.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
placeholder
-
Posts
24,677 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by placeholder
-
-
7 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:
Even if those accusations were true, and "connections" is such a nice vague word
Spewing terrorist propaganda is not vague. Hence why banned. Do you think they should let them carry on broadcasting?
Not surprising that any news that contradicts the official Israeli narrative you would characterize as "terrorist propaganda". Attaching "terrorist" to whatever information displeases you.
-
1
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Social Media said:
In recent years, protests on college campuses have shifted from critiques of specific policies to broader condemnations of America itself. What began as expressions of concern over Israel's actions in Gaza have morphed into demonstrations attacking the fundamental institutions and values of the United States. At the forefront of this movement are students who advocate for "universal liberation" while denouncing America as a "death country."
Campus protests are no longer limited to advocating for trans rights or condemning specific government actions; they have become platforms for a radical ideology that demonizes America and seeks its dismantlement. The American flag, once a symbol of unity and freedom, now elicits cheers when torn down from university flagpoles. The chants of "Free Palestine" have been replaced by slogans calling for the overthrow of all existing systems.
At the heart of these protests is a belief that America is inherently oppressive and irredeemable. The military, law enforcement, and democratic institutions are all portrayed as tools of exploitation and domination. Professors, often sympathetic to these views, propagate a narrative of America as a force for evil in the world, fostering an environment where dissenting opinions are marginalized and ideological conformity is rewarded.
Social media has amplified these sentiments, providing a platform for the dissemination of anti-American propaganda. TikTok algorithms promote divisive content that further fuels the flames of discontent among young people. As a result, we are witnessing a generation of students who view their own country with suspicion and disdain.
This phenomenon is not confined to the realm of academia; it has broader implications for America's standing in the world. When the youth of a nation reject their own country, it undermines the credibility and influence of that nation on the global stage. At a time when authoritarian regimes are on the rise and threats to democracy abound, the world needs American leadership more than ever.
2024-05-07
Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe
Same sort of nonsense was said about student demonstrators against the war in Vietnam.
-
1
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:
Truly bizarre comment from oppositeworld.
Being banned at various points because of connections to Iran and Islamist militants/terrorists would be a badge of honor to them? Who frigging cares.
The only "Truly bizarre comment from oppositeworld". I can see is yours
Even if those accusations were true, and "connections" is such a nice vague word, ya think that's why those countries banned Al Jazeera? Remember that it was Saudi Arabia along with the UAE that invented a provocation in order to justify a rupture with Qatar.
-
1 hour ago, sidneybear said:
All you do is Google and post links to unproven academic research and prototype technology, or anything else that supports the warmist creed, without adding any of your own insights. You have nothing.
Let me see. I cited research from some of the most prestigious scientific journals. And that is what you call unproven academic research? I cite a couple of examples of companies that are actually manufacturing batteries and you dismiss that as theoretical. As for insights...was your claim that nobody knows what percentage of CO2 comes from fossil fuels one of those "insights"? What you call insights a rational observer would call "making things up" or maybe science fiction.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:
It is common for people to ignore data outside their paradigm. It's called "cognitive dissonance".
You manifest that behavior when you fail to respond to scientific papers.
Actually, they didn't fail to respond. Rather they dismissed research from one of the most prestigious, maybe the most prestigious, scientific journal in the world.
-
1
-
-
On 5/5/2024 at 8:03 PM, Bkk Brian said:
Good for them, a bit late in the day though, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain & Egypt had already banned Al Jazeera.
Egypt accused Al Jazeera of being a mouthpiece for the Islamist group, banning the broadcaster and arresting a number of its journalists. In 2017, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain launched a boycott of Qatar over charges it supported terrorism, an accusation Qatar denied
Truly bizarre comment from oppositeworld. In the past, before Oct 7 it would have been considered a badge of honor to be banned by such repressive and brutal regimes like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain. Now, apparently, it's a mark of shame.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Barnet1900 said:
Great post.
I would never have thought COVID would be seen in my lifetime but it did.
I can honestly see this heat destroying the Thai economy within 10 years. With this heat nobody goes out, work stalls and people will look at other areas to travel to.
Unless Thailand takes this seriously they'll be facing an exodus which will be irreparable.
This, and last summer have been dreadful.
Well, this is an El Nino year was was last summer. Now that a La Nina is on the way, temperatures should be lower next year. But they're still most likely going to be hotter, on average, than they were, say 10 years ago. There's not much anyone can do to stop this rise of temperature. Even if the world were to achieve net zero tomorrow, average temperatures would still go up for a while before the rise was stopped. And, of course, by itself, Thailand can't make a significant difference to the rate of global warming.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, BE88 said:
Heat on earth is mainly due to solar particles which provide an average energy of 400 Watts/m2/day
And, it should be noted that the heat produced by humanity is less than 0.00001 of that graciously provided by the solar star.
The heat produced by humanity is utterly irrelevant to the issue of global warming. It has never been part of the scientific discussion What is relevant is the effect of greenhouse gases on certain bandwidths of solar radiation after they come into contact with various portions of planet earth.
-
2
-
-
11 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:
Exactly. I had in mind some form of social democracy, with a mixed economy; it’s not Marxism, but it’s not unfettered capitalism either. I expect that a social democracy would include abortion rights as part of a program of social equality and universal access to health and other services. Scandinavian countries generally follow such a system, and they always rank at the top in “happiness” indexes. But for a lot of people, it’s easier to simply throw around words that sound scary.
Exactly.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, susanlea said:
Nothing post. Nothing new there.
It may not be new, but in fact it certainly doesn't support your claims about the steady increase in temperature rise. And instead of offering valid evidence to contradict it, all you offer is empty words.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, susanlea said:
Are you going to correct this claim? It is embarrassing how you got it wrong despite the graph on this topic showing him to be correct.
If anyone should be embarrassed it's you basing your case on the widely dismissed work of Dr. Roy Spencer.
-
7 minutes ago, susanlea said:
1998 was the hottest year until 2016 so it held the record for 18 years.
I can't believe you are basing your assertions on the graph of Dr. Roy Spencer who can't get his work published in respectable journals and accuses the scientific world of conspiracy. This is definitely not a graph that the climatological research community bases its work on. On the other hand, the graph below reflects the consensus of the climatological community. I have taken the liberty of highlighting the year of 1998 in the graph below the first one just to make clear how tendentious your claim is.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24021772
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, susanlea said:
Nothing post.
I quote an article from Nature, possibly the most prestigious scientific journal in the world, that contradicts your claim, and you call it a nothing post. It's you who've got nothing.
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, susanlea said:
Social scientist, not a climate scientist. He was unemployed when he started the misinformation website. He was caught out misrepresenting reports and nobody respects him. Basically a fraudster.
And as for nobody respecting him, did you read the curriculum vitae I posted. That's your idea of nobody?
-
11 hours ago, susanlea said:
Wrong on both points. The rate is steady at 0.15 degrees per decade and temperatures rose by 1.1 degrees since 1900. You don't even know what you are posting.
Once again, here's that article from Nature which casts a lot of doubt on that assertion of yours:
Robust acceleration of Earth system heating observed over the past six decades
In this study, we demonstrate that since 1960, the warming of the world ocean has accelerated at a relatively consistent pace of 0.15 ± 0.05 (W/m2)/decade, while the land, cryosphere, and atmosphere have exhibited an accelerated pace of 0.013 ± 0.003 (W/m2)/decade. This has led to a substantial increase in ocean warming, with a magnitude of 0.91 ± 0.80 W/m2 between the decades 1960–1970 and 2010–2020, which overlies substantial decadal-scale variability in ocean warming of up to 0.6 W/m2. Our findings withstand a wide range of sensitivity analyses and are consistent across different observation-based datasets.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-49353-1
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, susanlea said:
Exposed as a climate fraudster in 2013
A dishonest fraudster who pretends to be an expert on climate.
This is the same James Taylor who claimed that 2015 was not the hottest year on record but rather that 1998 was.
James Taylor wrote an article in Forbes claiming that 2015 was not the hottest year on record:49a7
“Forget what global warming activists would lead you to believe – 2015 was not even close to the hottest year on record.
Satellite temperature readings going back to 1979 show 1998 was by far the warmest year in the satellite era, followed by 2010. 2015 comes in third. And these results are only for the period since 1979.”50
And given his long record of propagating falsehoods, I'm very dubious about his veracity.
https://www.desmog.com/james-taylor/
Whereas John Cook is
-
1 minute ago, susanlea said:
Exposed as a climate fraudster in 2013
A dishonest fraudster who pretends to be an expert on climate.
Tax dodges? What are you on about?
-
1 minute ago, susanlea said:
Social scientist, not a climate scientist. He was unemployed when he started the misinformation website. He was caught out misrepresenting reports and nobody respects him. Basically a fraudster.
Once again you have provided no evidence. Just empty claims.
-
3 hours ago, susanlea said:
Your source is worthless. The guy behind it has a checked past and known alarmist. Also not a climate scientist. He was exposed as a fraud years ago.
Really?
John Cook is a Senior Research Fellow at the Melbourne Centre for Behaviour Change at the University of Melbourne. He is also affiliated with the Center for Climate Change Communication as adjunct faculty. In 2007, he founded Skeptical Science, a website which won the 2011 Australian Museum Eureka Prize for the Advancement of Climate Change Knowledge and 2016 Friend of the Planet Award from the National Center for Science Education. John co-authored the college textbooks Climate Change: Examining the Facts with Weber State University professor Daniel Bedford. He was also a coauthor of the textbook Climate Change Science: A Modern Synthesis and the book Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand. In 2013, he published a paper analysing the scientific consensus on climate change that has been highlighted by President Obama and UK Prime Minister David Cameron. In 2015, he developed a Massive Open Online Course at the University of Queensland on climate science denial, that has received over 25,000 enrollments.
https://www.climatechangecommunication.org/all/team_member/john-cook/
John earned his PhD in Cognitive Science at the University of Western Australia in 2016.
Got some evidence that he's a known alarmist. Got any evidence to show that he was exposed as a fraud?
-
3 hours ago, susanlea said:
The graph is based on satellite data and it is not my graph posting. Secondly there are no 100% correct scientists. You aren't even a scientist and you have made incorrect statements today alone. Don't throw stones when you barely know the science.
The beach was great today. Beautiful weather.
Again with the personal comments. Whether or not I am a scientist is utterly irrelevant to the issues at hand. What matters is the sources I cite. Yours are mainly denialists or organizations who get their funding from oil interests.. As for "there are no 100% correct scientists".. maybe so, but some are a lot more wrong than others. I provided links to show just how wrong Spencer is. You have provided nothing to challenge this. Spencer is someone who claims there is a conspiracy to keep him from publishing in journals.
-
5 minutes ago, mogandave said:
Only history
ancient history
Battery costs have dropped by more than 90 per cent in the last 15 years, a new report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) reveals.
It’s one of the fastest declines ever seen among clean energy technologies, and provides hope that batteries can carry the world to its renewable energy goals.
It’s cheaper to build new solar than it is to operate coal plants
New analysis released by Lazard compares the levelized cost of energy for various generation technologies on a $/MWh basis and shows that renewables, specifically utility-scale solar and wind, are the economic frontrunner
And that analysis is 3 years old. Prices of photovoltaics has since plummeted. You're living in the past.
-
1 minute ago, youreavinalaff said:
No. Talking winning the next election without having released a manifesto.
To think PMQs is "unmissable" is sad.
Wow. And so a new religion is born. What is being worshipped is the Magic Manifesto without which an election is unwinnable even against a political party that is now thoroughly and widely detested.
-
15 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:
That's not wat I asked.
It's an answer to what you asked.
-
3 hours ago, susanlea said:
It looks like a drunk guy picked the low and high with scribbles. The correct ways to do this is low to low or high to high or midpoint to midpoint. You didn't do any of those things because you have an agenda to push. You are a time waster. Learn how science works or don't bother.
Actually, this graph was created by Dr. Roy Spencer, the denialist scientist you quoted above. He and his collaborator, John Christie have a history of being wrong in their hypotheses, measurements and predictions. Spencer actually claims that there is a conspiracy to suppress his work
https://bbickmore.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/roy-spencers-great-blunder-part-1/
https://skepticalscience.com/Roy-Spencers-Great-Blunder-Part-2.html
So his graph is worthless.
Al Jazeera Shutdown - Israeli Cabinet Approves Closure of Al Jazeera's Facilities
in World News
Posted
A practice they share with the Saudi, Bahraini, and Egyptian government to whatever or whomever opposes them.