Crazy Marjorie Traitor Greene wants statues of Hitler & Satan to stay up

[Katchii]

They're crazy and misguided but I don't see the point in being paranoid and pretending they are scary and dangerous.

The scary part is that she's supposed to be one of the leaders of this country, in her capacity as an elected official, and she's THIS crazy and misguided. If you honestly don't understand why that's a serious issue, and not something to be laughed at, there's no helping you.

Granted, you can laugh at her for being so crazy and misguided while also finding the fact that she is where she is while doing it to be absolutely terrifying. Personally, I find I can't laugh at it because it showcases a much larger problem, that isn't at al funny.

It's like hearing "the inmates are running the asylum," it being a REAL thing, laughing for a second as a "are you serious?" kind of thing before really wrapping your head around just how serious that is.

[cubby]

They're crazy and misguided but I don't see the point in being paranoid and pretending they are scary and dangerous.

I'm not sure how you can say this with a straight face. 230,000 people voted for her to represent their interests in Congress. She the craziest of a small but growing group of bat-shit crazy people who are taking over leadership roles in the United States. She represents people crazier than her in local government. People who are finding audiences to bolster their roles in national government. We will only see more of these people in part because of her.

Trump is one of these people. You may have have missed the fact that he resided in the White House for a few years recently.

To not be terrified of these people is a willful denial of the modern reality that is the United States. And it's only getting worse. How can I say that? Because people like here weren't in office 10 years ago.

[PACOX]

Stop putting a micriphone in this woman's face. People hate-listen to her at this point.

[PC2]

Yeah, you're misrepresenting AOC's comments so badly it's pretty clear you're just engaging in dishonest gaslighting.

https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-...ildren-1342853

She wasn't making a recommendation. She was noting an active concern among young people.

She is spreading misinformation by saying there's a "scientific consensus that the lives of young people are going to be very difficult". It is an example of untestable pseudo-scientific nonsense and unjustifiable pessimism.

She isn't "crazy and misguided". You're just a liar who lacks any sense of shame.

Hey @Endus I think you may not realize this but you've been misunderstanding the words "lie" and "liar" for a long time. You think if someone is wrong then it is a "lie", which makes no sense because a lie is only a lie if a person knows the information is wrong but still intentionally asserts it anyway. It's like if I claim AOC is lying because I think her positions, opinions, and arguments are wrong. When in reality she simply disagrees with me about what is true and what represents the best course of action.

Calling people liars is basically just a form of ad hominem which is usually unprovable and unfalsifiable. You could respond to every post by saying "you're lying!" but it's pointless unless you actually have proof that a person is lying.

[Endus]

She is spreading misinformation by saying there's a "scientific consensus that the lives of young people are going to be very difficult". It is an example of untestable pseudo-scientific nonsense and unjustifiable pessimism.

No, this is you repeating climate change denier talking points yet again.

I've debunked this directly with a heap of source material in prior threads that you never had any response for, and I'm not repeating myself a third time, I'll just link again to the earlier post;

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post53097572

Won't be the first time you've ignored the evidence, doubt it'll be the last, but your position is anti-scientific and counter to the known facts.

Hey @Endus I think you may not realize this but you've been misunderstanding the words "lie" and "liar" for a long time. You think if someone is wrong then it is a "lie", which makes no sense because a lie is only a lie if a person knows the information is wrong but still intentionally asserts it anyway. It's like if I claim AOC is lying because I think her positions, opinions, and arguments are wrong. When in reality she simply disagrees with me about what is true and what represents the best course of action.

Calling people liars is basically just a form of ad hominem which is usually unprovable and unfalsifiable. You could respond to every post by saying "you're lying!" but it's pointless unless you actually have proof that a person is lying.

Given that I've given you direct links and chapter headings for you to have informed yourself about these issues to at least a basic level, and you've clearly refused to do so, I'm perfectly comfortable calling you a liar. You've had every opportunity to inform yourself, and I really don't care if you're lying out of willful ignorance or open malfeasance. It's a lie either way. Don't like being called out like this? Then you're free to actually inform yourself for once, and stop lying about the facts as you insist on doing.

The "proof" that you're lying on this issue has been presented multiple times in prior threads. You just ignore it.

[beanman12345]

She is spreading misinformation by saying there's a "scientific consensus that the lives of young people are going to be very difficult". It is an example of untestable pseudo-scientific nonsense and unjustifiable pessimism.


Hey @Endus I think you may not realize this but you've been misunderstanding the words "lie" and "liar" for a long time. You think if someone is wrong then it is a "lie", which makes no sense because a lie is only a lie if a person knows the information is wrong but still intentionally asserts it anyway. It's like if I claim AOC is lying because I think her positions, opinions, and arguments are wrong. When in reality she simply disagrees with me about what is true and what represents the best course of action.

Calling people liars is basically just a form of ad hominem which is usually unprovable and unfalsifiable. You could respond to every post by saying "you're lying!" but it's pointless unless you actually have proof that a person is lying.

Him calling you a liar, is him giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are not mentally challenged, and are smart enough to actually not believe the things you claim you do considering the insurmountable evidence that is continuously provided to you, that proves everything you post is wrong. Him calling you a liar, is actually a compliment in this circumstance.

[Glorious Leader]

Him calling you a liar, is him giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are not mentally challenged, and are smart enough to actually not believe the things you claim you do considering the insurmountable evidence that is continuously provided to you, that proves everything you post is wrong. Him calling you a liar, is actually a compliment in this circumstance.

See I would not dismiss that he is both.

[beanman12345]

See I would not dismiss that he is both.

I'm sure he believes some of it, especially all the bigoted crap he spews, but the rest is just him lying.

[PC2]

No, this is you repeating climate change denier talking points yet again.

I've debunked this directly with a heap of source material in prior threads that you never had any response for, and I'm not repeating myself a third time, I'll just link again to the earlier post;

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post53097572

Won't be the first time you've ignored the evidence, doubt it'll be the last, but your position is anti-scientific and counter to the known facts.

Given that I've given you direct links and chapter headings for you to have informed yourself about these issues to at least a basic level, and you've clearly refused to do so, I'm perfectly comfortable calling you a liar. You've had every opportunity to inform yourself, and I really don't care if you're lying out of willful ignorance or open malfeasance. It's a lie either way. Don't like being called out like this? Then you're free to actually inform yourself for once, and stop lying about the facts as you insist on doing.

The "proof" that you're lying on this issue has been presented multiple times in prior threads. You just ignore it.

No, you simply don't understand what "lying" means. You say people are lying in almost every thread. Maybe it's projection or it could be paranoia which is the result of an extreme mistrust of other people.

I've always agreed with climate change science so that's not an issue at all. The mistake AOC is making is that she thinks climate change determines whether children will have "very difficult lives" in the future which is wildly inaccurate and unscientific. Science must be testable to be science and since there's no test that confirms the claim then that means it's not science. Making prophecies about the future of people, children in this case, is not science.

[Edge-]

The mistake AOC is making is that she thinks climate change determines whether children will have "very difficult lives" in the future which is wildly inaccurate and unscientific.

Based on current trajectories, it's bloody well not. There's consensus that life will be difficult if we don't radically change, and there's no evidence to suggest radical changes.

Making prophecies about the future of people, children in this case, is not science.

Science is about building predictable models dude, including projections into the future.

[Egomaniac]

Calling people liars is basically just a form of ad hominem which is usually unprovable and unfalsifiable. You could respond to every post by saying "you're lying!" but it's pointless unless you actually have proof that a person is lying.

I'm not sure "I'm not a liar... I'm just ignorant and refuse to educate myself" is really a strong position to argue from.

[TigTone]

I'm not sure "I'm not a liar... I'm just ignorant and refuse to educate myself" is really a strong position to argue from.

You would have to pay PC2 for him to learn and chose enlightenment rather than ignorance.

Money is the only thing that motivates PC2

[Calfredd]

I've always agreed with climate change science so that's not an issue at all. The mistake AOC is making is that she thinks climate change determines whether children will have "very difficult lives" in the future which is wildly inaccurate and unscientific. Science must be testable to be science and since there's no test that confirms the claim then that means it's not science. Making prophecies about the future of people, children in this case, is not science.

And here you are lying again.

[PC2]

I'm sure he believes some of it, especially all the bigoted crap he spews,

If I have a position that is bigoted just say what it is, I will then change my mind on the issue. I don't want there to be any bigotry or prejudice towards anyone, unless it's purely about a prejudice that is directed towards a bad idea or the criminal behaviour of an individual.

but the rest is just him lying.

Lying means I don't believe my own assertion is correct. Specifically which one of my points do you think I'm lying about? Why would I put forth an argument and defend an argument I don't truly believe in?

And here you are lying again.

Can you be more specific? Which point do you think is a lie?

[Endus]

No, you simply don't understand what "lying" means. You say people are lying in almost every thread. Maybe it's projection or it could be paranoia which is the result of an extreme mistrust of other people.

Or, maybe a lot of people lie.

I'm not particularly interested in investing time to figure out if they're lying from willful ignorance or malice. What matters is that they're lying.

I've always agreed with climate change science so that's not an issue at all.

That's a straight up lie.

See how this works?

You've repeatedly pushed climate change denialism on these forums. You did so in this thread.

The mistake AOC is making is that she thinks climate change determines whether children will have "very difficult lives" in the future which is wildly inaccurate and unscientific. Science must be testable to be science and since there's no test that confirms the claim then that means it's not science. Making prophecies about the future of people, children in this case, is not science.

Models are testable. You claiming otherwise is science denialism. They are not "prophecies", and it's only bad faith actors like yourself who lie to try and present them that way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_modelling
https://www.britannica.com/science/scientific-modeling
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/models-science/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ntific-models/

Just to provide the "proof" you're so desperate that I provide to demonstrate why your claims are outrageously, deliberately false.

Edit: This is also a point you've been wrong about in the past, and have refused to inform yourself on, when I've tried to point you towards better information, so those links aren't really meant to convince you, just piling up more evidence for everyone else to see what you're doing, and how long and insistently you've been doing it;

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post51952702
https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post52929508

When you're wrong, and continue to insist on the wrongness even when people prove you to be wrong and why you are wrong, it stops being accidental ignorance or a mistake. It's a conscious, willful choice to push a falsehood. That's "lying", by any reasonable definition.

[PC2]

Or, maybe a lot of people lie.

I'm not particularly interested in investing time to figure out if they're lying from willful ignorance or malice. What matters is that they're lying.

That's a straight up lie.

See how this works?

You've repeatedly pushed climate change denialism on these forums. You did so in this thread.

Nah I didn't lie or deny climate change. You have no proof because those claims are imaginary.

Models are testable. You claiming otherwise is science denialism. They are not "prophecies", and it's only bad faith actors like yourself who lie to try and present them that way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_modelling
https://www.britannica.com/science/scientific-modeling
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/models-science/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ntific-models/

Just to provide the "proof" you're so desperate that I provide to demonstrate why your claims are outrageously, deliberately false.

So where is the tested model that confirms that "children will have very difficult lives in the future"? Your links do not indicate that in any way. Isn't it strange how you can't give a source for this "test" and we're suppose to just trust you that the future is gloomy for children.

[Egomaniac]

Lying means I don't believe my own assertion is correct. Specifically which one of my points do you think I'm lying about? Why would I put forth an argument and defend an argument I don't truly believe in?

Once again, splitting hairs between lying and willful ignorance is just not a strong position to argue.

[Endus]

Nah I didn't lie or deny climate change. You have no proof because those claims are imaginary.

Already directly linked substantiating proof to support that statement.

You're a climate change denier, and you have a long history of pushing that particular nonsense here on these forums, and denying scientific analysis and procedure.

So where is the tested model that confirms that "children will have very difficult lives in the future"? Your links do not indicate that in any way. Isn't it strange how you can't give a source for this "test" and we're suppose to just trust you that the future is gloomy for children.

This post; https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post53097572

Re-linked in this thread in this post; https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post53202369

Chapters 11 through 13 are obviously pretty darned relevant, given that they cover human health, human security, and livelihoods/poverty.

Some choice quotes;

Chapter 11:
"The health of human populations is sensitive to shifts in weather patterns and other aspects of climate change"
"Until mid-century climate change will act mainly by exacerbating health problems that already exist"

Chapter 12:
"Human security will be progressively threatened as the climate changes"
"Climate change will compromise the cultural values that are important for community and individual well-being"
"Climate change will lead to new challenges to states and will increasingly shape both conditions of security and national securitypolicies"

Chapter 13:
"Observed evidence suggests that climate change and climate variability worsen existing poverty, exacerbate inequalities, and trigger both new vulnerabilities and some opportunities for individuals and communities"
"Climate change will create new poor between now and 2100, in developing and developed countries, and jeopardize sustainabledevelopment."
"Current policy responses for climate change mitigation or adaptation will result in mixed, and in some cases even detrimental,
outcomes for poor and marginalized people, despite numerous potential synergies between climate policies and poverty reduction"

Just sticking to the executive summaries, which it's clear you didn't even bother to read at any point. Rather than inform yourself, you just chose to lie about what the sources contained.

Edit: And before you say "but the executive summaries don't contain the models and every data point in full", all that information is either explained in the full body of the document or (more likely) in the cited bibliographic source material, which you're free to go double check any time you like. Literally the only thing stopping you is you.

[beanman12345]

If I have a position that is bigoted just say what it is, I will then change my mind on the issue. I don't want there to be any bigotry or prejudice towards anyone, unless it's purely about a prejudice that is directed towards a bad idea or the criminal behaviour of an individual.


Lying means I don't believe my own assertion is correct. Specifically which one of my points do you think I'm lying about? Why would I put forth an argument and defend an argument I don't truly believe in?


Can you be more specific? Which point do you think is a lie?

Nah, not gonna give you an outlet for you to continue to defend your bigotry. You are simply just not a good person. /shrug

- - - Updated - - -

Once again, splitting hairs between lying and willful ignorance is just not a strong position to argue.

Well, he did say he didn't care if he was the stupidest person on the earth. Someone even has it in their sig. I don't see why anyone would want people to believe that of them, but to each their own.

[Nastard]

You guys are missing PC2's point. He's not lying. He's merely showing a real-life example of the type of willful ignorance it takes for someone to support a person like Greene. It's parody and I applaud the excellent performance, particularly the part where he claimed to not deny science while simultaneously calling it fake news. Bravo.