Donald Trump removes evidence of climate change from EPA website

[Pegii]

The expression "liberal" has come colloquially to denote someone on the far left. However, the left has abused the term to describe themselves, to fool people into thinking that they mean well. They don't, as far as we patriots (or "conservatives") are concerned. People who refer to themselves as very "liberal" are more often than not leftists, and they are not far-removed at all from socialist and communist beliefs.

Most of today's U.S. Democrats, especially in public office, have much more in common with socialists and communists than they do with America's founding fathers, regardless of the fact that they refer to themselves in public as "liberals". They don't truly believe in America's traditions, individual liberty, or the U.S. Constitution.

But I'm a real liberal. I can see both sides of the argument most of the time.

 

[Classicalfan626]

But I'm a real liberal. I can see both sides of the argument most of the time.

OK, if you consider yourself a true liberal. Seeing both sides of an argument does not define true liberalism.

Definition of liberalism in a true political sense: A philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties.

No one is forcing you to think a certain way, but if you consider yourself a true liberal, it should be requested that you take a good look at the actions of politicians.

In regards to things like climate change, secondhand sources that propagate false information and sound bytes are not reliable.

@PaulaJedi & @Einstein - Could you guys please help me out in finding sources that refute the notion of man-made climate change? I can't do it myself, because I've already got a lot on my plate mentally.

 

[Einstein]

Here is a very informative article to read if you have the time:

Warming Up to the Truth: The Real Story About Climate Change

 

[PaulaJedi]

Here is a very informative article to read if you have the time:

Warming Up to the Truth: The Real Story About Climate Change

"The latest scientific results are good news: The human influence on global climate change is small and will be slow to develop."

That is good news.

 

[Pegii]

But I'm a real liberal. I can see both sides of the argument most of the time.

OK, if you consider yourself a true liberal. Seeing both sides of an argument does not define true liberalism.

Definition of liberalism in a true political sense: A philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties.

No one is forcing you to think a certain way, but if you consider yourself a true liberal, it should be requested that you take a good look at the actions of politicians.

In regards to things like climate change, secondhand sources that propagate false information and sound bytes are not reliable.

@PaulaJedi & @Einstein - Could you guys please help me out in finding sources that refute the notion of man-made climate change? I can't do it myself, because I've already got a lot on my plate mentally.

Are you right wing Classical?

 

[Classicalfan626]

@Juno - Yes, I may be what many people consider that, but first and foremost, I am a patriotic American.

 

[Khaos]

The expression "liberal" has come colloquially to denote someone on the far left. However, the left has abused the term to describe themselves, to fool people into thinking that they mean well. They don't, as far as we patriots (or "conservatives") are concerned. People who refer to themselves as very "liberal" are more often than not leftists, and they are not far-removed at all from socialist and communist beliefs.

Most of today's U.S. Democrats, especially in public office, have much more in common with socialists and communists than they do with America's founding fathers, regardless of the fact that they refer to themselves in public as "liberals". They don't truly believe in America's traditions, individual liberty, or the U.S. Constitution.

Well I think there is a difference between being an asshole and being a liberal, and being an asshole and being a conservative. Me on the other hand, I never really subscribe to any particular parties or organizations, I take issues as they come. I agree with some things liberal, disagree with others, agree with some things conservative, disagree with others. What would that make me? Somewhere in the middle?

Climate change, I believe in that. Look at Mars, and you got scientists saying it was once wetter and warmer at one point in history, and clearly the climate changed to a now dry and barren rocky desert. So if climate change exists on one planet, why can't it exist here? It does. We have gone through ice ages, extinctions. When that asteroid hit the earth and wiped out the dinosaurs, at least according to scientists, an asteroid hit, I kind of dispute that, but the climate changed in a way. The oxygen content was much higher back then, then it is now. And the world was much more temperate, more humid. Dinosaurs would have a difficulty adapting in today's climate.

Is climate change man made? I don't think so... I think the media hypes it up too much. Perhaps we contribute to a small quantity of it, but... not much.

But hey that is just my opinion.

Can I back that up with 100% irrefutable evidence that climate change exists? Not really, but then can you give me 100% irrefutable evidence that a God exists? And the bible isn't evidence... we need something that wasn't written by mankind...

Oh and please don't think I am calling you an asshole, Classical. I am not. As I did say in that magically delicious post that vanished a while back, I think there are good and bad in all political parties.

Its just like there are good cops and bad cops, good judges, bad judges, good doctors and bad doctors. You cannot say that only one part is all good and one party is all bad. I'm not saying you say that, but I see others say that, and it irks me.

Because like sometimes I will identify with some liberal issues, and someone might say I am a horrible person for being liberal and I condone killing babies. I think that is the abortion stuff?

Hey I might identify as a liberal sometimes, but I am actually anti-abortion

Sorta. I think it could be allowed in rare circumstances, but for the most part, I don't believe anyone should have the right to terminate life at will. That is murder.

 

[Pegii]

The expression "liberal" has come colloquially to denote someone on the far left. However, the left has abused the term to describe themselves, to fool people into thinking that they mean well. They don't, as far as we patriots (or "conservatives") are concerned. People who refer to themselves as very "liberal" are more often than not leftists, and they are not far-removed at all from socialist and communist beliefs.

Most of today's U.S. Democrats, especially in public office, have much more in common with socialists and communists than they do with America's founding fathers, regardless of the fact that they refer to themselves in public as "liberals". They don't truly believe in America's traditions, individual liberty, or the U.S. Constitution.

Well I think there is a difference between being an asshole and being a liberal, and being an asshole and being a conservative. Me on the other hand, I never really subscribe to any particular parties or organizations, I take issues as they come. I agree with some things liberal, disagree with others, agree with some things conservative, disagree with others. What would that make me? Somewhere in the middle?

Climate change, I believe in that. Look at Mars, and you got scientists saying it was once wetter and warmer at one point in history, and clearly the climate changed to a now dry and barren rocky desert. So if climate change exists on one planet, why can't it exist here? It does. We have gone through ice ages, extinctions. When that asteroid hit the earth and wiped out the dinosaurs, at least according to scientists, an asteroid hit, I kind of dispute that, but the climate changed in a way. The oxygen content was much higher back then, then it is now. And the world was much more temperate, more humid. Dinosaurs would have a difficulty adapting in today's climate.

Is climate change man made? I don't think so... I think the media hypes it up too much. Perhaps we contribute to a small quantity of it, but... not much.

But hey that is just my opinion.

Can I back that up with 100% irrefutable evidence that climate change exists? Not really, but then can you give me 100% irrefutable evidence that a God exists? And the bible isn't evidence... we need something that wasn't written by mankind...

Oh and please don't think I am calling you an asshole, Classical. I am not. As I did say in that magically delicious post that vanished a while back, I think there are good and bad in all political parties.

Its just like there are good cops and bad cops, good judges, bad judges, good doctors and bad doctors. You cannot say that only one part is all good and one party is all bad. I'm not saying you say that, but I see others say that, and it irks me.

Because like sometimes I will identify with some liberal issues, and someone might say I am a horrible person for being liberal and I condone killing babies. I think that is the abortion stuff?

Hey I might identify as a liberal sometimes, but I am actually anti-abortion

Sorta. I think it could be allowed in rare circumstances, but for the most part, I don't believe anyone should have the right to terminate life at will. That is murder.

In my opinion I think that honestly sending a human back to the afterlife before it even sets foot in this shitty world is a lot kinder than bringing it into a life where a mother doesn't want it or it's the son/daughter of a rapist. Or the mother can't afford it. Even if she gives it up for adoption it doesn't mean that it will get adopted. Sometimes children are rejected from adoption or even sadder, sometimes they're sent back.

 

[conscious9]

Some people are saying that Trump's support of fossil fuels is only temporary, and that he is using it as a means of revitilizing the economy with the current system in place, before the natural transition to free energy systems replaces it. As a staunch environmentalist, I can't say I am happy with this approach, but from an economic and governmental standpoint, it does make sense.

Some also say that chemtrails are the most destructive force in climate change.

 

[TimeFlipper]

I dont think Trump would ever use "free energy" as he would lose billions of dollars in tax revenue from the energy producing companies..