Tippaporn

No, you're clinging to a falsity for dear life, still trying to pretend it's true. The chutzpah you're displaying is truly comical.

Again, are you serious, Danderman123, in consistently deny the truth of that statement? I'm not ignoring any truth. And here you're using another logical fallacy. To disagree with a position does not infer that a position is ignored. The conclusion does not follow the premise. Are you saying that logic is abstract?

False. Repeating something over and over again doesn't make it true. So now your shifting from consensus to repetition as a tactic to convince?

Oh my God. You can't be serious posting that as a serious reply.

Now that was absolutely brilliant, Yellowtail. Coincidentally, I had been thinking of digging up some historical examples where almost universal consensus within the scientific community was ultimately shown to be false.

Care to weigh in on the consensus issue I'm raising, @placeholder or will you continue to ignore it? So far you've ignored answering twice; once refusing to address it in my reply to one of your posts and once when you were mentioned by link. It's an important issue to resolve, don't you think? For the false assertion of consensus equating to proof is used in almost every climate change article by climate change proponents. Including the article on which this thread is based.

Consensus may be true or it may be false. But consensus, in and of it self, does not make something true or false. If the truth is not yet established, as the debate still rages about climate changed, then consensus is irrelevant. Therefore, to use consensus when the truth has not been definitively established to assert that consensus makes a position true then that is a deceptive and dishonest practice. Your analogy is another form of fallacy of argument. Per Wiki, once again, on the Argument Of Analogy Fallacy: Argument from analogy or false analogy is a special type of inductive argument, where perceived similarities are used as a basis to infer some further similarity that has not been observed yet. Climate change has not been definitively proven. That the earth is not flat has been proven. I'm beginning to think that you have extreme difficulty with processing logical thought. Either that or you understand quite well that if consensus cannot be used to make climate change true then the climate change believers have lost a major tool in their arsenal for convincing the public of what they want the public to believe as true. For that would mean that even the outliers on this issue would have equal standing to the majority. Or, the truth would destroy one aspect of your narrative. Or, all of the above.

I'm posting information from Wiki on long established and accepted fallacies of argument. Consensus being one of them. To say that I'm posting false information is to say that Wiki's page on fallacies of argument is false information since I simply copied and pasted it. So saying that I'm posting false information is patently false. And BOOM!! you immediately post an article on scientific consensus which suggests that consensus makes something true. I mean, what does the above say? Well, it's more than obvious. BTW, neither @Danderman123 nor @placeholder have offered to address this issue. Hmmmm . . . I wonder why?

The reason President Trump doesn’t need to debate in one shot.

This much is established: If you understand that the argumentative use of consensus is a fallacy of relevance, and therefore false, why do you continue to use it to bolster your argument? Would you agree that it's use, being that it's false, is therefore dishonest? And if anyone purposely uses a known falsity then what might one conclude from that?

Wrong!! Absolutely wrong!! They have consensus of opinions!! <sarc>

Jack Smith has opened the door for the 2020 election to be litigated in court. After all, Trump is charged with knowingly spreading false information that it was stolen. Given the corrupt judiciary in the U.S., and the fact that ev erything is in constant flux, there are no guarantees. I and others think the corrupt Jack Smith has unwittingly opened Pandora's box. But we shall see in due time, won't we.

"Do you think the covid epidemic and it's effects on the economy stopped on Jan 20, 2021? Why do you give Trump a pass and not Biden?" Because Trump made the U.S. energy dominant in oil and gas. On Biden's 1st day he made the U.S. energy dependent. But, no, that had nada to do with inflation. It was the war in Ukraine. That's right. It was the bogeyman's fault. Didn't have anything to do with Biden's depletion of the U.S. oil reserves, either. A portion of which went to . . . the CCP.

Even if you take that chart at face value (and assume there won't be any revisions, LOL), and I don't without getting a 2nd, 3rd, 4th opinion, prices haven't come down. Never forget . . . "Inflation is transitory" - Janet Yellen. Sure, everything is . . . eventually. Go ahead and trust gubmint to your hearts content. And at your own peril. It seems you're stuck on MSM's many talking points. From MacroTrends. Quick quiz . . . which of the below years was Trump in office? Which of the below years was Biden in office? Yes, the economy is doing "well" from it's disastrous peak. It's like when gas shot up to almost $10/gal in certain locales, then dropped to $5 and the MSM was cheering about how cheap gas is now. I have no idea how they fool people so well with such twisted logic. U.S. inflation rate for 2022 was 8.00%, a 3.3% increase from 2021. U.S. inflation rate for 2021 was 4.70%, a 3.46% increase from 2020. U.S. inflation rate for 2020 was 1.23%, a 0.58% decline from 2019. U.S. inflation rate for 2019 was 1.81%, a 0.63% decline from 2018.

Was it Trump's fault that Covid happened? Geesh! So many minor details that you seem to leave out. 2019 was one of the best years ever economically for Americans. He created that by building over the previous two years.

Was it Trump's fault that Covid happened? Geesh! So many minor details that you seem to leave out. 2019 was one of the best years ever economically for Americans. He created that by building over the previous two years.

Come on, placerholder. Why do you ask me a question that you know I'm not allowed to answer? “That of which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence” ― Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

You forgot to mention that any wage increases have been completely stripped and outpaced by inflation. Small data point but . . . conveniently left out as truth so often doesn't fit into manufactured reality.

“That of which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence” ― Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus Don't be surprised if that changes rather soon.

". . . real concrete progress . . . " LOL. Have you been to the grocery store lately? Or the gas pump? Looked at a new apartment? How's your electric and gas bills? Going well for ya? What the hell are you talking about? That's why people are moving to Trump. If they're not with him already. Real concrete progress? On what planet?

If I were y'all I'd worry about not having Trump in office. Unless you've enjoyed the last 2-1/2 of epic destruction. Trump's the only Republican candidate who can halt and reverse that destruction. He's the only man, period, who can do the job that America desperately needs in order to survive. Why should he debate a bunch of political hacks, grifters and selfishly ambitious wannabes? None of them can talk about their policies in detail. Only in the form of glowing platitudes. If you'll allow me, placeholder, I'll borrow your trademark response here: They ain't got nothin'. “That of which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence” ― Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus This echo chamber here is the same as the other echo chamber I just recently exited. It's fun, but only for a very short while.

You can avoid reality but you cannot ignore the consequences of avoiding reality. - Ayn Rand As our dear Thai hosts are fond of saying, up to you, Tug.

The truth I speak informs many. They're just smart enough to not enter into this viper's den. Although there are others who speak the truth here now and again. They don't stay long as they get their word in and exit shortly. I've stayed much too long this go-around so I'll leave y'all to your carry on in your closed system. Until the next climate change thread . . .

There's reality and there's fantasy. Your fantasy is my reality and my reality is your fantasy. We can't both be right. But I know which is which.

Not according to the polls which everyone here loves so much (as long as they're favourable). Not sure if you've noticed but his indictments are strengthening him. Why? Because so many see the indictments as political persecution and election interference. The bridge has not been burned. People are still crossing over. To Trump. That includes independents, blacks and Hispanics. You can deny that if you wish. Even the MSM has admitted the fact. To their chagrin, I might add. Christie is joke. I don't know how else to put it. Emerson College has him at 9%. Do you understand how weak that is? Why? Because he's a joke, a RINO, a globalist, and a political parasite. What more reasons does one need?