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 Those Against Trump, Win or Lose

page: 4
60
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2019 @ 11:58 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

I always like to say that America needs to fly with both wings.
edit on 5-9-2019 by brofjw because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 12:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: brofjw
a reply to: rickymouse

I always like to say that America needs to fly with both wings.


When I eat chicken wings, I usually toss the wingtips out, they aren't worth the effort most times. Or I debone the chicken and take the tips off and throw the bones and tips into a pot and boil the hell out of them to make broth. The far left and far right are not worth wasting your time with when it comes to the consumer.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 12:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Good post and I agree with much of your sentiment, however, based on the textbook definition of a social progressive and fiscal conservative you realize those are two diametrically opposed positions, right?

A person cannot support social progressiveness and claim to be fiscally conservative at the same time. In order to be progressive socially requires a large amount of government funded programs all which draw from the tax payer base which is what a fiscal conservative is opposed to. Much lower taxes, much smaller government, and little to no government oversight meaning more privatization.

The very core of progressivism is the use of politics.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 03:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: 1point92AU
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Good post and I agree with much of your sentiment, however, based on the textbook definition of a social progressive and fiscal conservative you realize those are two diametrically opposed positions, right?

A person cannot support social progressiveness and claim to be fiscally conservative at the same time. In order to be progressive socially requires a large amount of government funded programs all which draw from the tax payer base which is what a fiscal conservative is opposed to. Much lower taxes, much smaller government, and little to no government oversight meaning more privatization.

The very core of progressivism is the use of politics.




Thank you for participating. We'll have your trophy in the mail shortly.

When I say socially progressive policy I mean gays can marry, people can chose their gender, and any number of other things that are not my business can happen. Socially progressive does not mean socialist. I gather, from this statement, you went to public school. Not a good one.

Social and socialism are not the same. This is why I drink liqour all the time. I just can't handle what is happening to this world. I'm sorry for the repercussions of all of you having a family tree that is a ladder. It's not my fault. You're stupid. Just go post on Facebook or Instagram or something. Let the grown-ups talk.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

They lost me as soon as they said human caused climate change. Human caused climate change is negligible, and climate change is an inevitable part of Earth's life cycle. The majority of land is not even farmed. We have starvation, and less nutritious foods because of over farming in small areas.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 05:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Extorris

Logic does not corroborate your assumptions. For every Leftist that screams Never Trump, there is a #KAG Trump supporter, and a #walkaway supporter, and a #blexit supporter, and a turning point follower. You can live in denial if you want, just be prepared to be disappointed.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 06:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Good post mate, I didn't vote for him and probably wont vote for him in 2020 but its nothing specifically about him its just I swore to never vote for an R or a D again since both parties are complicit in the issues we are facing.


If he ran on a third party I would probably vote for him in 2020.



For the 1st time in years of voting Ron Paul, I voted R and DJT because he wasn't an R. Now he is the leader and I also like his results very much. He wasn't my 1st pick but HRC was my last and I had to be sure to vote someone that could beat her crooked ass at the ballot box.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 07:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook

originally posted by: Ksihkehe
a reply to: lostbook

Perhaps you can tell me exactly what he has done to boost the economy at the expense of the environment? Keep in mind we have exceeded the carbon emission goals, in spite of how useless they are, since he was president.

I was not kidding when I say I keep up on things. My education is in environmental science. I've kept up on it in spite of my career being slightly untraditional.

What has he actually done? When in the past century have we not been destroying the natural environment? When did the first world start exceeding the environmental destruction of the planet more than the third world?

Did it start to matter when people decided they didn't like Trump?

You are correct though. I don't believe he is a paragon of human excellence. He's the right tool for the right job. We have a nail and we need a hammer.


As I understand it, he's undoing Nasa's climate change budget, he's allowing developers to build on lands which were supposed to be set aside for national parks, and he's trying to allow drilling in the Arctic. All of which are efforts to boost himself or someone else, economically. As I've said many times, I don't dislike Trump. I have no problem with him being President. I have problems with him claiming the high road in our face(s) then going the lowroad while our back(s) are turned. He's getting things done but I just worry that we'll suffer for it later because of his way of doing those things.


Misdeeds by climate liars at NASA / UN simply must be undone. Tough that you bought total BS from the MSM and their no debate science is settled crap they shove around like it is true.

I have made my living collecting/analyzing/certifying data on gasses and particles in our atmosphere. You can believe me or the liars you know are lying. Your pick.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

Transportation is the only one on the chart that is measurably higher at the end of the graph. Power is clearly trending downward.


Holy crap. Are you OK?

It is clear as day for those that can...um..see?

Power is trending upwards SINCE TRUMP TOOK OFFICE and removed restrictions on carbon emissions for Power Plants.

Seriously...do your eyes not register and upward movement?

Very Weird...I know the idea that zealous ideology can morph reality in words "Alternate facts"...but Visual Perception?

Kind of fascinating.




edit on 6-9-2019 by Extorris because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-9-2019 by Extorris because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: Ksihkehe


Plants will be less nutritious? As you understand it? I would be very reluctant to use the word understand along with that whole statement.

Here you go Democrats... this is the lesson you've managed to teach your base. Plants will be less nutritious. I've heard some real zingers and this one takes the cake.


Ahem.


Climate change is hitting us where it counts: the stomach — not to mention the forests, plants and animals, a new United Nations scientific report finds. Human-caused climate change is already making food more expensive, scarcer and even less nutritious.



Scientists had long thought one of the few benefits of higher levels of carbon dioxide, the major heat-trapping gas, was that it made plants grow more and the world greener, Rosenzweig said. But numerous studies show that the high levels of carbon dioxide reduce protein and nutrients in many crops.


CBS


CBS is not SCIENTIFIC.


Here is what real science has to say about it.




edit on 6-9-2019 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2019 @ 10:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

Transportation is the only one on the chart that is measurably higher at the end of the graph. Power is clearly trending downward.


Holy crap. Are you OK?

It is clear as day for those that can...um..see?

Power is trending upwards SINCE TRUMP TOOK OFFICE and removed restrictions on carbon emissions for Power Plants.

Seriously...do your eyes not register and upward movement?

Very Weird...I know the idea that zealous ideology can morph reality in words "Alternate facts"...but Visual Perception?

Kind of fascinating.




So you are arguing a 1-2% actual change?...
Alright chicken little...



posted on Sep, 7 2019 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

You're not talking about being socially progressive then. That's just not being conditioned to a closed mindset. Being socially progressive has nothing to do with socialism so not sure why you're going that route.

Just wanted to point out your contradicting belief systems. It's not my opinion on what a "social progressive" and a "fiscal conservative" are. There are distinct definitions you can research.

I see a lot of people make that statement and it makes me realize they really don't understand what they are saying when they say it.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Then you need to alert every greenhouse in the world. They raise co2 levels to make their plants grow larger. 6th grade earth science. A plany uses co2 as food and realeace o2 as a result. Geeze does no one understand simple science any more. By the way everyone who is worried about our 'carbon footprint should stop and consider the fact that everything on this planet is CARBON based. F'n stupididty. a reply to: lostbook



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlackmoonJester
a reply to: Extorris

Logic does not corroborate your assumptions. For every Leftist that screams Never Trump, there is a #KAG Trump supporter, and a #walkaway supporter, and a #blexit supporter, and a turning point follower. You can live in denial if you want, just be prepared to be disappointed.


Trump is unfathomably bad at his job. The brightest minds could not create a worse President in a lab.

#Walkaway is a ghost ship invented to make Trumpites feel good. So much so that when Fox News actually finds one, they become an instant celebrity.

Trump was a prank played on the country by a bunch of disenfranchised, angry white guys who wanted attention and a Russian leader who had a grudge against HRC. The prank was funny for about month before the vast majority of the country realized Trump wasn't just pretending to be an idiot.

Trump is the only President in modern history to never, not once, break 50% approval.
Hell, Nixon and Jimmy carter are outperforming him by a healthy margin.

You don't need to be some liberal boogey man to recognize reality.

The question is not "who can beat Trump", ANYONE can.



www.realclearpolitics.com...
edit on 11-9-2019 by Extorris because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 03:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: RichardA
Then you need to alert every greenhouse in the world. They raise co2 levels to make their plants grow larger. 6th grade earth science. A plany uses co2 as food and realeace o2 as a result.



Right and living creatures consume O2 and emit CO2. A balanced exchange until one of those living creatures creates technology that emits CO2 millions of times faster than plants can convert it while simultaneous steadily, consistently and dramatically reducing the plant life most capable of converting the CO2.

Humans are not the issue, the rapid spread of CO2 producing technology is.

A typical passenger vehicle emits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year.

As for human emissions?


Human beings do exhale almost 3 billion tons of carbon dioxide annually, but the carbon we exhale is the same carbon that was “inhaled” from the atmosphere by the plants we consume. (When we eat meat, we’re still eating the same carbon, except that it passes through livestock on its way into our mouths and out into the atmosphere.) The only way to add to the carbon in the atmosphere is to take it from a sequestered source like fossil fuels—where it has been safe from the atmosphere for millions of years—and combust it.



And the earth is not in danger. The earth is well equipped to manage it's health and can tolerate all kinds of climates.
The Human race though is much more sensitive to climate change and it's consequences.
edit on 11-9-2019 by Extorris because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2019 @ 12:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Extorris

I was curious so I had a look at the data on carbon dioxide and found the following:

By volume, dry air contains 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.04% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases. Air also contains a variable amount of water vapor, on average around 1% at sea level, and 0.4% over the entire atmosphere.

The oceans contain 37,400 billion tons (GT) of suspended carbon, land biomass has 2000-3000 GT. The atmosphere contains 720 billion tons of CO2 and humans contribute 6 GT additional load on this balance. The oceans, land and atmosphere exchange CO2 continuously so the additional load by humans is incredibly small. A small shift in the balance between oceans and air would cause a CO2 much more severe rise than anything we could produce.

Essentially, CO2 comprises 0.4% of atmospheric gas and human actions are contributing approximately 2-3% of the total CO2 that is in the air.

Data from satellites indicates that the sun's radiation is increasing and it will continue to increase.

www.forbes.com...

The benefits of carbon dioxide supplementation on plant growth and production within the greenhouse environment have been well understood for many years.

www.omafra.gov.on.ca...

Active volcano's beneath Antarctica's western ice sheet are causing the ice to melt faster...

www.independent.co.uk...

Meanwhile, Eastern Antarctic ice sheets are actually growing and offset the ice lost in the western ice sheet according to a NASA glaciologist...

wattsupwiththat.com...

Sea level has not risen in 50 years...If there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.

Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

What I am suggesting isn't that there arn't serious problems because i genuinely believe that life on earth is in very serious trouble but for a variety of reasons and not just one: man-made drugs and chemicals continually being released into the environment in increasing volumes, radiation plumes as a direct result of all the water being pumped through Fukushima's reactors to prevent a meltdown are spreading throughout the pacific ocean containing a cesium isotope that has a 150 year half life that is devastating sea life in the Pacific, many diseases thought eradicated as well as other newer diseases are at crisis levels: Typhus, Dengue fever, Ebola, Zika, Bird flue, SAR's, new strains of Hepatitis, slavery world-wide of 75 million people (often marginalized women and children), vast unemployment as well as great increases in population along with several impending financial collapse's and market contractions and increasing food insecurity and competition for depleting resources in a world full of nations that are rapidly arming themselves is stoking serious regional conflicts and the potential of a 3rd world war, large scale involuntary migrations, large scale cyber-attacks, increasing natural disasters, major biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse (terrestrial and marine), etc...

Is it possible that the 2-3% of CO2 being generated by us humans that comprises 0.4% of total atmospheric gas isn't really the biggest problem but because of the many serious crisis's that the world is truly facing it's been used as a scapegoat in order to justify 10's of trillions of dollars in taxes all in an effort to decrease mankind's total impact on the planet? And that by only focusing on this one issue we are really neglecting and obscuring a great plethora of other extremely serious issues?



posted on Sep, 15 2019 @ 04:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: 1point92AU
a reply to: Ksihkehe

You're not talking about being socially progressive then. That's just not being conditioned to a closed mindset. Being socially progressive has nothing to do with socialism so not sure why you're going that route.

Just wanted to point out your contradicting belief systems. It's not my opinion on what a "social progressive" and a "fiscal conservative" are. There are distinct definitions you can research.

I see a lot of people make that statement and it makes me realize they really don't understand what they are saying when they say it.





It's reasonable to assume the op has made this thread as a star and flag grab to boost his ego.
edit on 15-9-2019 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2019 @ 05:01 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 15 2019 @ 05:06 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen




posted on Sep, 15 2019 @ 05:30 AM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

🤣 😃 🤣







 
60
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join