JCauto

46 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) announced on Friday that she had filed articles of impeachment against Attorney General Merrick Garland as the FBI’s search of the former president’s Florida residence roils Republicans. 

 

Greene’s resolution claims that the attorney general’s “personal approval to seek a search warrant for the raid on the home of the 45th President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, constitutes a blatant attempt to persecute a political opponent.”

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3599038-marjorie-taylor-greene-filed-articles-of-impeachment-against-garland/

Is that correct? I thought she would surely say "cuticles of impeachtreement" or something along those lines. She must have gotten a coach to teach her how to say the proper words before she gets up to the mic. How wonderful it must be to have such fine people representing one's side as this!

They undercooked the Amok. It got up and started running.

Horses gone? Quick! Bolt the barn door!

9 hours ago, Sparktrader said:

Consensus isnt science and there is no one opinion. Lots of views from mild to strong. 

Of course. But you understand what I was saying. This is not a controversial issue among the informed.

6 hours ago, Sparktrader said:

Google skeptics. Look at how many there are.

Yes. And they're a tiny minority. It's a big issue involving an enormous amount of scientists in a wide range of disciplines. The consensus is overwhelming.

4 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

Sure bet my compatriots back in the UK will be moaning like hell about the cost of gas and electric come the winter months and moaning they wish it was summer again.

No doubt. You live in Thailand and moan like two cats courting in the middle of the night.

On 7/19/2022 at 3:07 AM, smedly said:

engineer of what exactly ?

 

how about sharing your opinion on the the topic instead of the "I'm an engineer and you are all talking ##" stupid nonsense and quite frankly for a self claimed expert on everything - well you have to be since according to you we are all talking z3#................the engineer of ? ##, I will guess you from the USA who have to odd ## that thinks they know everything..........you don't

 

oh and I have 3rd level education but I don't need to brag about it, common sense overrides stupidity no matter how smart you think you are, right now pretty much everyone has an opinion about you, try joining and contributing to the conversation instead of telling everyone they are stupid because you are "an engineer" lol

Civil engineering, seeing as you're so interested.

Despite your 3rd level education, you were unable to discern my point, that being the almost complete lack of technical expertise or experience amongst the vaccine and mask skeptics. That you are so interested in the minutiae of my degree yet unable to describe any technical aspects of your own (other than "3rd level") tells me I was correct.

Yes, they're so much more influenced by pornography in movies than by, oh, the dozen or so places selling sex openly that they walk or drive past every day on their way to school. I'm sure the dreaded porn affects them much more than their father having a mia noi who is only a few years older than they are. 

2 hours ago, smedly said:

and you of course are a genius at everything

No, not at all, although I may be better at maths and science than you since I'm an engineer. Or perhaps you're one too?

Doubt it, since you're rabbitting on about pandemic response without acknowledging the millions of people who were saved by it. In my experience, practically none of the Google PhDs in Epidemiology that suddenly appeared have much if any of a technical background. But boy, they sure do learn quick! Seems I made a big mistake by studying and working in technical fields for years when all I needed was a few Youtube videos and Bob's Your Uncle! 

Wow, all the amateur epidemiologists are back! Were you finally going back to uni to catch up on those noisome statistics courses you missed out on the first time? Excellent that y'all realized you were talking about things you hadn't a clue about so decided to swot up! Just wondering though how you managed to acquire decades of experience as well in that short time since you were last pontificating...

9 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

The answer is obvious , everyone would choose the baby .

But if I were to reply with "The baby" , he would try to use that to make me wrong about something, or that I'm a hypocrite or something or prove some other point .

   He seemed to be making the point that babys have more value than unborn babies .

  Everybody would choose to rescue the baby

Exactly. Thank you for being honest. Now use the same calculus to assess the value of the unborn in comparison to that of the mother. The unborn do not in any case have any precedence over the living. 

16 hours ago, JCauto said:

There was a great analogy I read the other day that clarifies things in this endless and fruitless debate. It's a variation on the "Trolley Problem".

 

You're in a house that has caught on fire. The house is a Center for Reproductive Health. You wake up in a panic and rush to get out. On your way out, you quickly open a door because you hear someone screaming in terror and inside there are two chairs. One has a child of 1 year old on it. The other has a big container with 1,000 in-vitro fertilization eggs that have already been impregnated with sperm and the cooling systems to maintain them. You can only carry one and what is left will burn. What do you do?

Yo! Mac! Mac Mickmanus! Did you see this post? Why haven't you responded? What would you do? You've responded to other posts since I sent this and you responded to my other posts about this topic. Simple question. What do you do? HELLO!!!!!

2 hours ago, JCauto said:

There was a great analogy I read the other day that clarifies things in this endless and fruitless debate. It's a variation on the "Trolley Problem".

 

You're in a house that has caught on fire. The house is a Center for Reproductive Health. You wake up in a panic and rush to get out. On your way out, you quickly open a door because you hear someone screaming in terror and inside there are two chairs. One has a child of 1 year old on it. The other has a big container with 1,000 in-vitro fertilization eggs that have already been impregnated with sperm and the cooling systems to maintain them. You can only carry one and what is left will burn. What do you do?

By the way, the person who wrote the original analogy observed that when he would post this on fora, he practically NEVER gets a response because everyone knows what the answer is including the so-called "right-to-lifers", hence they simply won't answer. Prove us wrong Mac!

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

Though Thaksin was beloved by millions, and did a far better job than Prayuth could ever dream of doing, it seems that the family is fairly toxic at this point. Time for some new blood. Some smart, creative, youthful leadership. 

Oh, you mean the Future Forward Party? Gee, what happened with those guys?

1 hour ago, Misterwhisper said:

This is like freakin' deja-vu.

 

In my opinion, it's rather clear why PTP fields an unexperienced "girly" like Paetongtarn. who at 35 years old cannot possibly have attained the political acumen to head a government and whose knowledge of economics is limited to spending her family's wealth....

 

Then again, Thai politics has NEVER been about political competence and fielding the right people. Instead it's ALWAYS been who is going to get their turn at the feeding trough next.

Okay...so first of all, PTP hasn't fielded this woman as their leader, this is the response of people to a NIDA Poll. You know, as in "I, Prayuth, NEED A Poll that shows I am a popular Prime Minister..." That he finished 3rd in a NEED A Poll is about as big a condemnation as you're likely to observe in this land when it comes to powerful people who gained it via having guns.

Second of all, while your last sentence is true, why should it be accepted as being so? When it appears that there may actually be an independent candidate or party, he's sure to be quickly moved to the side (do you recall Thanathorn?). And don't think this is just the Military who were on board with that; the Democrats and Peua Thai would similarly be pleased to see him shuffled off to the sidelines. That's what they REALLY don't want! But second-worst is Thaksin, who for all of his bluster, lack of respect for institutions and corruption did something nobody else had previously done - pointed the government firehose of funds towards the North and Northeast and decentralized power to them. That's something they'll never forgive, and why he's still Public Enemy Number One. Once the people realized that this was possible, the genie was out of the bottle. Now they'll put him or his relatives or sock puppets back whenever they're allowed to do so. 

The biggest disappointment for me remains the pathetic attitudes of the Bangkokians and other Thai who know better but won't vote against their own interests because they're essentially beneficiaries of the corruption and, at the end of the day, aren't willing to suffer even minor inconvenience to get real change. Oh, and the even-more-pathetic foreign cheerleaders (Steven100, care to offer another full-throated defense of the powers-that-be?).