They are all ars....holes

I guess one could respond with what do Biden, Harris, the Clintons, the Obamas and Nancy Pelosi all have in in common and one could also add who's the odd one out. I'll answer the last one. Biden's the odd one out because he's the only one that's laughing.

30 minutes ago, theshu25 said:

They are all ars....holes

 

ah, damn.

 

I'm reminded of them first thing every morning.

10 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Jordan Peterson is a climate denier. That automatically makes him an idiot in my book.

He denies there's a climate?

3 minutes ago, roquefort said:

He denies there's a climate?

He denies the climate is changing, as a result of anthropomorphic emissions.

 

Does light bend around you?

When Jordan Peterson enters a room, he doesn't turn the light on. He turns the dark off. 

 

Courtesy of JP, I now consider myself to be a (non-practicing) lapsed atheist. 

30 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

He denies the climate is changing, as a result of anthropomorphic emissions.

I just wanted to be sure you were talking about 'The Science' which 97% of the world's experts agree on (allegedly).

13 minutes ago, roquefort said:

I just wanted to be sure you were talking about 'The Science' which 97% of the world's experts agree on (allegedly).

Your use of apostrophes indicates scepticism.

 

What scientific training do you have?

They all backed a winner in the Election

They are all both richer and smarter than any poster on AN.

12 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

They are all both richer and smarter than any poster on AN.

Richer yes, but on the smarter part -- in the case of Tucker, I protest.

 

 

26 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Richer yes, but on the smarter part -- in the case of Tucker, I protest.

 

 

You are just jealous that he is listened to, unlike you. Bet ya half the membership here ignores what you say. 

 

Tucker is smart though, he doesnt call decent folks scumbags racists brainwashed cruel stupid et. esq.. You should take some lessons, Comrade.

They are all massive bell ends.

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

They are all both richer and smarter than any poster on AN.

There are plenty of rich people in this world who are thicker than two planks.

8 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

Tucker is just an outlier in this group.

No worries.

 

Still, he belongs in this group because he is also an admirer of Musk.

 

Tucker Carlson admires people I would not p!ss on, if they were on fire. He's a toady journalist.

5 hours ago, Lacessit said:

He denies the climate is changing, as a result of anthropomorphic emissions.

 

Does light bend around you?

 

Is it Nocturnal emissions, you are talking about, which are definitely anthropomorphic.

 

OR, are you talking...

 

ANTHROPOGENIC Climate Change?????

 

There's actually a difference, you know.....maybe...

 

 

1 minute ago, Lacessit said:

Tucker Carlson admires people I would not p!ss on, if they were on fire. He's a toady journalist.

 

Yes.

I agree.

But these three men are just a subset of all admirers of Musk.

Simple, I thought.

 

4 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

Is it Nocturnal emissions, you are talking about, which are definitely anthropomorphic.

 

OR, are you talking...

 

ANTHROPOGENIC Climate Change?????

 

There's actually a difference, you know.....maybe...

 

 

You've caught me out, you are quite correct. My bad.

 

Alas, my days of pleasant nocturnal emissions are about 6 decades behind me.

8 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

You've caught me out, you are quite correct. My bad.

 

Alas, my days of pleasant nocturnal emissions are about 6 decades behind me.

 

No worries.

Just another sick Gamma joke...I guess.

 

14 hours ago, Lacessit said:

You're wrong. All were found under genetically modified cabbages, planted by Romulans on a secret visit to Earth when they were searching for Spock. Raised by the Illuminati, they received their financial education from Tiny Rowland. Musk alone was entrusted with the jewels of the Garamantes to provide collateral on bank loans. Huey Long saw to their political education

\

You sound jealous.

6 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Your use of apostrophes indicates scepticism.

 

What scientific training do you have?

Probably no more than you. What's your point?

3 hours ago, Lacessit said:

There are plenty of rich people in this world who are thicker than two planks.

Perhaps so, but these three do not qualify.  I think I smell the faint waft of jealousy... or perhaps simple political distaste. It is a sad thing to equate people you disagree with to being unintelligent. 

1 minute ago, Hanaguma said:

Perhaps so, but these three do not qualify.  I think I smell the faint waft of jealousy... or perhaps simple political distaste. It is a sad thing to equate people you disagree with to being unintelligent. 

 

For sure, I will never say Musk or Peterson are not super intelligent.

That would be completely untrue.

 

1 hour ago, roquefort said:

Probably no more than you. What's your point?

Scientist spend years in training in difficult subjects, and decades acquiring experience in diverse fields. It's no walk in the park, compared to getting qualifications in the arts, accounting, and law.

 

I continue to be astounded by the arrogance and stupidity of non-scientists who think they know better, just because they are followers of some idiot on YouTube spouting junk science.

 

I have a degree in chemistry, two world patents, and multiple publications in scientific journals. And you?

 

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

Perhaps so, but these three do not qualify.  I think I smell the faint waft of jealousy... or perhaps simple political distaste. It is a sad thing to equate people you disagree with to being unintelligent. 

I'd agree Musk is a very smart guy. Jordan Peterson is a climate denier, anyone with two brain cells knows climate change is real.

 

I suppose you could describe Tucker Carlson as being intelligent enough to lob soft-ball questions to Putin, so he could get out of Russia without being poisoned or defenestrated.

 

You've never met anyone who is rich by inheritance, through no effort of their own?

IMHO all 3 of these individuals have a singular trait in common.

All thrive on fame and adulation despite that being disproportionately or inequitably apportioned.

Musk stands supreme in that he possesses intellectual conceptual widespread capacity that coupled with accrued financial  resources to realize concepts that is rare.

It does not endow him with endearing personality traits!

IMO Peterson is a typical psychologist whose interest in that "profession" was probably in search  of answers to personality problems of his own and perhaps having identified them has since spent time and effort in deflecting from  self and inflicting on others .

Tucker ? Personality wise a little brother to Peterson but self entitled enough to dispense with any rational validation and  simply ride the wave of fame/infamy in delusional self conviction of intellectual superiority. Given that Fox Entertainment Channel felt obliged to eradicate him should not be ignored. He is the sort of materiaal that Trump might consider  giving a job tho !

 

Never forget cynical sarcasm exists for a reason .....GG.

 

 

1 hour ago, Lacessit said:

Scientist spend years in training in difficult subjects, and decades acquiring experience in diverse fields. It's no walk in the park, compared to getting qualifications in the arts, accounting, and law.

 

I continue to be astounded by the arrogance and stupidity of non-scientists who think they know better, just because they are followers of some idiot on YouTube spouting junk science.

 

There are plenty of scientists who disagree with the consensus view on climate change. Are you saying that non-scientists cannot make a judgement on which group they choose to believe?

2 minutes ago, roquefort said:

Are you saying that non-scientists cannot make a judgement on which group they choose to believe?

 

He is saying that the science is set in stone..it has been proven beyond doubt and that  "us useless plebs"  should just believe whatever the "scientists" and legacy media say...no questions no doubt  just blind faith !

2 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Scientist spend years in training in difficult subjects, and decades acquiring experience in diverse fields. It's no walk in the park, compared to getting qualifications in the arts, accounting, and law.

 

I continue to be astounded by the arrogance and stupidity of non-scientists who think they know better, just because they are followers of some idiot on YouTube spouting junk science.

 

I have a degree in chemistry, two world patents, and multiple publications in scientific journals. And you?

 

 

I have always been reminded the sentiment expressed in a letter to his mother, written by Richard Smalley, anytime I hear students complain that the Social Sciences might be difficult.

 

Social Science is easy.

The Natural Sciences are truly hard.

 

(Also, much of Social Science is just, basically.....JUNK SCIENCE.)

 

Try taking a few grad courses at MIT Physics or Biochemistry if you think otherwise.

 

Most Social Scientists are nitwits...and....they even ENJOY being nitwits.....

This is why they chose Social Sciences in the first place...maybe.....

 

 

19 minutes ago, roquefort said:

There are plenty of scientists who disagree with the consensus view on climate change. Are you saying that non-scientists cannot make a judgement on which group they choose to believe?

 

No.

In fact, there are very few.

 

If you insist otherwise, then please list a few.

Thank you.