Current events discussion

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

Was that about people calling me out on lies, and being mad that they dare question me, and not just believe me "because I said so"?
LMK
In fact, LMK about any time I've demanded people accept what I say simply "because I said so".
I'll wait

It was just you melting down because you feel like a victim

Because you see...grown-ups don't act that way

Hell my daughter (who's 10) doesn't do that sh!t

 

[YourNameHere 10+ year member]

This meme describes Rob on caraudio.com (was posted by someone else a while ago)....everytime Rob replys to something i think of this

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

The truth bears repetition.

Then I shall say it again. You are ignorant.

Are you going to show us a belief that was proved by using other beliefs as supporting evidence?
It can be your own, or someone else's belief.
Just one example would be fine.

This is why I insulted you. More ignorance. If you are going to willfully ignore comprehension then stop ******* responding. You are again responding to something that obviously went over your head... way over your head. You missed the point by a mile.

Maybe prove your belief that bones do not have nerves in them. Show us how you can read an anatomy textbook and COMPREHEND the information therein.

Educate me Dr. Rob. Since you want to talk shit, we will use your Camp Ripley argument. You are an expert, tell me the correct procedure for finding the level of PFA's in 10L of water. Please site your "scientific method" as well.

What is the relevance to your failure to know the scientific method, and to show us how a belief was proved with a belief? Seems like you are spinning off on a tangent to avoid failing again.

Well Captain Ignorant. I never once said a belief was proved with a belief. Time for you to change your tampon and wash the sand out of your ******.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

The truth bears repetition.

I think you meant to say this:

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Why do I have the feeling this clown is going to try a Google search on the proper procedure for finding the amount of PFA's in 10L of water.

Rob is usually doing a heavy Google search when he is challenged then goes silent. How much do you want to bet he comes back with EPA 537 and EPA 537.1. Mind you, I asked him for procedure, not methods. Let's see his spin.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

"Forget about ordering that juicy steak from your favorite restaurant — how about some mold? In a study that could transform the culinary world, researchers at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the University of California-Berkeley have unlocked the potential of fungi to create what they’re calling sustainable, healthy, and flavor-rich food alternatives."

Mold On The Menu: Scientists Create Surprising Meat Replacement

UC Berkeley researchers have unlocked the potential of fungi to create sustainable, healthy, and flavor-rich food alternatives.

studyfinds.org

How about some no?

 

[Old_Slapper]

Do the Mormon fundamentalists and the Strangites not still practice it?

I find the argument fascinating. What scientific proof exists that says there is a singular higher being, and of the many singular higher beings that people look to, which one is the "correct" one?
I know some people think the Holy Trinity is the right one. Others think Buddah is. Others think their god is an alien (Xenu) from another planet who brought life to earth, then destroyed it, and started over.
Which one has it right?

Correct. So if a government makes a law derived from a religious belief, they are pushing that religion on their citizens. I would not be happy with a law that said I was not allowed to eat bacon b/c god would be mad at me.

No, he actually refused to. That is why there was a subsequent FBI raid. His words went something like this:
“I don’t want anybody looking, I don’t want anybody looking through my boxes, I really don’t,” Trump told his lawyer in May 2022, according to the indictment. “What happens if we just don’t respond at all or don’t play ball with them? Wouldn’t it be better if we just told them we don’t have anything here?”

That has no relevance to an insurrection at the capitol building in a coup attempt. You're using the 3rd grade strategy of a strawman. Billy gets caught kicking Cindy, so he narcs on Steve for stealing gum.
Irrelevant.

The most powerful man in the country, and self-proclaimed billionaire can't get something investigated?
Yet we are supposed to believe that Biden is the dark underlord who can make people vanish with a wave of his hand, and beleive that Trump is an effective world leader?
Pretty inconsistent logic there. It seems the story changes to fit each new situation.

I asked several times for proof of an attempt by Democrats to overthrow the gov't by preventing the completion of a legitimate election process. Can you name a specific Democrat who pushed for it? Can you name a specific protest that was an attempt to stop the election process?
The strawman that "since Democrats rioted, it's OK for Republicans to attempt a coup" simply doesn't fly for me.


Probably for the same reason that on 9/11, tens of thousands of US business continued to operate, and who knows how many on Manhatan island itself. You would think 9/11 would have been horrible enough to brink the entire island to a grinding halt that day. Nope.
If you think the Jan 6th insurrection was no big deal, then you really have a problem. I suppose you thought the first attempt on the towers was no big deal since they failed and only blew up some cars?
Minimizing a coup attempt on the US government? Wow.


Did you miss my response to the it? Go back and look at the post again.
If you mean in the history of the site, maybe? Not sure how you'd know so much history as a brand new member here, though.

Well, they opposed adding it for family members of the justices, not the justices themselves.
But here are some of the reasons stated:
"Grijalva told The Hill that he voted against the bill in-part to make a statement regarding the fact that it did not include protections for federal court systems. He noted, however, that protections for the Supreme Court are “absolutely” necessary."
Ocasio-Cortez told reporters that she voted against the bill as a call to action for gun and abortion legislation.
“I think it’s ridiculous that we have the political will and capacity to pass protections for ourselves so quickly, but for some reason when it comes to kids, people in grocery stores, anybody in a public place, that we somehow can’t get gun safety or we can’t even pass federal protections, to Veronica Escobar’s point, we can’t pass expanded security protections for federal workers who are providing health care and abortion care as well,”

You seem to want it to be that the Democrats were doing this to hurt Republican judges. Did you know that the SCOTUS, though it's SUPPOSED to be non-partisan, is composed of right AND left-leaning judges? So you think maybe the Democrats were trying to sacrifice their own in order to hurt the right-leaning justices?

Now, here is an interesting thing you may have missed in that whole situation:
House Democrats wanted to expand the Senate-passed bill — offering protections to Supreme Court staff if the court marshal determined it was needed — but Republicans in the upper chamber objected to such a move.
Why would Republicans be against providing protection when a marshall of the court specifically and situationally determines it is needed?


"Stop with the spin"? OK spinster, please show me that this is an "FBI approved safe" and point out what int he picture proves it is not a public bathroom. What proves that it is his "private ballroom"?
I'll wait:
View attachment 57384
View attachment 57385
View attachment 57386

Rob,
Are you married with kids? If not, can see why you think the way you do. As I mentioned before, your thought process is way too narrow.

Again, you just went and put your own spin on things. Can you not see what your doing? Right now, your reading this and thinking of a spin to make off it.

Mr. Knowledge (Rob), the Fundamentalist Mormon and the Strangites are totally different than the Mormons. I guess that's why you went back and correct what you said by mentioning those two and not the Mormons. Trust me, you don't want to debate religion with me. I would honestly destroy your argument.

Like I said, there is more proof of there being a higher being than there not being one. If you want to believe that SOME science is accurate about there not being a higher power, then you have to go by faith. Just like there being a God, there is no 100% proof that there isn't a God. That is correct, there is no solid proof that there is no higher being that created us and earth. Many people like to have faith in science because it is easier and they think "well, when I die and find out I was wrong, I'll just say oopsies."

As for not wanting to live in a country where you can't eat bacon? With all these illegals coming in and all the Islamic followers who were born here, I would be willing to bet you will see the Dems pushing to abolish pork, within your lifetime.

 

[Old_Slapper]

Hey Rob.
Answer this for me. Why does Biden want to send the Haitians to place outside the US? They are actually coming from a war-stricken country. Could it have anything to do with Haitians being republicans and hate the Clintons and democrats?

MSN

www.msn.com

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Rob,
Are you married with kids? If not, can see why you think the way you do. As I mentioned before, your thought process is way too narrow.

I'm not sure what that means, or has to do with anyhting. Are you suggesting that being married with kids or being unmarried with no kids, or maybe being unmarried with kids makes one "better"?
Which of those people I listed is "better", and why?

Again, you just went and put your own spin on things. Can you not see what your doing? Right now, your reading this and thinking of a spin to make off it.

Please explain how I am "spinning" things by introducing facts as a challenge to beliefs. You said there is scientific proof of a higher being. I ask for you to share the proof.
How is that "spin"? Is there proof, or not?

Mr. Knowledge (Rob), the Fundamentalist Mormon and the Strangites are totally different than the Mormons. I guess that's why you went back and correct what you said by mentioning those two and not the Mormons. Trust me, you don't want to debate religion with me. I would honestly destroy your argument.

So they are Mormons but hey are NOT Mormons since they don't fit the definition you want them to?
I'll debate religion all day long. How much time did you spend in seminary?

Like I said, there is more proof of there being a higher being than there not being one. If you want to believe that SOME science is accurate about there not being a higher power, then you have to go by faith. Just like there being a God, there is no 100% proof that there isn't a God. That is correct, there is no solid proof that there is no higher being that created us and earth. Many people like to have faith in science because it is easier and they think "well, when I die and find out I was wrong, I'll just say oopsies."

"there is more proof of there being a higher being than there not being one"
Repetition doesn't make proof. Please show me this "more proof" of said "higher being" that created all that is.
I'm a fan of science.
A warning: I don't accept the "It's just not possible to have all this WITHOUT a higher being having created it" line as proof.

As for not wanting to live in a country where you can't eat bacon? With all these illegals coming in and all the Islamic followers who were born here, I would be willing to bet you will see the Dems pushing to abolish pork, within your lifetime.

That is nothing but spin to avoid answering a direct question. I'll try again:
You want government to rule based on YOUR religion or beliefs. Would you be OK with our government ruling based on someone ELSE'S religion?
How would you feel if eating pork was made illegal because it doesn't please a god other than your own?
How would you feel if practicing your religion was simply outlawed?
Please answer without trying to spin to a strawman.

Hey Rob.
Answer this for me. Why does Biden want to send the Haitians to place outside the US? They are actually coming from a war-stricken country. Could it have anything to do with Haitians being republicans and hate the Clintons and democrats?

MSN

www.msn.com

That's a good question. I didn't know being Haitian means you are Republican by default.
If they can only be Republican, then why would they even NEED to be Republican. If there is only one party, then no party is necessary,
Regardless, what is the reason he wants them to stay at Gitmo?

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Then I shall say it again. You are ignorant.

Says the guy who didn't know the Scientific Method until a few posts ago. The guy who thinks bones are not innervated. The guy who believes orgasm causes ovulation. The guy confused by mathematical averages.

This is why I insulted you. More ignorance. If you are going to willfully ignore comprehension then stop ******* responding. You are again responding to something that obviously went over your head... way over your head. You missed the point by a mile.

You are avoiding a direct challenge to your belief that beliefs can be used in the scientific method to prove another belief.
So I'll ask again: What belief do you know of that has been proved with other beliefs?
It can be your own belief or the belief of another.

Educate me Dr. Rob. Since you want to talk shit, we will use your Camp Ripley argument. You are an expert, tell me the correct procedure for finding the level of PFA's in 10L of water. Please site your "scientific method" as well.

I have no idea what the correct procedure is.
What I do know is that you stated VERY clearly that you deemed Camp Ripley "safe biologically" until I found out that the place was later found to have unacceptable levels of PFAs.
You then tried to backpedal and say you didn't do tests that would be necessary to determine the pace "safe biologically".
It's funny that you bring up water testing, since you said you DIDN'T test the water there.
What DID you test to declare the camp "safe biologically"? The mess hall? Computer keyboards? Phone handsets? Bed linens>

Well Captain Ignorant. I never once said a belief was proved with a belief. Time for you to change your tampon and wash the sand out of your ******.

Ahhh, a very cute ad hominem. Typical for one with the intellect of a child.

Here is the basis of the discussion of beliefs being used to prove a belief:

I eschew beliefs and personal opinion when arguing matters of politics, science, data and statistics.
Beliefs and opinions should be argued about your favorite team, your favorite restaurant, your favorite color.
They have no place in science, politics, statistics.

Thxone: So explain to all of us uneducated "Trump supporters" how one first arrives at a scientific fact. One that has never existed but then comes to be a scientific fact. No thoughts, no feelings, no beliefs are used to form an idea that can then be proved or disproved? They just exist? They are just there suddenly for you to argue about?

I never once said that facts "just exist" or are just here "suddenly for" me "to argue about". That was something you created in your mind and thought you'd in some way use to argue against me.
BELIEFS are the things "just exist" or are "suddenly there". And as I have said MANY times, I don't refer to beliefs when arguing about matters of science, politics. medicine, economics, etc.
It's a fool's folly to do so, and I honestly don't understand WHY people do it.

You want to believe in a god? Have at it, and enjoy. But DON'T argue that I should believe in the same god, or any god at all, when you have ZERO evidence to back it up.
You want to believe bones do not have nerves in them? Go right ahead. But DON'T be a fool and argue your belief in the face of well over a century of empirical evidence that proves bones are innervated.
You want to believe that a $4,000 power cable for your home stereo sounds better than running 12 gauge copper romex direct from the breaker box into your amplifier? Have at it. But DON'T argue it as fact when there is absolutely ZERO empirical evidence, and you can't do better than a 50/50 success ratio when blind testing.

You want to be the fool who argues using personal beliefs as a form of "proof" and "evidence"?
Go right ahead. But don't cry when people destroy your argument with little to no effort, and TELL you you are a fool.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I think you meant to say this:

View attachment 57398

Literally a book about Trump and his continuing lie (war cry, even) claiming the election was "stolen".

The man who ghost-wrote "The Art of The Deal" for Trump had this to say:
"Trump is not only willing to lie, but he doesn't get bothered by it, doesn't feel guilty about it, isn't preoccupied by it," Schwartz said. "There's an emptiness inside Trump. There's an absence of a soul. There's an absence of a heart."

Sounds like Trump and Goebbels would get along well.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

View attachment 57403

Literally a book about Trump and his continuing lie (war cry, even) claiming the election was "stolen".

The man who ghost-wrote "The Art of The Deal" for Trump had this to say:
"Trump is not only willing to lie, but he doesn't get bothered by it, doesn't feel guilty about it, isn't preoccupied by it," Schwartz said. "There's an emptiness inside Trump. There's an absence of a soul. There's an absence of a heart."

Sounds like Trump and Goebbels would get along well.

I respond with Goebbels you respond with TDS

What's funny is TDS that you have is what the CIA wants you to have, for whatever reason, and that's why the news says it so much, which is why you say it. You get a little hit of dopamine every time you talk bad about Trump, because you've been programmed to do so. Bunch of lemmings whining about Trump at every opportunity. Simon says clap your hands Rob, and Rob claps.

 

[Eggs 5,000+ posts]

Rounds, Tester Introduce CRA to Overturn Biden Administration Decision Allowing Beef Imports from Paraguay | U.S. Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) and Jon Tester (D-Mont.) officially filed a...

www.rounds.senate.gov

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I respond with Goebbels you respond with TDS

What's funny is TDS that you have is what the CIA wants you to have, for whatever reason, and that's why the news says it so much, which is why you say it. You get a little hit of dopamine every time you talk bad about Trump, because you've been programmed to do so. Bunch of lemmings whining about Trump at every opportunity. Simon says clap your hands Rob, and Rob claps.

So you think Trump is actually telling the truth with his neverending repetition of his Big Lie?
The Big Lie that the election was somehow stolen with over 7 MILLION fake votes but no one, not even him when he was the most powerful person in our country, can come up with a SINGLE shred of evidence for this massive conspiracy?
He tells you what you WANT to hear and you cling to it like a cluster of flies feeding on horse manure.

Dopamine, huh? Maybe you could benefit from some of that, and get the motivation to get a job instead of lying in bed playing on the internet all day. Hell, ANY "programming" that could get you to be useful to society would be a benefit.