It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

For Dems who were asleep in grade school science

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Apparently its not just Dems that we asleep in science class. Most conservatives don't believe in climate change and don't understand the difference between climate and weather.




posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Funny!

That conservative named Nixon created the EPA.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: Metallicus
Dems clearly ignore science when it suits them. There is no scientifuc basis for more than two genders, but they haven’t let that stop them.


God made them "male and female" [Genesis 1:27]

but then He gave them "imagination" [Ecclesiastes 7:29]

So...man started his own "creations"....





Once again to be clear GENDER isnt BODILY APPARENT. It syour mental sex. SEX is what your body looks like. It dotn ask for GENDER on your applications for jobs does it? No it ask SEX.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Meat is murder, but plants that have been shown to interact, evolve to climates, follow the light that is the source of their life, attach to host, evolve their seeds to spread through the air, or form in a fruit so it will be transferred by the animal eating the fruit.

Where is there a differentiation other than animals being more similar to us. Ego much?

This is not to be offensive to those who don't subscribe to FORCING it on others. I understand many have differing reasons for their choice.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Climate is long term, weather is dictated by climate people know this, that isn't the argument. Climate is a longer cycle than we have recorded to study by the extracted dated (which some has been manipulated) is not enough to create a true algorithym to even identify it.

It's all theoretical at this point which to me ties into the god vs science debate. Do we really have the right to transform our host to better suit us? The tree of knowledge, it was about knowledge we were not ready to inherit, due to too powerful of knowledge being in the wrong hands can be extremely detrimental to not only us but all that inhabit this planet.

With space are we the best to inhabit other planets when we can't even take care of the one that provides us life. What's the end game?

As in the instance of climate change without the proper long form data we have just as big of a chance of destroying what we're trying help.

Then you take in to count the pushers of this and the monetary gain at hand it cast further doubt. Besides paying carbon tax, redistrubting wealth, expanding opportunities for more, none of it can coexist with effeciency which would result in our best attempt at tackling the climate issue.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Was there ever a motive explained for Vegas? As far as I am aware an act of terror doesn't necessarily constitute the individual a terrorist. Some say it's subjective to racial implications, but it's due to the agenda behind that act that constitutes terrorism.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 04:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: amazing

Funny!

That conservative named Nixon created the EPA.



I didn't say all. That's one Conservative. LOL



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: amazing

Climate is long term, weather is dictated by climate people know this, that isn't the argument. Climate is a longer cycle than we have recorded to study by the extracted dated (which some has been manipulated) is not enough to create a true algorithym to even identify it.

It's all theoretical at this point which to me ties into the god vs science debate. Do we really have the right to transform our host to better suit us? The tree of knowledge, it was about knowledge we were not ready to inherit, due to too powerful of knowledge being in the wrong hands can be extremely detrimental to not only us but all that inhabit this planet.

With space are we the best to inhabit other planets when we can't even take care of the one that provides us life. What's the end game?

As in the instance of climate change without the proper long form data we have just as big of a chance of destroying what we're trying help.

Then you take in to count the pushers of this and the monetary gain at hand it cast further doubt. Besides paying carbon tax, redistrubting wealth, expanding opportunities for more, none of it can coexist with effeciency which would result in our best attempt at tackling the climate issue.


But your missing the bigger point. We know the planet and life of some sort will probably survive anything that happens but...when we talk about climate change or global warming and how it affects us, we're talking about humans and too much warming is detrimental to us humans. We know that. Science and research and data has shown that.

We also, using science, can look at evidence from the past like ice core samples, tree rings, sediment etc. Science can give us a pretty good estimation of what earths climate was going back millions of years.

Science is also telling us that we are in an accelerated warming cycle, irregardless or in addition to any natural warming or cooling cycle we may already be in. Scientists look at all of that.

We have to at least start by agreeing that there is a warming trend. Then we have to agree that man is causing some of it. Then we have to agree to look at models that can predict what might happen and what we can do to mitigate the effects or if we can change this pattern.

Then, when we really look at who's making billions off of this debate, we see that it is oil, coal, automobile, fracking, local energy companies. They will and have been making billions as long as they pay our elected officials to keep business as usual.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 04:54 PM
link   
If anything lets not continue to spread the fake news that the girl died from being hit by the car. Her mother said it was a heart attack, and the video evidence supports this.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

The thing is do you honestly think our omnipotent God did not know exactly what was going to happen to the apple in the garden with a naked woman prancing about?


Adam didn't know she was naked, until she saw the snake and got the idea into her head that she and Adam could taste the fruit hanging in the middle of their gardens.

She approached Adam and offered him to taste.

If Adam had approached her, we'd have called it harassment.





posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

Once again to be clear GENDER isnt BODILY APPARENT. It syour mental sex. SEX is what your body looks like. It dotn ask for GENDER on your applications for jobs does it? No it ask SEX.


That's right.

Same thing I said though.

Sex is real. Gender is in the imagination.




posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
While I agree that conatsntly calling someone racist etc. diminshes credibility, I can not support the part about that girl deserving to die.

I totally disgaree with your belittling attitude of her death.

B the same token, you would say that if a trump supporter gets in front of a bike lock, they deserve to get smashed.

Or if free speech rally attenders know 50000 will be there to protest them, they knew they would get attacked.

I strongly disagree with this.


Where did he say she deserved to die?
The point was that people should know better than to play in the road.



posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: Metallicus
Dems clearly ignore science when it suits them. There is no scientifuc basis for more than two genders, but they haven’t let that stop them.


God made them "male and female" [Genesis 1:27]

but then He gave them "imagination" [Ecclesiastes 7:29]

So...man started his own "creations"....





Once again to be clear GENDER isnt BODILY APPARENT. It syour mental sex. SEX is what your body looks like. It dotn ask for GENDER on your applications for jobs does it? No it ask SEX.


So you admit that it's all a fantasy? A mental fetish we're all expected to play along with?

Sex is gender. XX and XY. No matter how much you want, you can't change that.



posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Thanks for outing yourself as a white supremacist. I mean those are the only sites where this ridiculous narrative is being pushed. But feel free to continue to believe that the medical examiner is in on some vast conspiracy to paint neo-Nazis in a negative light. I mean they're currently seen as such paragons of virtue. Clearly the government needs to enact a devious plot to turn the mass public against them.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

No sir I am not the one missing the point, I clearly stated that the earths functions are more important than us. What gives us the right to transform our host to suit us? Not to mention we see in the field of science wild speculation and conjecture to which we often put into practice for monetary/ego reasons that often result in negative consequence.

That's why I brought the science vs god debate into it. Just because we think we have the potential to curb the harm done to us do we have that right? The tree of knowledge is meant to be our downfall due to our inability to handle the responsibility. We don't know our earth, oceans, or ourselves well enough at this point, but we still "believe" that we do which in some instances works out alright atleast for the short term.

Einstein wanted to know why and how, but what nonone eludes to is the fact that we being who we are only want to know to change things for our own purposes, of which generally are not in our best interest nor our host.

We have yet to evolve to handle the responsibility, if we happen to not survive, the DNA and makings of us will exist, hopefully in better form next time.

We also do not have the full knowledge, and may never have a long enough lifespan to ever understand. We have to know the coexistence between macro and micro in an extremely vast time. How atomic level to universal level coexist in a time expedentiture beyond our grasp.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Thanks for outing yourself as a white supremacist. I mean those are the only sites where this ridiculous narrative is being pushed. But feel free to continue to believe that the medical examiner is in on some vast conspiracy to paint neo-Nazis in a negative light. I mean they're currently seen as such paragons of virtue. Clearly the government needs to enact a devious plot to turn the mass public against them.


I think the dilemma we're having here is like the Pence incident when speaking on Big Tobacco. The whole smoking doesn't kill you debacle. It's just that it is more likely to contract a deadly disease from smoking tobacco especially with a genetic predisposition. He is stating the car itself is inaccurate in describing what killed her, however it most likely caused the heart attack to which she was in a high statistical range for that probability.

Definitely doesn't warrant calling him a white supremacist imo, but with the way labels are tossed around and what all they encompass isn't very clear at this moment.



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: amazing

No sir I am not the one missing the point, I clearly stated that the earths functions are more important than us. What gives us the right to transform our host to suit us? Not to mention we see in the field of science wild speculation and conjecture to which we often put into practice for monetary/ego reasons that often result in negative consequence.

That's why I brought the science vs god debate into it. Just because we think we have the potential to curb the harm done to us do we have that right? The tree of knowledge is meant to be our downfall due to our inability to handle the responsibility. We don't know our earth, oceans, or ourselves well enough at this point, but we still "believe" that we do which in some instances works out alright atleast for the short term.

Einstein wanted to know why and how, but what nonone eludes to is the fact that we being who we are only want to know to change things for our own purposes, of which generally are not in our best interest nor our host.

We have yet to evolve to handle the responsibility, if we happen to not survive, the DNA and makings of us will exist, hopefully in better form next time.

We also do not have the full knowledge, and may never have a long enough lifespan to ever understand. We have to know the coexistence between macro and micro in an extremely vast time. How atomic level to universal level coexist in a time expedentiture beyond our grasp.


But don't you think we have the right to survive? It's in our instincts to hunt and harvest and create dwellings and use tools. If we have the right to survive then isn't our technology just related to using stone age tools or a coconut shell to gather water to drink with but to a further degree. You could say that everything we've done since modern man came to be has harmed the earth or changed the earth. Where do you draw the line?



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Being Tom Petty is part of newtonian mechanics?

News to me.



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: TheLead

The coroner reports that she died from blunt force trauma and that there was no indication of a heart attack. The neo-Nazi crowd have been pushing the heart attack conspiracy because they want people to doubt the official story and believe that the government is trying pin the blame Heyer's death on them when it's not true.

It's just like why the UTR attendees chose to go with Confederate flags instead of more controversial things. They know there are people out there they can sway to their side and by painting themselves as the underdog, instead of what they actually are, it will help bring others over. They want to get these people questioning the narrative surrounding Heyer's death because those questions will lead them to the groups that made up the UTR crowd.

Anyone pushing this false narrative are either a white supremacist or on the verge of joining with them. So anyone pushing this narrative should be called out for what they're doing and who they are.



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 01:38 PM
link   
How do you even start in a thread like this?

Newton's law does not apply to thoughts and words. Only matter and energy. You can't seriously make those statements and state that anyone has failed science. Sounds like you're projecting.

And to really talk about a woman (anti-fa sally is clearly a reference to Heather Heyer) getting "plowed down" by a car is just disgusting. And no, you're flimsy excuses trying to worm out of that aren't working.




I am talking about other events where the car stops, but has had enough and eventually plows through,


Maybe that should have been in your opening post. But it wasn't. Strike one !




I am talking about drivers fearing for their lives, panicing, hitting the gas.


Strike two !




I am talking about the hordes of people who purposely block drivers, then start smashing their side window in to the point he panics and floors it, they topple and get back up.


Again, should've made it clear from the beginning. Strike three !


And for good measure, some nitwit throws the "heart attack" bs in the mix.

And I'm not even getting into the other idiotic # on here.

You need some serious help. (and some of you need some not so serious help)
edit on 18-1-2018 by Eshel because: (no reason given)







 
13
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join