Donald Trump running for president

[ax1]

activists rule social media....independent fact checkers my ass!!!

Well, to be clear I meant that independent fact checkers were independently selected by twizzer and facekrap to run their Stasi.

 

[thebigt]

I remember the 80s was all catastrophe if we didnt save the Amazon Rainforest and also how there was a giant hole over the ozone layer. What the F' happened to that????? Someone fill up the ozone layer? Speaking of why, Im sure blowing it up with nukes may have had something to do with it, but blame tree loggers.

in the late 50's-thru 60's the big fear was nuclear attack---i remember the drills, they sent us grade schoolers into hallways and had us tuck our heads between our legs-lol, as if this would save us from a nuke---if we had cell phones back then the videos would have been hilarious...for every decade i have lived thru there has been one impending doom after another.

never fear, the government will protect us-eh?

 

[thebigt]

oops...two of the questioners supposedly picked by random from audience at bidens town hall were actually a former obama speechwriter and wife of a democrat candidte. as if it wasn't bad enough that little georgie was bill clintons 'fixer'---speaking of fix, looks like the fix was in to softball sloe joe.

 

[thebigt]

'biden's plan to overhaul 401k tax breaks could force some companies to cut retirement benefits'

 

[thebigt]

'shares of gunmakers gain as bidens lead grows'


many expect crime to soar with less cops with a biden win and fear they won't be able to protect themselves from criminals if biden and dems attempt to confiscate guns.

 

[thebigt]

'RNC files FEC complaint against twitter, claims company made illegal contribution to biden campaign'

oh my

 

[Jiigzz]

We aren't total opposites here; but I believe we have some nuance issues. Science has nothing to do with "experts". Something is NEVER true, merely because an expert says it. As a matter of fact, if the only evidence one can give that something is true is, "There is a consensus" - then you probably have a big issue. Things that are actually based in evidence hardly ever mention that they have a consensus - they mention the evidence.

You don't hear that gravity is generally accepted to be a "truth" because the consensus is that it exists. No, you can experiment for yourself and figure it out - how many times do you have to drop something before it will not fall to the earth?

The earth is round thing is NOT anti-intellectual because it questions scientists. It is anti-intellectual because it lacks experimental evidence - or maybe worse because it ignores evidence for a pre-conceived idea that doesn't hold up to observation. You can run any number of experiments yourself, that with just the tiniest bit of logical reasoning, you can figure out the world is more likely round than flat. All you need is two sticks and some sunlight.

In contrast, global warming (if you are referring to man-made global warming) lacks any scientific experiment that has been tested to prove man has caused it. It's anti-intellectual and arrogant. But the fact the evidence is lacking is on plain display because nobody ever says, "here is the raw evidence" - it's always "there is a consensus".

Sure, your point that ice and snow being seen as evidence isn't entirely invalid. It IS evidence. But it isn't necessarily definitive. It's not convincing evidence once you get more facts - which you are right, an expert should be able to explain some of those missing pieces of the puzzle.

And maybe I'm wrong about that one. Again, I've asked a number of people to provide me with actual evidence of why they think man has caused global warming, and the best I have ever gotten was a NASA report that spent 5 pages at the end discussing how they lacked evidence so they had to create a predictive model, and because they lacked the evidence for that model they had to estimate some facts - hardly a "proof" IMO. At least they were honest, but somehow people just skip over those sections.

Sure, NASA is an expert I guess. They certainly know more than me. But that should make it that much easier for them to prove it to me, right? Since they should have all the evidence at hand.

I accept what a lot of scientists have to say, but not ever just because they are scientists. I like to see the evidence. I've read some really good things from scientists that have really made it hard not to change my views because they laid out overwhelming evidence, which was based on their observations that had been replicated, and usually have some "testability" either - the theory they propose explains something that I know to be true in a way that is better than the alternative, or I can directly test it.

And you'd be surprised what you can directly test with a little imagination and some logic. Sure we aren't going to have access to a large particle accelerator, but there are a lot of things you can figure out are true based on their usefulness or creative experiment.

A good example of "science" that gets criticized as not being science is string theory, right? Since there is no experiment you can do on it to prove or disprove the theory, it is not science - at least not at this point.



Yeah, don't get me wrong. I don't disagree that people need better training in how to think with reasoning and logic. I will agree that MOST of the people who know the least, question the experts the most. I have a saying I tell people I work with, "The people who need your help the most, recognize it the least. The people who need your help the least, appreciate it the most." People just don't realize when they lack knowledge. It's a challenge we all face at all times.

And the ease of someone who knows nothing about what they are saying spreading information to mass audiences is tremendous in today's age.

But do you find it ironic that you were defending Twitter and Facebook a few pages ago and now you specifically point them out in your examples of anti-intellectualism? I mean, they will allow anti-vaxxers to make stupid, untrue claims, but they are going to censor any articles about Biden that aren't flattering in the name of "quality of evidence"? If they have an unbiased standard, it is some algorithm that I can't figure out.

Also, most "experts" aren't doing experiments either - they are reading the research and interpreting. Some experts barely even read the reaseach. Doctors are a good example of this, some read research, some don't. In their day-to-day jobs the research doesn't really matter because it is more about protocol than anything else.

Having said that, talking to people in different fields can be very enlightening. I often email the people who publish interesting pubmed research to discuss their research with them and get deeper views. About 50% of the time they don't respond, often they like to talk about it briefly, and sometimes they are excited to talk about it. But even with some brief insight; I've had some people write 1-2 sentence replies that I didn't understand at all at first and my understanding gets completely changed once I dig into what those 2 sentences mean.

Anyway, today has been busy. I'm worn out. Good chat, my worthy foe. haha.

Flat earthers try disprove gravity all the time. Yes, we obviously experience gravity simply by not floating into space, but flat earthers don't exactly agree with the theory despite it being easily measurable and calculable.

Global warming has pretty solid evidence of being man-progressed. We know climate change occurs without our presence, but we also know that us drilling our carbon from within the ground and pumping it into the atmosphere has increased carbon in the atmosphere. We know methane from farming has contributed quite significantly as well. We literally have other planets in our solar system that we use as a reference for how climate change affects the environment.

The dunning kruger effect is very prevalent in society. A bit of knowledge can be more harmful than no knowledge or a lot of knowledge in the wrong hands. As a prime example, the idea that carbohydrates block lipolysis has lead to a large number of people slamming carbohydrates as the scourge of fat loss. That's a gross misunderstanding of the system as a whole, yet it is enough to push hundreds of diet books out the door by those who exploit it.

 

[thebigt]

Flat earthers try disprove gravity all the time. Yes, we obviously experience gravity simply by not floating into space, but flat earthers don't exactly agree with the theory despite it being easily measurable and calculable.

Global warming has pretty solid evidence of being man-progressed. We know climate change occurs without our presence, but we also know that us drilling our carbon from within the ground and pumping it into the atmosphere has increased carbon in the atmosphere. We know methane from farming has contributed quite significantly as well. We literally have other planets in our solar system that we use as a reference for how climate change affects the environment.

The dunning kruger effect is very prevalent in society. A bit of knowledge can be more harmful than no knowledge or a lot of knowledge in the wrong hands. As a prime example, the idea that carbohydrates block lipolysis has lead to a large number of people slamming carbohydrates as the scourge of fat loss. That's a gross misunderstanding of the system as a whole, yet it is enough to push hundreds of diet books out the door by those who exploit it.

'some of the biggest names in flat earth theory have travelled to new zealand to attend aucklands flat earth festival'

 

[ax1]

Global warming has pretty solid evidence of being man-progressed. We know climate change occurs without our presence, but we also know that us drilling our carbon from within the ground and pumping it into the atmosphere has increased carbon in the atmosphere. We know methane from farming has contributed quite significantly as well. We literally have other planets in our solar system that we use as a reference for how climate change affects the environment.

We also know that governments have nuked the crap out of the ozone layer, we also know that governments run controversial experiments with the atmosphere and climate, we also know modernization has significantly reduced the amount of trees on our globe, we also know radio and electric waves have gone up through the roof compared to 50 years ago....I can go on and on and on, but

Most importantly, we also know government have fed scientists lard for data in order to promote a political agenda, so as far as people like me are concerned Im proud to add more layers of tin foil around my chest. The truth is there are trillions of dollars at stake here and there are no limits people will go to feed the sheep lies.

 

[ax1]

'some of the biggest names in flat earth theory have travelled to new zealand to attend aucklands flat earth festival'

Its not round, its not flat, its an octagon!!!!! Its flat but like all around and stuff, lol

 

[thebigt]

Its not round, its not flat, its an octagon!!!!! Its flat but like all around and stuff, lol

just like when he said there was so much racism here in US when based on popultation there are over 6x more white supremacists in new zealand than here

 

[ax1]

just like when he said there was so much racism here in US when based on popultation there are over 6x more white supremacists in new zealand than here

Yeah we bought that up before, implementing a mixed society as openly diverse as the US is in NZ tomorrow would have catastrophic societal consequences.

The fact is the USA is the least racist and welcoming planet in the globes history. Of course we have some work to do but hearing people claim the US is systematically racist is absolutely comical.

 

[HIT4ME]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


Contact: Blanquita Cullum 703-307-9510 bqview at mac.com

Joint letter to NASA Administrator blasts agency’s policy of ignoring empirical evidence

HOUSTON, TX – April 10, 2012.

49 former NASA scientists and astronauts sent a letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden last week admonishing the agency for it’s role in advocating a high degree of certainty that man-made CO2 is a major cause of climate change while neglecting empirical evidence that calls the theory into question.

The group, which includes seven Apollo astronauts and two former directors of NASA’s Johnson Space centre in Houston, are dismayed over the failure of NASA, and specifically the Goddard Institute For Space Studies (GISS), to make an objective assessment of all available scientific data on climate change. They charge that NASA is relying too heavily on complex climate models that have proven scientifically inadequate in predicting climate only one or two decades in advance.


H. Leighton Steward, chairman of the non-profit Plants Need CO2, noted that many of the former NASA scientists harbored doubts about the significance of the C02-climate change theory and have concerns over NASA’s advocacy on the issue. While making presentations in late 2011 to many of the signatories of the letter, Steward realised that the NASA scientists should make their concerns known to NASA and the GISS.

“These American heroes – the astronauts that took to space and the scientists and engineers that put them there – are simply stating their concern over NASA’s extreme advocacy for an unproven theory,” said Leighton Steward. “There’s a concern that if it turns out that CO2 is not a major cause of climate change, NASA will have put the reputation of NASA, NASA’s current and former employees, and even the very reputation of science itself at risk of public ridicule and distrust.”

Select excerpts from the letter:

• “The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.”
• “We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated.”
• “We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject.”

The full text of the letter:

March 28, 2012

The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
NASA Administrator
NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001

Dear Charlie,

We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.

The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.

As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.

For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.

Thank you for considering this request.

Sincerely,

(Attached signatures)

CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science

CC: arse Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight centre

Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12, regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change.

/s/ Jack Barneburg, Jack – JSC, Space Shuttle Structures, Engineering Directorate, 34 years

/s/ Larry Bell – JSC, Mgr. Crew Systems Div., Engineering Directorate, 32 years

/s/ Dr. Donald Bogard – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 41 years

/s/ Jerry C. Bostick – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 23 years

/s/ Dr. Phillip K. Chapman – JSC, Scientist – astronaut, 5 years

/s/ Michael F. Collins, JSC, Chief, Flight Design and Dynamics Division, MOD, 41 years

/s/ Dr. Kenneth Cox – JSC, Chief Flight Dynamics Div., Engr. Directorate, 40 years

/s/ Walter Cunningham – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 7, 8 years

/s/ Dr. Donald M. Curry – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Leading Edge, Thermal Protection Sys., Engr. Dir., 44 years

/s/ Leroy Day – Hdq. Deputy Director, Space Shuttle Program, 19 years

/s/ Dr. Henry P. Decell, Jr. – JSC, Chief, Theory & Analysis Office, 5 years

/s/Charles F. Deiterich – JSC, Mgr., Flight Operations Integration, MOD, 30 years

/s/ Dr. Harold Doiron – JSC, Chairman, Shuttle Pogo Prevention Panel, 16 years

/s/ Charles Duke – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 16, 10 years

/s/ Anita Gale

/s/ Grace Germany – JSC, Program Analyst, 35 years

/s/ Ed Gibson – JSC, Astronaut Skylab 4, 14 years

/s/ Richard Gordon – JSC, Astronaut, Gemini Xi, Apollo 12, 9 years

/s/ Gerald C. Griffin – JSC, Apollo Flight Director, and Director of Johnson Space centre, 22 years

/s/ Thomas M. Grubbs – JSC, Chief, Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering Branch, 31 years

/s/ Thomas J. Harmon

/s/ David W. Heath – JSC, Reentry Specialist, MOD, 30 years

/s/ Miguel A. Hernandez, Jr. – JSC, Flight crew training and operations, 3 years

/s/ James R. Roundtree – JSC Branch Chief, 26 years

/s/ Enoch Jones – JSC, Mgr. SE&I, Shuttle Program Office, 26 years

/s/ Dr. Joseph Kerwin – JSC, Astronaut, Skylab 2, Director of Space and Life Sciences, 22 years

/s/ Jack Knight – JSC, Chief, Advanced Operations and Development Division, MOD, 40 years

/s/ Dr. Christopher C. Kraft – JSC, Apollo Flight Director and Director of Johnson Space centre, 24 years

/s/ Paul C. Kramer – JSC, arse.t for Planning Aeroscience and Flight Mechanics Div., Egr. Dir., 34 years

/s/ Alex (Skip) Larsen

/s/ Dr. Lubert Leger – JSC, arse’t. Chief Materials Division, Engr. Directorate, 30 years

/s/ Dr. Humbolt C. Mandell – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Program Control and Advance Programs, 40 years

/s/ Donald K. McCutchen – JSC, Project Engineer – Space Shuttle and ISS Program Offices, 33 years

/s/ Thomas L. (Tom) Moser – Hdq. Dep. Assoc. Admin. & Director, Space Station Program, 28 years

/s/ Dr. George Mueller – Hdq., Assoc. Adm., Office of Space Flight, 6 years

/s/ Tom Ohesorge

/s/ James Peacock – JSC, Apollo and Shuttle Program Office, 21 years

/s/ Richard McFarland – JSC, Mgr. Motion Simulators, 28 years

/s/ Joseph E. Rogers – JSC, Chief, Structures and Dynamics Branch, Engr. Directorate,40 years

/s/ Bernard J. Rosenbaum – JSC, Chief Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division, Engr. Dir., 48 years

/s/ Dr. Harrison (Jack) Schmitt – JSC, Astronaut Apollo 17, 10 years

/s/ Gerard C. Shows – JSC, Asst. Manager, Quality Assurance, 30 years

/s/ Kenneth Suit – JSC, arse’t Mgr., Systems Integration, Space Shuttle, 37 years

/s/ Robert F. Thompson – JSC, Program Manager, Space Shuttle, 44 years/s/ Frank Van Renesselaer – Hdq., Mgr. Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, 15 years

/s/ Dr. James Visentine – JSC Materials Branch, Engineering Directorate, 30 years

/s/ Manfred (Dutch) von Ehrenfried – JSC, Flight Controller; Mercury, Gemini & Apollo, MOD, 10 years

/s/ George Weisskopf – JSC, Avionics Systems Division, Engineering Dir., 40 years

/s/ Al Worden – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 15, 9 years

/s/ Thomas (Tom) Wysmuller – JSC, Meteorologist, 5 years

The real issue here is that we all are being pushed into this idea that humans are at fault - which is a bit arrogant and possibly devastating. Humans take up such a small amount of this planet, you could put every human in the world in the state of Delaware and they could still have 9 sq ft of space to themselves. It just tells you how small we really are.

But we have to believe that it is our fault, because that means it is within our control. It makes us feel better. Not to mention the really deranged people who think it makes them better than everyone else because they care about trees.

But if it is CO2 emissions, why wasn't global warming at the peak during the industrial age while we were just spewing CO2 without restriction into the air?

More importantly, what if the cause is not our fault, and we waste all these resources trying to prove it is - doesn't that leave us in danger when the true cause continues to heat the environment and we haven't found a solution because we assumed we knew it was all us?


[

 

[HIT4ME]

I remember the 80s was all catastrophe if we didnt save the Amazon Rainforest and also how there was a giant hole over the ozone layer. What the F' happened to that????? Someone fill up the ozone layer? Speaking of why, Im sure blowing it up with nukes may have had something to do with it, but blame tree loggers.

Well, obviously you know the answer. Man Made Global Warming saved us. It is well known that the first step to creating a habitable ozone for humans is massive CO2 emissions. All of our CO2 fixed the ozone of course!

in the late 50's-thru 60's the big fear was nuclear attack---i remember the drills, they sent us grade schoolers into hallways and had us tuck our heads between our legs-lol, as if this would save us from a nuke---if we had cell phones back then the videos would have been hilarious...for every decade i have lived thru there has been one impending doom after another.

never fear, the government will protect us-eh?

Thats what we are doing now - putting our head between our legs and hoping our hybrid vehicle will save our asses.

Fear helps breed control. But you would think someone would have read about chicken little as a kid.

 

[HIT4ME]

Flat earthers try disprove gravity all the time. Yes, we obviously experience gravity simply by not floating into space, but flat earthers don't exactly agree with the theory despite it being easily measurable and calculable.

Global warming has pretty solid evidence of being man-progressed. We know climate change occurs without our presence, but we also know that us drilling our carbon from within the ground and pumping it into the atmosphere has increased carbon in the atmosphere. We know methane from farming has contributed quite significantly as well. We literally have other planets in our solar system that we use as a reference for how climate change affects the environment.

The dunning kruger effect is very prevalent in society. A bit of knowledge can be more harmful than no knowledge or a lot of knowledge in the wrong hands. As a prime example, the idea that carbohydrates block lipolysis has lead to a large number of people slamming carbohydrates as the scourge of fat loss. That's a gross misunderstanding of the system as a whole, yet it is enough to push hundreds of diet books out the door by those who exploit it.

Well, I am agreeing that flat earthers are dumb. I am just saying the reason has nothing to do with questioning things, it has to do with ignoring the evidence.

If you have any good info on actual science showing climate change, I may be open to changing my mind...would love to see it...but at this point I have seen so much junk that I am very jaded.

 

[Jiigzz]

lol...what were they predicting in the 70's?--ICE AGE...this is fact, we were told the earth was cooling!!!

Times do, in fact change. That doesn't make any future observations void, we've simply got better ways of monitoring the earth.

 

[Jiigzz]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


Contact: Blanquita Cullum 703-307-9510 bqview at mac.com

Joint letter to NASA Administrator blasts agency’s policy of ignoring empirical evidence

HOUSTON, TX – April 10, 2012.

49 former NASA scientists and astronauts sent a letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden last week admonishing the agency for it’s role in advocating a high degree of certainty that man-made CO2 is a major cause of climate change while neglecting empirical evidence that calls the theory into question.

The group, which includes seven Apollo astronauts and two former directors of NASA’s Johnson Space centre in Houston, are dismayed over the failure of NASA, and specifically the Goddard Institute For Space Studies (GISS), to make an objective assessment of all available scientific data on climate change. They charge that NASA is relying too heavily on complex climate models that have proven scientifically inadequate in predicting climate only one or two decades in advance.


H. Leighton Steward, chairman of the non-profit Plants Need CO2, noted that many of the former NASA scientists harbored doubts about the significance of the C02-climate change theory and have concerns over NASA’s advocacy on the issue. While making presentations in late 2011 to many of the signatories of the letter, Steward realised that the NASA scientists should make their concerns known to NASA and the GISS.

“These American heroes – the astronauts that took to space and the scientists and engineers that put them there – are simply stating their concern over NASA’s extreme advocacy for an unproven theory,” said Leighton Steward. “There’s a concern that if it turns out that CO2 is not a major cause of climate change, NASA will have put the reputation of NASA, NASA’s current and former employees, and even the very reputation of science itself at risk of public ridicule and distrust.”

Select excerpts from the letter:

• “The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.”
• “We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated.”
• “We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject.”

The full text of the letter:

March 28, 2012

The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.
NASA Administrator
NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001

Dear Charlie,

We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.

The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.

As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.

For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.

Thank you for considering this request.

Sincerely,

(Attached signatures)

CC: Mr. John Grunsfeld, Associate Administrator for Science

CC: arse Mr. Chris Scolese, Director, Goddard Space Flight centre

Ref: Letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, dated 3-26-12, regarding a request for NASA to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that human produced CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change.

/s/ Jack Barneburg, Jack – JSC, Space Shuttle Structures, Engineering Directorate, 34 years

/s/ Larry Bell – JSC, Mgr. Crew Systems Div., Engineering Directorate, 32 years

/s/ Dr. Donald Bogard – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 41 years

/s/ Jerry C. Bostick – JSC, Principal Investigator, Science Directorate, 23 years

/s/ Dr. Phillip K. Chapman – JSC, Scientist – astronaut, 5 years

/s/ Michael F. Collins, JSC, Chief, Flight Design and Dynamics Division, MOD, 41 years

/s/ Dr. Kenneth Cox – JSC, Chief Flight Dynamics Div., Engr. Directorate, 40 years

/s/ Walter Cunningham – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 7, 8 years

/s/ Dr. Donald M. Curry – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Leading Edge, Thermal Protection Sys., Engr. Dir., 44 years

/s/ Leroy Day – Hdq. Deputy Director, Space Shuttle Program, 19 years

/s/ Dr. Henry P. Decell, Jr. – JSC, Chief, Theory & Analysis Office, 5 years

/s/Charles F. Deiterich – JSC, Mgr., Flight Operations Integration, MOD, 30 years

/s/ Dr. Harold Doiron – JSC, Chairman, Shuttle Pogo Prevention Panel, 16 years

/s/ Charles Duke – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 16, 10 years

/s/ Anita Gale

/s/ Grace Germany – JSC, Program Analyst, 35 years

/s/ Ed Gibson – JSC, Astronaut Skylab 4, 14 years

/s/ Richard Gordon – JSC, Astronaut, Gemini Xi, Apollo 12, 9 years

/s/ Gerald C. Griffin – JSC, Apollo Flight Director, and Director of Johnson Space centre, 22 years

/s/ Thomas M. Grubbs – JSC, Chief, Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering Branch, 31 years

/s/ Thomas J. Harmon

/s/ David W. Heath – JSC, Reentry Specialist, MOD, 30 years

/s/ Miguel A. Hernandez, Jr. – JSC, Flight crew training and operations, 3 years

/s/ James R. Roundtree – JSC Branch Chief, 26 years

/s/ Enoch Jones – JSC, Mgr. SE&I, Shuttle Program Office, 26 years

/s/ Dr. Joseph Kerwin – JSC, Astronaut, Skylab 2, Director of Space and Life Sciences, 22 years

/s/ Jack Knight – JSC, Chief, Advanced Operations and Development Division, MOD, 40 years

/s/ Dr. Christopher C. Kraft – JSC, Apollo Flight Director and Director of Johnson Space centre, 24 years

/s/ Paul C. Kramer – JSC, arse.t for Planning Aeroscience and Flight Mechanics Div., Egr. Dir., 34 years

/s/ Alex (Skip) Larsen

/s/ Dr. Lubert Leger – JSC, arse’t. Chief Materials Division, Engr. Directorate, 30 years

/s/ Dr. Humbolt C. Mandell – JSC, Mgr. Shuttle Program Control and Advance Programs, 40 years

/s/ Donald K. McCutchen – JSC, Project Engineer – Space Shuttle and ISS Program Offices, 33 years

/s/ Thomas L. (Tom) Moser – Hdq. Dep. Assoc. Admin. & Director, Space Station Program, 28 years

/s/ Dr. George Mueller – Hdq., Assoc. Adm., Office of Space Flight, 6 years

/s/ Tom Ohesorge

/s/ James Peacock – JSC, Apollo and Shuttle Program Office, 21 years

/s/ Richard McFarland – JSC, Mgr. Motion Simulators, 28 years

/s/ Joseph E. Rogers – JSC, Chief, Structures and Dynamics Branch, Engr. Directorate,40 years

/s/ Bernard J. Rosenbaum – JSC, Chief Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division, Engr. Dir., 48 years

/s/ Dr. Harrison (Jack) Schmitt – JSC, Astronaut Apollo 17, 10 years

/s/ Gerard C. Shows – JSC, Asst. Manager, Quality Assurance, 30 years

/s/ Kenneth Suit – JSC, arse’t Mgr., Systems Integration, Space Shuttle, 37 years

/s/ Robert F. Thompson – JSC, Program Manager, Space Shuttle, 44 years/s/ Frank Van Renesselaer – Hdq., Mgr. Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, 15 years

/s/ Dr. James Visentine – JSC Materials Branch, Engineering Directorate, 30 years

/s/ Manfred (Dutch) von Ehrenfried – JSC, Flight Controller; Mercury, Gemini & Apollo, MOD, 10 years

/s/ George Weisskopf – JSC, Avionics Systems Division, Engineering Dir., 40 years

/s/ Al Worden – JSC, Astronaut, Apollo 15, 9 years

/s/ Thomas (Tom) Wysmuller – JSC, Meteorologist, 5 years

This letter has been openly criticized. Is it not strange to you that they did not provide much in the way of statements as to why they wrote it?

 

[Jiigzz]

just like when he said there was so much racism here in US when based on popultation there are over 6x more white supremacists in new zealand than here

Not once have you ever substantiated this number with evidence.

In fact, the US has more racist people per capita than 1940's Germany.

 

[ax1]

This letter has been openly criticized. Is it not strange to you that they did not provide much in the way of statements as to why they wrote it?

Yes of course, we live in a age of extremism where even respected professionals can’t have opposing views without being persecuted as tin foils or oil sellouts.

 

[ax1]

This letter has been openly criticized. Is it not strange to you that they did not provide much in the way of statements as to why they wrote it?

What’s interesting was it took me a bit of work with googles rigged biased algorithms compared to just a few years ago to find that when it was instant.

Now it’s just a bunch of selected and biased “fact checking” and “debunking” baloney force fed on the searcher before finally finding it which is probably what led to your response.

 

[Jiigzz]

Yes of course, we live in a age of extremism where even respected professionals can’t have opposing views without being persecuted as tin foils or oil sellouts.

I agree, opposing views based on equally credible evidence is absolutely fine. However some people will have opposing views in the face of overwhelming evidence. All it takes is a quick scan of any journal to see the evidence for climate change. Methane concentrations and pumping carbon from the ground into the atmosphere do play a role in climate change - we know this because we can observe planets like Venus and Mars.

Obviously those did it of their own accord, and so the same could happen to earth, however the same processes that have superheated venus are happening now on earth, and we are the ones accelerating that process.

It also boggles me how much opposition climate change has received. At worst, let's say we are wrong, we will be more dependent on renewable energy (which we are going to need to be anyway once stocks run out). On the other side of the coin, the worst that could happen is far more worrying.

I'd rather be wrong and have cleaner air than be right and die on a superheated planet with my skin bubbling. But to each their own.

I trust the 97% of climate scientists on this.

 

[thebigt]

Not once have you ever substantiated this number with evidence.

In fact, the US has more racist people per capita than 1940's Germany.

then new zealand has 6x more than 1940's germany.

splc estimated there were 3000 white supremacists in US in 2017, they estimate that number has grown by 47%....this is where i got the 6000 number from.

 

[thebigt]

Times do, in fact change. That doesn't make any future observations void, we've simply got better ways of monitoring the earth.

the government has been telling people the sky is falling one story after another all my life---don't worry, the government will save you-you need government to save you.

 

[ax1]

I agree, opposing views based on equally credible evidence is absolutely fine. However some people will have opposing views in the face of overwhelming evidence. All it takes is a quick scan of any journal to see the evidence for climate change. Methane concentrations and pumping carbon from the ground into the atmosphere do play a role in climate change - we know this because we can observe planets like Venus and Mars.

Obviously those did it of their own accord, and so the same could happen to earth, however the same processes that have superheated venus are happening now on earth, and we are the ones accelerating that process.

It also boggles me how much opposition climate change has received. At worst, let's say we are wrong, we will be more dependent on renewable energy (which we are going to need to be anyway once stocks run out). On the other side of the coin, the worst that could happen is far more worrying.

I'd rather be wrong and have cleaner air than be right and die on a superheated planet with my skin bubbling. But to each their own.

I trust the 97% of climate scientists on this.

As I always say, nothing wrong with cleaning up the environment and respecting our planet, as long as you also do it responsibly unlike some of the ludicrous irresponsible policies they have been trying to pull off here.

I drive a hybrid and installed solar panels on my house just in time before the CCP-Virus lock-downs took place. I consider myself an environmentalist even though Im a man-made climate change critic.

 

[ax1]

Not once have you ever substantiated this number with evidence.

In fact, the US has more racist people per capita than 1940's Germany.

Oh yeah, Goebbels has a pretty well crafted independent public polling mechanisms in place to establish an accurate picture of the German mind, RRROOOFFFFLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

 

[ax1]

then new zealand has 6x more than 1940's germany.

splc estimated there were 3000 white supremacists in US in 2017, they estimate that number has grown by 47%....this is where i got the 6000 number from.

Hardly any blacks lived in Germany in the 40s or even NZ now, I can picture it being 1000x more apparent if we enforced multi-culturalism in those places at the same ratio's of the US.

 

[Jiigzz]

then new zealand has 6x more than 1940's germany.

splc estimated there were 3000 white supremacists in US in 2017, they estimate that number has grown by 47%....this is where i got the 6000 number from.

Like I said, cant find anywhere that actually cites that number at all.

 

[Jiigzz]

the government has been telling people the sky is falling one story after another all my life---don't worry, the government will save you-you need government to save you.

Except it's not ONLY the government saying it. Most climate researchers arent government employees. You can choose to be a skeptic all you like, it's your grandchildren who will pay the price.

 

[ax1]

Except it's not ONLY the government saying it. Most climate researchers arent government employees. You can choose to be a skeptic all you like, it's your grandchildren who will pay the price.

Maybe the sun starts getting a little inactive and global warming would have saved us. Id bet money on that.

 

[ax1]

Except it's not ONLY the government saying it. Most climate researchers arent government employees. You can choose to be a skeptic all you like, it's your grandchildren who will pay the price.

The crap they are trying to pull off such as the "Green New Deal" costs as much as 50-80 TRILLION dollars and they dont know how to pay for it...and Id bet it has little to no effect on anything anyways.

I tell you the solution here is far more catastrophic than the problem, and if you think about the price our grandchildren have to pay the price being a anti-climate-change person is the best and smartest way to go. The other option on the table is to destroy our economy and significantly increase poverty and societal unrest.

 

[ax1]

RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1978 - Temperatures have been dropping for 30 years!!!!

 

[ax1]

Dump is out of his mind thinking he shares Libertarian values!

 

[sammpedd88]

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

White supremacy still plagues New Zealand, PM says – DW – 03/13/2020

The prime minister was speaking ahead of the one year anniversary of the shooting spree that killed 51 people at two mosques. Ardern admitted there was still "much more" her country could do to deal with extremism.

www.google.com

Revealed: How white supremacists terrorised New Zealand for decades

There's a long history of murders and abuse before the Christchurch attack.

www.google.com

 

[ax1]

These quotes have been stuck in my head since that debate...

Grandpops Groper Joe: “I am the Democratic Party”

Dump: “That’s not what Kamala said”

LMFAO!

 

[thebigt]

Like I said, cant find anywhere that actually cites that number at all.

this will be the 3rd time i have told you that 'splc estimates 3000 white supremacist's' c,mon man i know you aren't that freaking dense!!!!

 

[ax1]

this will be the 3rd time i have told you that 'splc estimates 3000 white supremacist's' c,mon man i know you aren't that freaking dense!!!!

I wonder what the numbers are on black supremacists, or Jewish supremacists, or Spanish supremacists are......or should we turn a blind eye????

 

[thebigt]

I wonder what the numbers are on black supremacists, or Jewish supremacists, or Spanish supremacists are......or should we turn a blind eye????

if you count nation of islam then the black supremacists well outnumber white supremacists by a large number---remember farrakhans million man march?

 

[ax1]

if you count nation of islam then the black supremacists well outnumber white supremacists by a large number---remember farrakhans million man march?

Yes, but you know the saying, you just dont understand, LMFAO!

 

[thebigt]

joe biden-out of 200,000 who have died how many of them are going to survive?

none you stupid dumbass if they have died aint none of them going to survive....geez, what a moron, and yes, the stupid moron really did ask that.

 

[Jiigzz]

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

White supremacy still plagues New Zealand, PM says – DW – 03/13/2020

The prime minister was speaking ahead of the one year anniversary of the shooting spree that killed 51 people at two mosques. Ardern admitted there was still "much more" her country could do to deal with extremism.

www.google.com

Revealed: How white supremacists terrorised New Zealand for decades

There's a long history of murders and abuse before the Christchurch attack.

www.google.com

We know this, but where is the 6x more than the US statement? That's what I'm wondering here.

If that source exists, great, but noone has posted it and I cant find it.

 

[Jiigzz]

The crap they are trying to pull off such as the "Green New Deal" costs as much as 50-80 TRILLION dollars and they dont know how to pay for it...and Id bet it has little to no effect on anything anyways.

I tell you the solution here is far more catastrophic than the problem, and if you think about the price our grandchildren have to pay the price being a anti-climate-change person is the best and smartest way to go. The other option on the table is to destroy our economy and significantly increase poverty and societal unrest.

The cost of a superheated planet is everyone dies. We have been through several extinction events on this planet already, and I'm pretty sure extinction is worse than 50 trillion dollars.

Most of these extinction events occur due to atmospheric conditions. For example, a giant volcanic eruption pumped out 14T tons of carbon into the atmosphere which caused soil and seawater to superheat.

Quite a few extinction events are linked to CO2 balance. The Triassic period ended likely due to volcanic activity and causing massive amounts of CO2 to be pumped into the atmosphere once again.

Now here we are, doing this process voluntarily. Drilling up carbon and pumping it into the atmosphere. Carbon naturally makes it way back into the earth, but we are pumping it out faster than it can regulate.

 

[Jiigzz]

RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1978 - Temperatures have been dropping for 30 years!!!!

You're one of the people who see a dip in a chart and be like "SEE, it's getting cooler again" while the chart shows peaks and troughs but still has an upward trajectory.

You look at the mean average and the trajectory overtime, not take one day and use that as evidence for the rest of eternity.

 

[Jiigzz]

this will be the 3rd time i have told you that 'splc estimates 3000 white supremacist's' c,mon man i know you aren't that freaking dense!!!!

That doesnt link anywhere. I've said that 10 times. Post the link!

 

[Jiigzz]

You're one of the people who see a dip in a chart and be like "SEE, it's getting cooler again" while the chart shows peaks and troughs but still has an upward trajectory.

You look at the mean average and the trajectory overtime, not take one day and use that as evidence for the rest of eternity. View attachment 198797

This chart highlights exactly this:

 

[thebigt]

That doesnt link anywhere. I've said that 10 times. Post the link!

not my fault you don't know how to google.

 

[thebigt]

This chart highlights exactly this:View attachment 198798

who posts a graph that starts in degrees and ends in celsius

 

[Jiigzz]

who posts a graph that starts in degrees and ends in celsius

Degrees Celcius?

 

[Jiigzz]

not my fault you don't know how to google.

I've copied and pasted that link as many times as you've posted it and... nada

 

[thebigt]

Degrees Celcius?

fahrenheit

 

[Jiigzz]

fahrenheit

The chart is in degrees celcius. The lone 'C' just denotes the metric