s when the Industrial Revolution started the rising CO2 levels.

from your daily caller article: "NOAA’s study, however, notes the overall warming trend since 1880 has not been significantly changed. What’s increased is the warming trend in recent decades."

They are saying that data may have been fiddled with in the recent decades, but the overall rising trend from the 1800s hasn't been changed.


it's like you are ignoring the fire in the rest of the house because the temperature barely rose in the bedroom where you are currently sitting in.


fine, let's ignore the 97% number since that seems to have been propagated in a 2012 study that people find issues with the methodology. in that study I linked from 2013, the amount of published papers on climate change from 91-2012 was 13974. 24 said humans had no part in it. That is 0.00172, or .17% of papers published dictating that climate change does not have human help.

1 guy out of 9,136 authors said humans have no impact on GW in their publications. 1 guy. you can take a look at his methodology by clicking the link on this link (it's the author's direct blog post)

Why Climate Deniers Have No Scientific Credibility - In One Pie Chart | DeSmogBlog

Dude was appointed to the National Science board by Reagan, and then again by GHW Bush.


edit to add: I'm talking peer-reviewed, published papers. Because, Peer-Review is the protection from allowing idiots to spout shaky science as fact. If somebody tries to slip something wrong through the peer-review process, they get smacked down.