Random Politics & Religion #00

So the only way to move forward is to constantly be reminded by the past ?

As I said above. It is what it is. I'm just saying let's remember the past for the good and the bad and learn from it.


Not saying constantly remind people of it. I'm saying the "back when we were the good guys" schtick is quite guilty of some serious selective memory.

I think the good Ford did outweighs any bad. But that is just me.

To quote the Simpsons "Everything looks bad when if you remember it"

You're trying to make him a good guy or a bad guy. I'm not saying he's either. I'm saying looking at the whole picture and learn from it.

Learn from the past. Sounds like advice for Hillary. Or any politician for that matter.

Well yeah.

Chances of most of them doing that are likely null, however.

I don't think anyone in hiroshima, dresden, tokyo, berlin, nagasaki, etc. would agree with that sentiment.

we used to say we were the good guys and you used to be gullible enough to believe it.

Since when does America care what any other country thinks though ? I don't think we should apologize for bombing the hell out of Japan. *** em !

If we bomb the Middle East long enough they will finally give in to us.

With Obama's Iran deal they will have a nuclear weapon in about five years.

The first link attempts to establish credibility for future modeling based on "correcting" the errors of the past. Nothing more than "trust us in our NEW predictions". At least that's what I get from the abstract I'm not going to pay 32 bucks for such a document. I hope (I pray actually) you don't/didn't spend that kind of money on this cultish nonsense.

Your second article, is an attempt to use modeling to explain previous warming trends (written in 2007, cataloging trends from 1880-2003) so basically another attempt to establish credibility going forward.

Your third article is more of the same, 'this is why climate models going forward (written in 2007) are trustworthy'. There's not one graph projecting temps beyond the year the article was written.

-------

So, here's the level of debate global warming has come to. I requested a previous model that was accurate in it predictions of justifiable alarmism in an attempt to address my skepticism. You don't provide any, but instead provide articles preaching how models are 'super sciency' and just should not be subject to my skepticism.

Way to flunk out of Jedi school! Atta boy!

Contradictions ahoy.

(Not saying don't pray; just saying the difference between "cult" and "religion" is merely public opinion)

I'm aware of Ford, but the last I checked his son and grandson weren't Presidents. (of the nation anyway).

Yeah but the Bushes are still relevant for being in bed with bad guys to this day in their private business.

Ford seemed a better example of leaving the bad in the past.

Can we talk about planned parenthood selling and profiting from aborted baby organs and limbs?

Is it time to cut all government funding to them yet? I think so.

Libs will of course brush this off but if I were to replace aborted babies with death row inmates, then I'm guessing we'd have a HUGE issue.

No, and really don't give a *** as fetuses aren't babies.

Sorry, didn't realize that's all you were getting at with the post.

What's the problem with using dead tissue for further scientific or medical purposes, or getting money back to further benefit the program?

Stop thinking with feels.

A cult is a small, unpopular religion.

A religion is a large, popular cult.

(I'm not unreligious, but I'm self aware about what it is, at least)

While there is a difference that may upset some people, I would also be fine with executed individuals tissue being used for medical experiments.

If we would go back to a non-chemical method of execution, they could even be used as organ donors.

In fact, I whole-heartedly support this notion. It's a great idea.

Good on you.

Not too familiar with either of those as common definitions, but hey.

Let's not devolve into that.

Are we aware that selling human tissue is illegal?

Yes, as even death row inmates have rights, aborted fetuses do not.

So is having premarital sex in Virginia, really don't care.

Also I believe you mean organs, as there's nothing illegal about selling the tissue.

edit: actually even fetal organs aren't illegal for research purposes, so definitely don't care.

The exact rules vary by state, but I don't know of any where it's opt-out instead of opt-in.

No, donating human fetal tissue is perfectly fine, selling it is not.

Federal law prohibits the sale of body parts of aborted babies. In fact, the sale or purchase of human fetal tissue a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $500,000

Sadly, no. There are too many cult protections in place, you need to opt-in, one way or another. Most frequently it's with your driver's license/government ID registration.

I don't think that's a good idea. If other people can't be bothered with it, that's their right. I don't think the state should automatically have the ability to harvest their bodies unless they contest.

I'm old fashion in that regard. Nobody is getting my organs. I'm taking them to grave with me. Don't need any organ hungry doctor waiting to snatch up my organs. If I thought humanity deserved them I would, but as it stands, nope.

Then cite the law that says you can't sell it for research purposes.