Illinois Court OKs accounting for carbon emissions?
Great! Let them start by monitoring Al Gore’s, John F’in Kerry’s Mark Zuckerberg’s, Warren Buffet’s, and other assorted Washington and Hollyweird liberal’s private jets. Let us know the totals, by month, by year, and before and after Global Climate Something-or-other Conferences they attend in distant corners of the globe. I’m waiting impatiently and impartially for the first series of reports!
are you sick and tired of Yogi complaining about BOTs “censoring” his posts? let’s try something new. don’t downvote his comment, upvote this one instead!
if it shuts you up about complaining that liberal BOTs are after you and trying to stifle your free speech, i’m fine if people vote my post up (12), don’t comment on my post, and don’t down vote your comment (5) so it stays visible.
as long as your posts aren’t hidden and you have to pull your ***REPOSTING BECAUSE LIBERAL BOTS ARE OUT TO GET ME*** nonsense, i’m happy
August 17, 2016 at 12:09 pm
confused says:
Like or Dislike:
1
7
missed a word.
*you DON’T have to pull your nonsense
August 18, 2016 at 1:24 pm
Yogi Polar Berra says:
Like or Dislike:
3
0
Off topic, again.
August 18, 2016 at 2:58 pm
confused says:
Like or Dislike:
0
4
would you like to post something on-topic for me to respond, or you just want to point out that my post was off-topic?
August 15, 2016 at 5:12 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
7
4
See what I mean Yogi? The BOTS can’t stand anyone that disagrees with them, so they try to hide any Conservative post. If that doesn’t work, they insult with terrible language.
We know who they are and IJ knows who they are. One of the no no’s is personal insults. Something tells me that this blog has not been monitored well recently or this would have stopped by now.
What an awkwardly worded title! The key phrase is ‘still-doubted’, which badly needs the hyphen I inserted.
If in doubt, liberals make up their minds and impose their will on those who remain in doubt.
OTOH, Conservative allow others to review the facts and data and use their free will to decide for themselves. This key difference in posture will be the reason for my projection of OVER 100 posts in this thread before it is closed down by the IJ staff due to foul language and personal attacks.
Yogi Troller Berra – Yeah, watch out for the Progressive Socialist Millennial Pokeman “BOTs”. You ARE using heavy duty aluminum foil for that hat, right?
Our current leaders have done little right in 8 years! Doubt they will get this one right either, especially since Climate Change isn’t a proven reality.
I like the first story too about how this government is going to help with hacking. They couldn’t even stop their own party, DNC, from being hacked!
It takes a village to raise a child – HRC. I think some of the ugly trolls on this site didn’t get raised right and had a succession of foster parents that abused them.
OMG!!! How stupid do they think we are with their “ESTIMATED social cost of carbon” based on a fictitious “net-present value of climate chaos” to arrive at “The Obama administration’s ESTIMATE—about $36 a ton”.
This is nothing but a WAG and was “developed” (aka made up) by an interagency group in 2010 and revisited last year. “The ESTIMATES are based on physical science and projections (ESTIMATES) of energy use, population, and economic growth. It’s complicated (meaning the people who can’t think for themselves will believe this like they believed Obamacare was a good thing), rigorous (meaning they put so much BS in it that the people will get too bored to uncover the truth), and imperfect (meaning they have an “escape clause” in case some conservative actually challenges them with the truth).
This is another piece of evidence that they are making this crap up. There is no way to use “empirical costs of climate chaos” to develop a social cost of carbon. First, there are no credible costs that can be associated with climate change. Simply stating that the costs of flooding or hurricanes does not make it true. These phenomena occurred way before the industrial revolution. Stop building in catastrophe prone areas and the costs will go down.
It continues to amaze me how those on the left cannot use common sense to read between the lines and see how their “leaders” are making them look like fools because they believe all the crap they tell them.
Integrity, great post. Social Costs = Socialism. Socialism begets Communism. Communism on steroids = Venezuela. What is the common good in eating dogs and cats because the population is starving?
Many of the Progressive Socialists have no memory of Al Gore saying the polar ice caps would be gone by 2014. That is called selective memory.
Too much caffeine from Starbucks could cause health issues.
August 12, 2016 at 4:08 pm
caffiend says:
Like or Dislike:
6
9
And all the nay-sayers and ideologically blinded individuals have come out of the woodwork.
Do you even listen to what you say? Have you done any research to refute the data that has accumulated over the past several decades showing that climate change is happening? Or are you just parroting the biggest conservative blow-hards that yell the loudest on the radio?
Paraphrasing one of you from earlier, now waiting for the CONSERVATIVE bots to down vote me. Dare you…
caffiend – don’t you know, any science that doesn’t support the conservative agenda is a godless liberal conspiracy meant to overthrow our democracy and turn us into a communist dictatorship under the oppressive Adolfbama regime. The more evidence that supports supports it just means a bigger conspiracy. You should know better…
mr, what liberal school did you go to with the idea that this country was founded as a Democracy? If you were taught right, it was founded as a Constitutional Republic since Democracies result in chaos.
“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”
Ever recite the pledge in school with your hand over your heart? When did you stop believing in the Constitution of this country? Let me guess, about the time Obama said – We live in the greatest country in the world. Join me as I seek to fundamentally transform it.
Caffeind – Yes, the climate changes. It has for a very long time. The question is…are humans the cause? There are too many variants to credibly make that determination.
Here is a link to a NASA news site from 2004 saying global warming was going to potentially cause the next ice age as early as 2024. How’s that for an oxymoron?
Logic tells me that should put a damper on the “global average temperature”, unless of course the “scientists” conveniently leave out those temps because of some BS anomaly they will proclaim.
They are sure playing both sides of the coin to say “see, we told you so” when the temperatures eventually come down.
Here is a link to an article showing NASA predicted an ice age in 1971.
There have been recent reports and with scientists indicating that the number of sunspots on the sun is reducing as part of its natural cycle and could result in an ice age within the next 20 years.
The global warming scientists agree the sun spots are reducing but are saying the reduced sun spots (which makes the heat of the sun less intense, thereby cooling the planet) will not reduce the heat generated by the trapped greenhouse gases. Other scientists disagree.
My money is on the natural sun and its affects (or lack, thereof) will prove the arrogant global warming scientists wrong. Nature has a way of doing that sort of thing. (Remember the Titanic statements made…”even God can’t sink the Titanic”…oops, bad call on that one!)
Their “research” is a bunch of pasted links that have been refuted over and over, conspiracy theories, and outright lies. It’s not even worth engaging with these morons. Sadly, we have to just let enough of them die out and then try to fix the damage they have left us with. In previous debates they have said stats don’t add up, are manipulated, fake, etc., and then proven they do not even know basic statistics like confidence intervals and what averages or medians are.
So why did IJ feel compelled to add “still doubted” to the title of the article? Still doubted by whom? Some dumba*** that still can’t comprehend the significance of the fact that 2014 global average temperatures were the hottest on record, only to be surpassed by 2015, and quite likely will be surpassed again in 2016? The fact that the last 8 months were also the hottest months on records?
Would you feel also compelled to write a headline like “Geologist recommend flight paths to account for the still doubted round earth theory?”
97% of experts (including NASA) say humans are causing global warming. The ones that don’t are being funded by oil companies. This has been proven. There is no debate only ignorant people getting fooled by wealthy who make money on pollution. https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
“No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.” Albert Einstein
Do you really think the wealthy have a mastermind plan to kill off the planet including themselves, their children and their grand children, just to make another buck they don’t need? That seems absurd.
See numbers 4 and 176 in the list I posted of debunked arguments of global warming deniers. The 97% of scientists agreeing on global warming has been confirmed over and over. It has also been confirmed that the studies denying global warming were funded by the Koch brothers and Exxon. And yes, I do think they would destroy the planet to make a buck they don’t need. It’s not absurd at all. What do all men with power covet?…more power. Most wealthy people are addicts. They are addicted to “more.” It’s what makes them successful, but also makes them untrustworthy. Why would the benefit of the doubt not go to the scientists on a scientific issue rather than politicians and oil companies? That seems absurd.
August 17, 2016 at 11:40 am
Yogi Polar Berra says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
What is the definition of ‘scientist’ in the poll?
Credentials? Experience? Peer review? Continuing Ed Requirements?
Would Professor Irwin Corey qualify as a ‘scientist’ for that poll?
August 17, 2016 at 5:00 pm
mr opinion says:
Like or Dislike:
2
4
Yogi – did you seriously just ask me to define “scientist”? Tell you what – you go out and personally interview every scientist on the planet. When the ones you deem worthy of their degrees decide global warming is a hoax, I’ll apologize. Until then the burden of proof is on the people claiming that 97% of scientists are liars, conspirators, or mostly unqualified. I don’t listen to politicians, special interests, or corporate America…experts. If you have evidence they aren’t experts, bring it on. Until then you are just regurgitating what you hear from the politicians being funded by people who want global warming to be a hoax. Don’t kid yourself into thinking that you are a sceptic or high-minded in challenging data. You’re not skeptical of the data, you challenge it on the basis that you don’t like the results. No matter how many times the scientists are verified you won’t buy it. No matter how many times the data is tested, you’ll argue that too. It will never end. It will never be enough. But the first time anyone with a PhD shows 1 study that possibly disputes global warming, it will be your bible. You will throw it in everyone’s face and say “here, I told you so.” And when he is discredited, you will say it was a liberal plot. That’s the problem with political fanatics. There is always an excuse, a challenge or conspiracy, unless the results are what you want them to be. Let me guess, if Trump loses the election it will be because it was rigged? No, voter fraud. No, Hillary donated money to a company that sabotaged voting machines in conservative districts. Tell me so I can start rolling my eyes now.
August 17, 2016 at 5:26 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
B, judging from the number of posts, I think mr opinion is one of those true believer types brainwashed by Al Gore.
Climate Change is the most serious national security threat this nation faces. BHO
Refrigerators and A/C are the cause for ISIS in the world. J Heinz Kerry aka Lurch
August 15, 2016 at 10:49 am
B.Right says:
Like or Dislike:
7
3
Assuming I’m completely wrong on climate change, my only questions are:
1) How much is the solution?
2) Who’s going to pay for it?
Classic democrat response will be….raise taxes on the wealthy again and again and again.
What happens though is that the wealthy will still be wealthy and the middle class wages will be stagnant another 50 years. And the bottom 50% who don’t pay anything into the system will remain civilized slaves.
I was just watching Glen Beck with specially educated Alex Jones and they said this was all BS. The lizard people were flying their plans and the chem trails are used to manipulate us.
Buy Gold, Guns, pre-rationed meals to store in your bunkers that you have spent every last penny on.
The SOUTH WILL RISE A’GIN 1776!!!!
But first we need some Federal Tax money for Louisianner, Mississipuh, and Alabamer,
are you sick and tired of Yogi complaining about BOTs “censoring” his posts? do you want to downvote his post, but don’t want to listen to him whine about you using your free will? don’t downvote his comment – upvote this one instead!
Yogi, if it talks like a bot, walks like a bot, there is a good chance it is a bot.
August 16, 2016 at 7:02 pm
rnr_risk says:
Like or Dislike:
4
2
Who came up with that moronic headline? “…Still Doubted…”?? Only by scientifically illiterate people. Oh yeah – and evolution mediated by natural selection is “just a theory”.
Illinois Court OKs accounting for carbon emissions?
Great! Let them start by monitoring Al Gore’s, John F’in Kerry’s Mark Zuckerberg’s, Warren Buffet’s, and other assorted Washington and Hollyweird liberal’s private jets. Let us know the totals, by month, by year, and before and after Global Climate Something-or-other Conferences they attend in distant corners of the globe. I’m waiting impatiently and impartially for the first series of reports!
BOTs to censor my conservatively oriented posts are due in a matter of minutes…
Actually Yogi, they are waiting for me to post so they can do their censorship barrage.
are you sick and tired of Yogi complaining about BOTs “censoring” his posts? let’s try something new. don’t downvote his comment, upvote this one instead!
You got only ‘crickets’ responding to your question.
if it shuts you up about complaining that liberal BOTs are after you and trying to stifle your free speech, i’m fine if people vote my post up (12), don’t comment on my post, and don’t down vote your comment (5) so it stays visible.
more ‘crickets’ in reply to your post.
as long as your posts aren’t hidden and you have to pull your ***REPOSTING BECAUSE LIBERAL BOTS ARE OUT TO GET ME*** nonsense, i’m happy
missed a word.
*you DON’T have to pull your nonsense
Off topic, again.
would you like to post something on-topic for me to respond, or you just want to point out that my post was off-topic?
See what I mean Yogi? The BOTS can’t stand anyone that disagrees with them, so they try to hide any Conservative post. If that doesn’t work, they insult with terrible language.
We know who they are and IJ knows who they are. One of the no no’s is personal insults. Something tells me that this blog has not been monitored well recently or this would have stopped by now.
Icebergs on which I float southward in the ocean only emit fresh water as they drift farther south. And I recycle all my empty beer bottles.
What an awkwardly worded title! The key phrase is ‘still-doubted’, which badly needs the hyphen I inserted.
If in doubt, liberals make up their minds and impose their will on those who remain in doubt.
OTOH, Conservative allow others to review the facts and data and use their free will to decide for themselves. This key difference in posture will be the reason for my projection of OVER 100 posts in this thread before it is closed down by the IJ staff due to foul language and personal attacks.
The whole article is written terribly. It’s a blog post with links that didn’t carry over here.
Yogi Troller Berra – Yeah, watch out for the Progressive Socialist Millennial Pokeman “BOTs”. You ARE using heavy duty aluminum foil for that hat, right?
I will gladly troll you wherever you surf on the net.
My hat is cotton, mostly.
No worries- I’m sure libtards will get this right like they got the $2500 premium reduction for the average family from Obumacareless.
Jack, hot off the press. Obamacareless is in the toilet completely now as we have predicted for 6 years.
Our current leaders have done little right in 8 years! Doubt they will get this one right either, especially since Climate Change isn’t a proven reality.
I like the first story too about how this government is going to help with hacking. They couldn’t even stop their own party, DNC, from being hacked!
“We are going to raise taxes on the middle class!”
For once, Lyin’ Crooked Hillary is telling the truth.
“At this point, what difference does it make?”
“We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”
“God bless the America we are trying to create.”
B, you have been raised right.
It takes a village to raise a child – HRC. I think some of the ugly trolls on this site didn’t get raised right and had a succession of foster parents that abused them.
Climate change is nothing more than Democratic and UN led extortion to transfer wealth and power.
OMG!!! How stupid do they think we are with their “ESTIMATED social cost of carbon” based on a fictitious “net-present value of climate chaos” to arrive at “The Obama administration’s ESTIMATE—about $36 a ton”.
This is nothing but a WAG and was “developed” (aka made up) by an interagency group in 2010 and revisited last year. “The ESTIMATES are based on physical science and projections (ESTIMATES) of energy use, population, and economic growth. It’s complicated (meaning the people who can’t think for themselves will believe this like they believed Obamacare was a good thing), rigorous (meaning they put so much BS in it that the people will get too bored to uncover the truth), and imperfect (meaning they have an “escape clause” in case some conservative actually challenges them with the truth).
This is another piece of evidence that they are making this crap up. There is no way to use “empirical costs of climate chaos” to develop a social cost of carbon. First, there are no credible costs that can be associated with climate change. Simply stating that the costs of flooding or hurricanes does not make it true. These phenomena occurred way before the industrial revolution. Stop building in catastrophe prone areas and the costs will go down.
It continues to amaze me how those on the left cannot use common sense to read between the lines and see how their “leaders” are making them look like fools because they believe all the crap they tell them.
Integrity, great post. Social Costs = Socialism. Socialism begets Communism. Communism on steroids = Venezuela. What is the common good in eating dogs and cats because the population is starving?
Many of the Progressive Socialists have no memory of Al Gore saying the polar ice caps would be gone by 2014. That is called selective memory.
Agent, don’t forget he invented the internet, so he pretty much knows everything!
What the dumbocrats have learned is that if you tell a lie often enough, about 50% of the people will believe you.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
@B.Right – Republicans have learned that too apparently.
Too much caffeine from Starbucks could cause health issues.
And all the nay-sayers and ideologically blinded individuals have come out of the woodwork.
Do you even listen to what you say? Have you done any research to refute the data that has accumulated over the past several decades showing that climate change is happening? Or are you just parroting the biggest conservative blow-hards that yell the loudest on the radio?
Paraphrasing one of you from earlier, now waiting for the CONSERVATIVE bots to down vote me. Dare you…
Take a read, https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-the-most-cited-climate-change-papers
Oh, and research was published in 1967 regarding climate change and modeling. https://www.carbonbrief.org/prof-john-mitchell-how-a-1967-study-greatly-influenced-climate-change-science
Interesting reads
Oh, and climate change science is not exactly new. One of the more widely cited papers was published in 1967. http://www.carbonbrief.org/prof-john-mitchell-how-a-1967-study-greatly-influenced-climate-change-science
Please go ahead and start citing your sources for the climate isn’t changing arguments. I’d be interested in reading them.
caffiend – don’t you know, any science that doesn’t support the conservative agenda is a godless liberal conspiracy meant to overthrow our democracy and turn us into a communist dictatorship under the oppressive Adolfbama regime. The more evidence that supports supports it just means a bigger conspiracy. You should know better…
mr, what liberal school did you go to with the idea that this country was founded as a Democracy? If you were taught right, it was founded as a Constitutional Republic since Democracies result in chaos.
“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”
Ever recite the pledge in school with your hand over your heart? When did you stop believing in the Constitution of this country? Let me guess, about the time Obama said – We live in the greatest country in the world. Join me as I seek to fundamentally transform it.
Science is nothing but lies, sent from the pit of hell!!! It’s the devil’s work!!!
Caffeind – Yes, the climate changes. It has for a very long time. The question is…are humans the cause? There are too many variants to credibly make that determination.
Here is a link to a NASA news site from 2004 saying global warming was going to potentially cause the next ice age as early as 2024. How’s that for an oxymoron?
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2004/05mar_arctic/
Logic tells me that should put a damper on the “global average temperature”, unless of course the “scientists” conveniently leave out those temps because of some BS anomaly they will proclaim.
They are sure playing both sides of the coin to say “see, we told you so” when the temperatures eventually come down.
Here is a link to an article showing NASA predicted an ice age in 1971.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/noel-sheppard/2007/09/19/
There have been recent reports and with scientists indicating that the number of sunspots on the sun is reducing as part of its natural cycle and could result in an ice age within the next 20 years.
The global warming scientists agree the sun spots are reducing but are saying the reduced sun spots (which makes the heat of the sun less intense, thereby cooling the planet) will not reduce the heat generated by the trapped greenhouse gases. Other scientists disagree.
My money is on the natural sun and its affects (or lack, thereof) will prove the arrogant global warming scientists wrong. Nature has a way of doing that sort of thing. (Remember the Titanic statements made…”even God can’t sink the Titanic”…oops, bad call on that one!)
Their “research” is a bunch of pasted links that have been refuted over and over, conspiracy theories, and outright lies. It’s not even worth engaging with these morons. Sadly, we have to just let enough of them die out and then try to fix the damage they have left us with. In previous debates they have said stats don’t add up, are manipulated, fake, etc., and then proven they do not even know basic statistics like confidence intervals and what averages or medians are.
So why did IJ feel compelled to add “still doubted” to the title of the article? Still doubted by whom? Some dumba*** that still can’t comprehend the significance of the fact that 2014 global average temperatures were the hottest on record, only to be surpassed by 2015, and quite likely will be surpassed again in 2016? The fact that the last 8 months were also the hottest months on records?
Would you feel also compelled to write a headline like “Geologist recommend flight paths to account for the still doubted round earth theory?”
Really bad journalism.
Straw Man argument, again.
Climates change. Man doesn’t have diddly squat impact on it.
are you sick and tired of Yogi complaining about BOTs “censoring” his posts? don’t downvote his comment – upvote this one instead!!
97% of experts (including NASA) say humans are causing global warming. The ones that don’t are being funded by oil companies. This has been proven. There is no debate only ignorant people getting fooled by wealthy who make money on pollution.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
It hasn’t been proven.
http://climatechangedispatch.com/97-articles-refuting-the-97-consensus/
“No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.” Albert Einstein
Do you really think the wealthy have a mastermind plan to kill off the planet including themselves, their children and their grand children, just to make another buck they don’t need? That seems absurd.
See numbers 4 and 176 in the list I posted of debunked arguments of global warming deniers. The 97% of scientists agreeing on global warming has been confirmed over and over. It has also been confirmed that the studies denying global warming were funded by the Koch brothers and Exxon. And yes, I do think they would destroy the planet to make a buck they don’t need. It’s not absurd at all. What do all men with power covet?…more power. Most wealthy people are addicts. They are addicted to “more.” It’s what makes them successful, but also makes them untrustworthy. Why would the benefit of the doubt not go to the scientists on a scientific issue rather than politicians and oil companies? That seems absurd.
What is the definition of ‘scientist’ in the poll?
Credentials? Experience? Peer review? Continuing Ed Requirements?
Would Professor Irwin Corey qualify as a ‘scientist’ for that poll?
Yogi – did you seriously just ask me to define “scientist”? Tell you what – you go out and personally interview every scientist on the planet. When the ones you deem worthy of their degrees decide global warming is a hoax, I’ll apologize. Until then the burden of proof is on the people claiming that 97% of scientists are liars, conspirators, or mostly unqualified. I don’t listen to politicians, special interests, or corporate America…experts. If you have evidence they aren’t experts, bring it on. Until then you are just regurgitating what you hear from the politicians being funded by people who want global warming to be a hoax. Don’t kid yourself into thinking that you are a sceptic or high-minded in challenging data. You’re not skeptical of the data, you challenge it on the basis that you don’t like the results. No matter how many times the scientists are verified you won’t buy it. No matter how many times the data is tested, you’ll argue that too. It will never end. It will never be enough. But the first time anyone with a PhD shows 1 study that possibly disputes global warming, it will be your bible. You will throw it in everyone’s face and say “here, I told you so.” And when he is discredited, you will say it was a liberal plot. That’s the problem with political fanatics. There is always an excuse, a challenge or conspiracy, unless the results are what you want them to be. Let me guess, if Trump loses the election it will be because it was rigged? No, voter fraud. No, Hillary donated money to a company that sabotaged voting machines in conservative districts. Tell me so I can start rolling my eyes now.
B, judging from the number of posts, I think mr opinion is one of those true believer types brainwashed by Al Gore.
Climate Change is the most serious national security threat this nation faces. BHO
Refrigerators and A/C are the cause for ISIS in the world. J Heinz Kerry aka Lurch
Assuming I’m completely wrong on climate change, my only questions are:
1) How much is the solution?
2) Who’s going to pay for it?
Classic democrat response will be….raise taxes on the wealthy again and again and again.
What happens though is that the wealthy will still be wealthy and the middle class wages will be stagnant another 50 years. And the bottom 50% who don’t pay anything into the system will remain civilized slaves.
I was just watching Glen Beck with specially educated Alex Jones and they said this was all BS. The lizard people were flying their plans and the chem trails are used to manipulate us.
Buy Gold, Guns, pre-rationed meals to store in your bunkers that you have spent every last penny on.
The SOUTH WILL RISE A’GIN 1776!!!!
But first we need some Federal Tax money for Louisianner, Mississipuh, and Alabamer,
Thanks for presuming all Conservatives think in lock-step with those TWO political commentators.
It goes to prove your simplistic thought process and inability to discern variances in opinion and thought among different individuals.
In other words, it’s just another one of your lame Straw Man Arguments, used to confuse, obfuscate and mis-direct the current discussion.
are you sick and tired of Yogi complaining about BOTs “censoring” his posts? do you want to downvote his post, but don’t want to listen to him whine about you using your free will? don’t downvote his comment – upvote this one instead!
Yogi –
“Thanks for presuming all (insert any group here) think in lock-step with those (insert any name here).
It goes to prove your simplistic thought process and inability to discern variances in opinion and thought among different individuals.
In other words, it’s just another one of your lame Straw Man Arguments, used to confuse, obfuscate and mis-direct the current discussion.”
WOULD YOU PLEASE PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH?
If you can prove you do not think in lock-step with other liberals, you will qualify for my future label of ‘almost a liberal’. Now, go earn it!
Yogi, if it talks like a bot, walks like a bot, there is a good chance it is a bot.
Who came up with that moronic headline? “…Still Doubted…”?? Only by scientifically illiterate people. Oh yeah – and evolution mediated by natural selection is “just a theory”.