Remember me
▼ Content

So how exactly does this Evil Liberal Governmental Science Conspiracy do... anything?



Page 2 of 3<123>
02-10-2016 03:56
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Well, I'm not the only person to disagree with you. So it's not obvious.
02-10-2016 04:30
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
jwoodward48 wrote:Well, I'm not the only person to disagree with you. So it's not obvious.

Are you telling me you have a consensus?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-10-2016 20:02
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
FFS, I'm NOT claiming that most people agree with me, or that that would make me right. I'm saying that I'm holding a common opinion, one that can't be dismissed as "well you must never have read the Constitution then".
02-10-2016 21:30
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
Yeah, some people disagree with Originalism, so it's not as clear-cut as you would imply.


The Constitution is pretty clear cut.

Like any document with words in it, people who redefine words as you have been doing are going to read all kinds of things into it.

First, the Constitution does not grant rights. Rights are assumed to exist.

The Constitution is a document that specifies what the federal government looks like, how it operates, and what powers it shall have. It has no powers outside what is given to it.

Rights exist not because of what is in the Constitution, but because of what is NOT in the Constitution.

The Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments) are only clarifications of what was already there. They are actually not needed for those rights to exist. They clarify. That's all.


The Parrot Killer
02-10-2016 22:37
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
If this is about the 10th, there are implied powers that go along with explicitly stated powers.

But besides that, this seems pretty logical. How can a legal document be "living", anyway?
03-10-2016 20:58
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
If this is about the 10th, there are implied powers that go along with explicitly stated powers.

But besides that, this seems pretty logical. How can a legal document be "living", anyway?


There is no 'implied' powers. The powers are clearly stated.

The term "living" document is meaningless. Documents don't "live". Or are you referring to ignoring the parts of the document you don't like by using that term?


The Parrot Killer
03-10-2016 21:00
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
1. There are countless tiny powers not specified. There's a quote from one of the founding fathers on that, I'll post it later.
2. I was expressing my tentative agreement with you, and my disagreement with those who call the Constitution "living". Not everything I say is necessarily against you.
03-10-2016 21:34
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
1. There are countless tiny powers not specified. There's a quote from one of the founding fathers on that, I'll post it later.
2. I was expressing my tentative agreement with you, and my disagreement with those who call the Constitution "living". Not everything I say is necessarily against you.


There is no power the federal government has that is not specified. Those specified powers allow the federal government, for example, to create a budget to build needful buildings to implement those powers. That not an implied power. It is the result of a specified power.


The Parrot Killer
03-10-2016 22:30
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Yes, but there are also less important powers, like, say, the ability to make an official flag. Not all those are listed in the Constitution. (Although that might be listed, let me check.)
04-10-2016 00:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
Yes, but there are also less important powers, like, say, the ability to make an official flag. Not all those are listed in the Constitution. (Although that might be listed, let me check.)


The right to designate an official flag is the same right you have to designate your own official flag.

Flags are as old as heraldry itself (thousands of years, for all we know).

That power stems from the federal government as an identity.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 04-10-2016 00:19
04-10-2016 01:06
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
But is it listed as a power in the Constitution?
04-10-2016 01:42
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
But is it listed as a power in the Constitution?


Yes. By the creation of the entity called the federal government.


The Parrot Killer
04-10-2016 02:42
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
No. Is it listed AS A SPECIFIC POWER, or is it implied?
04-10-2016 03:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
No. Is it listed AS A SPECIFIC POWER, or is it implied?


Yes. By the creation of the federal government as an entity.

You seem to think the Constitution must list exactly word for word what those powers are.

Try reading it sometime.


The Parrot Killer
04-10-2016 03:57
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
No. YOU think that. You are saying that there are no implied powers.
04-10-2016 04:29
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
No. YOU think that. You are saying that there are no implied powers.


There aren't. The creation of an entity called the federal government is all they need to create a flag, seal, letterhead, or any other insignia or banner. The Constitution even specifies they have to the power to pay for it.

Go read the thing.


The Parrot Killer
04-10-2016 04:52
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
So it's... Implied?
04-10-2016 19:28
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
jwoodward48 wrote: So it's... Implied?

You are clearly one to quibble over irrelevancies.

It's not "implied" if it is included within an explicit range of powers. It falls under explicit powers. The President explicitly has veto power, but does he really have the power to so with a fountain pen? If you insist that "it is implied" then I'll know what you mean, even though I know that it is included in the President's explicitly stated power.

But then you'll want to say "That means it is implied because it isn't stated anywhere." I would then remind you that that makes it understood, not implied. If it's not stated anywhere then there is no implication to which you can point.

So when you insist that it is implied, you are certainly welcome to do so but you're not going to win that argument because there is no point to it.

You say it's implied. He says it's included in the explicit. Is it your intention to grind the discussion to a halt over this meaningless point so that the main point that you fear, that threatens your Marxism, won't be discussed?


So, you were going to explain how the founding fathers somehow did not capture their intent in the Constitution.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
04-10-2016 19:46
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
**** this. I say "hmm, I think I might agree with you, you make sense, but what about this?" Then I get this response. I don't even care if you think I'm evil, I'm done.
04-10-2016 21:12
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
jwoodward48 wrote:**** this. I say "hmm, I think I might agree with you, you make sense, but what about this?" Then I get this response. I don't even care if you think I'm evil, I'm done.

I'm not falling for it. You don't disguise your pouting very well. I guess it's your turn to "not like" the response you received and to curl your lower lip.

Are you "done" because I reminded you that you haven't explained how the founding fathers somehow did not capture their intent in the Constitution? Is that what it is? You don't want to face that question, correct?

Or is it that you were identified as being a compulsive, pointless quibbler? You never really clarified.

Oh, why would your liking of my post affect whether or not you agree with the content? Oh that's right! The truth is a matter of democratic vote and of "consensus." Reality naturally conforms to the desires of the chosen ones who own "truth" and who get to determine what it is.

Please just ignore the question. I answered it on my own.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
04-10-2016 22:03
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Oh, what the ****. What if I say it in large, simple words...?

I AGREE WITH YOU. YOU CAN STOP ABUSING ME NOW.

I don't like your response because even when I say that I agree with you, you find every chance you can to insult me. You aren't doing this for me. You're just a troll who likes making people suffer.
04-10-2016 22:16
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
I agree that saying "we don't know what the founding fathers wanted" is not a valid line of argument. You are now abusing a straw man.

Not only are you abusing me, you are abusing me for a claim which I have now abandoned. That's why I'm exasperated.
Edited on 04-10-2016 22:17
04-10-2016 22:42
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
jwoodward48 wrote:
I agree that saying "we don't know what the founding fathers wanted" is not a valid line of argument. You are now abusing a straw man.

Not only are you abusing me, you are abusing me for a claim which I have now abandoned. That's why I'm exasperated.

Are you aware you could have avoided all of this if you had simply posted those words above as opposed to posting the exact opposite?

This is a public forum and words are all we have. You are responsible for writing what you mean and meaning what you write. You don't get to play the victim when you don't meet your obligations in this regard.

Shall we just shake hands and press ahead?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
04-10-2016 23:52
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
So it's... Implied?


If you want to consider it such, you could say it is. I do not consider it such. I consider it a property of the entity simply existing at all.

Since the Constitution created that entity, it has all the authority of any entity as an entity.

That means it has an identifier (a name). It has a symbol or symbols for that identifier. There is absolutely no reason that entity can't choose it's own symbols and representations for itself.

You are arguing as if every corporation has to include the right to designing their banner, flag, logo, or letterhead must be included in the articles of incorporation.

Go read the Constitution. It is a contract between the States. Read it as such.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 04-10-2016 23:56
05-10-2016 00:22
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
IBdaMann wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote:
I agree that saying "we don't know what the founding fathers wanted" is not a valid line of argument. You are now abusing a straw man.

Not only are you abusing me, you are abusing me for a claim which I have now abandoned. That's why I'm exasperated.

Are you aware you could have avoided all of this if you had simply posted those words above as opposed to posting the exact opposite?

This is a public forum and words are all we have. You are responsible for writing what you mean and meaning what you write. You don't get to play the victim when you don't meet your obligations in this regard.

Shall we just shake hands and press ahead?


.


Sure, let's move on. I'd suggest that when I change my mind to agree with you, though, you stop insulting me. Good Pavlovian reinforcement and whatnot.


"Heads on a science
Apart" - Coldplay, The Scientist

IBdaMann wrote:
No, science doesn't insist that, ergo I don't insist that.

I am the Ninja Scientist! Beware!
05-10-2016 01:00
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
jwoodward48 wrote:Sure, let's move on.

Great.

<extends hand for shaking>

So, does our agreement include the fact that the founding fathers captured their intent in the Constitution?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
05-10-2016 01:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote:
I agree that saying "we don't know what the founding fathers wanted" is not a valid line of argument. You are now abusing a straw man.

Not only are you abusing me, you are abusing me for a claim which I have now abandoned. That's why I'm exasperated.

Are you aware you could have avoided all of this if you had simply posted those words above as opposed to posting the exact opposite?

This is a public forum and words are all we have. You are responsible for writing what you mean and meaning what you write. You don't get to play the victim when you don't meet your obligations in this regard.

Shall we just shake hands and press ahead?


.


Sure, let's move on. I'd suggest that when I change my mind to agree with you, though, you stop insulting me. Good Pavlovian reinforcement and whatnot.


BS. I have stopped insulting you. What did I get for it? Insults. You took it here. You deserve every insult you get.

I have gone through this twice with you. The first time I forgave you outright, giving you the benefit of the doubt. The second time I required restitution before forgiving you. You provided that. I forgave you. Now you turn on people again.

Your word is bullshit. It carries no weight anymore.


The Parrot Killer
05-10-2016 01:17
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
I was talking with IB, Into. You weren't really insulting me that much. (That much more than usual.)

I turn on people when they insult me. Tell me - is your system of morality that says that you are right and I wrong logically consistent and both generalizable and interchangeable? If not, I really don't care how ashsoley you think I am.

Besides, you never cared about what I said anyway. I'm just another warmizombie.
Edited on 05-10-2016 01:18
05-10-2016 01:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
I was talking with IB, Into.
This is not a private email server, dork. Private messaging is available, use it if you want a private conversation.
jwoodward48 wrote:
You weren't really insulting me that much. (That much more than usual.)
That's over.
jwoodward48 wrote:
I turn on people when they insult me.
You turn on people when they don't insult you.
jwoodward48 wrote:
Tell me - is your system of morality that says that you are right and I wrong logically consistent and both generalizable and interchangeable?
Morality isn't the issue here, dork.
jwoodward48 wrote:
If not, I really don't care how ashsoley you think I am.
Obviously, since you don't care about anyone or anything but yourself.
jwoodward48 wrote:
Besides, you never cared about what I said anyway. I'm just another warmizombie.

I never use the term. But, since you suggested it, I will use the term with you.


The Parrot Killer
05-10-2016 01:54
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
When I say "you", and I am talking to IB, guess who I mean? Hint: it's not you.

I don't care if you think I'm being an **** if I'm only acting similarly to you. (From my standpoint, you've been worse.) I won't start falling on my knees and asking forgiveness any time soon, buster.
05-10-2016 03:03
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
When I say "you", and I am talking to IB, guess who I mean? Hint: it's not you.

I don't care if you think I'm being an **** if I'm only acting similarly to you. (From my standpoint, you've been worse.) I won't start falling on my knees and asking forgiveness any time soon, buster.


Wouldn't make any difference now anyway. You've revealed what you are.


The Parrot Killer
05-10-2016 05:26
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
jwoodward48 wrote:Besides, you never cared about what I said anyway. I'm just another warmizombie.

"Warmizombie" is my word. Sure, others are welcome to use it for its accuracy and clarity of expression, but I don't think Into the Night is blasting that particular clarity of expression in your general direction.

Jussayn.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
05-10-2016 16:14
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Into the Night wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote:
When I say "you", and I am talking to IB, guess who I mean? Hint: it's not you.

I don't care if you think I'm being an **** if I'm only acting similarly to you. (From my standpoint, you've been worse.) I won't start falling on my knees and asking forgiveness any time soon, buster.


Wouldn't make any difference now anyway. You've revealed what you are.


Edit: no, I'm not going to lower myself to your level. Have fun wallowing in the mud. Sling it all you like, I'm not joining you.


"Heads on a science
Apart" - Coldplay, The Scientist

IBdaMann wrote:
No, science doesn't insist that, ergo I don't insist that.

I am the Ninja Scientist! Beware!
Edited on 05-10-2016 16:15
05-10-2016 22:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote:
When I say "you", and I am talking to IB, guess who I mean? Hint: it's not you.

I don't care if you think I'm being an **** if I'm only acting similarly to you. (From my standpoint, you've been worse.) I won't start falling on my knees and asking forgiveness any time soon, buster.


Wouldn't make any difference now anyway. You've revealed what you are.


Edit: no, I'm not going to lower myself to your level. Have fun wallowing in the mud. Sling it all you like, I'm not joining you.


You already did, dude. You already did. You're still in the mudhole.


The Parrot Killer
05-10-2016 23:45
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
I've been out of the mud, then you slung mud at me, then I got back in, then I got out, then I got back in. You've been in it most of the time.
06-10-2016 00:07
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
jwoodward48 wrote:
I've been out of the mud, then you slung mud at me, then I got back in, then I got out, then I got back in. You've been in it most of the time.


Now you're just lying.


The Parrot Killer
06-10-2016 00:44
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Now you're just lying. You can go on, but I'm stopping now.
24-11-2016 17:42
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
[b]IBdaMann wrote: I'm not sure that scientists are funded. It might help to be one though.


Another admission by ibm. It ain't a scientist. AND it doesn't have science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in an unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. ibm is happy NOT to have a hi skule DEE-plooomaa, so it avoided the bias of education.
24-11-2016 18:55
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
litesong wrote:
IBdaMann wrote: I'm not sure that scientists are funded. It might help to be one though.


Another admission by ibm. It ain't a scientist. AND it doesn't have science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in an unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. ibm is happy NOT to have a hi skule DEE-plooomaa, so it avoided the bias of education.

litesong my good friend, I don't remember ever writing the above. Perhaps it was someone else's quote?

Have a great Thanksgiving!


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
25-11-2016 21:56
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
IBdaMann wrote:
litesong wrote:
IBdaMann wrote: I'm not sure that scientists are funded. It might help to be one though.


Another admission by ibm. It ain't a scientist. AND it doesn't have science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in an unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa. ibm is happy NOT to have a hi skule DEE-plooomaa, so it avoided the bias of education.

litesong my good friend, I don't remember ever writing the above.


ibm ain't ma buddy or good friend, but lies readily. ibm also has no science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in its non-existent hi skule DEE-plooomaa. ibm is happy NOT to have a hi skule DEE-plooomaa, so it avoided the bias of education.
Page 2 of 3<123>





Join the debate So how exactly does this Evil Liberal Governmental Science Conspiracy do... anything?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
About the damage that Obama did to science.11809-12-2019 15:56
Argument against AGW science314-08-2019 20:51
Objectivity of Environmental Science109-08-2019 02:13
Still No Climate Change Science1111-07-2019 04:23
Trump Administration's Attempts to Limit Climate Change Science 'Like Designing Cars Without Seat128-05-2019 20:13
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact