Friday, September 1, 2017

What Heroes Do

Excerpted from Airboating Magazine

Hundreds and hundreds of small boats pulled by countless pickups and SUVs from across the South are headed for Houston. Almost all of them driven by men. They're using their own property, sacrificing their own time, spending their own money, and risking their own lives for one reason: to help total strangers in desperate need.

Most of them are by themselves. Most are dressed like the redneck duck hunters and bass fisherman they are. Many are veterans. Most are wearing well-used gimme-hats, t-shirts, and jeans; and there's a preponderance of camo. Most are probably gun owners, and most probably voted for Trump.

These are the people the Left loves to hate, the ones Maddow mocks. The ones Maher and Olbermann just *know* they're so much better than.

These are The Quiet Ones. They don't wear masks and tear down statues. They don't, as a rule, march and demonstrate. And most have probably never been in a Whole Foods.

But they'll spend the next several days wading in cold, dirty water; dodging gators and water moccasins and fire ants; eating whatever meager rations are available; and sleeping wherever they can in dirty, damp clothes. Their reward is the tears and the hugs and the smiles from the terrified people they help. They'll deliver one boatload, and then go back for more.

When disaster strikes, it's what men do. Real men. Heroic men. American men. And then they'll knock back a few shots, or a few beers with like-minded men they've never met before, and talk about fish, or ten-point bucks, or the benefits of hollow-point ammo, or their F-150.

And the next time they hear someone talk about "the patriarchy", or "male privilege", they'll snort, turn off the TV and go to bed.

In the meantime, they'll likely be up again before dawn. To do it again. Until the helpless are rescued. And the work's done.

They're unlikely to be reimbursed. There won't be medals. They won't care. They're heroes. And it's what heroes do.

60 comments:

Majormajor said...

Note the total lack non fossil fuel vehicles being used in these rescues.

Sorry Al Gore.

Rain Trueax said...

It has been inspiring to read about them. I live with folks like that out here in rural Oregon. :)

Jefferson's Guardian said...

"Americans love to help when disaster hits — and that’s great — but we don’t want to do the hard work to help in the long run.

This is not in any way to denigrate those attempts to help people in the immediate aftermath of a disaster. That is vital and necessary and we really do all kind of come together for that purpose. That’s a very good thing. But our apathy the rest of the time, our inattention to the details of public policy and lack of attention to the underlying problems of society inevitably make such disasters far worse.
"

Yes, Mr. Paine, it's that very "inattention to the details", and the science -- yes, the science -- that inevitably allow these calamities to be the mammoth disasters they are, and will continue to be. Until sound public policy debate begins and the shift towards what's safest and in the best interests of the community -- instead of the short-term profit motives of land developers and builders -- more and more flat-boaters and voluntary rescuers will be filling their idle time saving those in harm's way.

Darrell Michaels said...

Majormajor, yep, it is true. Fossil fuel engines are still the most efficient method we have for locomotion for cars, boats, and planes to this day. (not including nuclear reactors for some of our naval vessels.) I can only assume that our friends are not very fond of nuclear energy either though, despite it being the cleanest and most efficient form of energy we currently have.

Rain, I know exactly what you mean. I was born and lived for several years as a child and then later as an adult on the outskirts of Medford, Oregon. There are a lot of very good people like that there. Indeed, I have been blessed to meet a lot of people like that, typically in rural areas.

JG, first thanks for commenting here. I appreciate your input. That said, if you are speaking of the "settled science of anthropogenic global warming", I am afraid that I cannot agree with it being settled, sir. There are way too many holes in the theory that proponents simply cannot explain. Of course any critic is dismissed as automatically being a shill for the oil industry.

Regardless, there are indeed details we can and should address prior to disasters striking. Well-managed jurisdictions typically do this. Building and rebuilding homes and businesses below sea-level surrounded by dikes and levees in hurricane prone areas like in New Orleans seems to be some of those details we keep ignoring however.

Dave Dubya said...

Thoughts and prayers to the victims of the storm and flooding by the record setting rainfall. Mr. Paine knows better than science, that this has nothing to do with warmer ocean water. "Sunspots", amirite?

Of course any critic is dismissed as automatically being a shill for the oil industry.

If one were truthful, one would say PAID shills, largely through the oily Heartland Institute. I have shown all of Mr. Paines sources being such paid shills.

That is settled fact.

What do greenhouse gasses do? Is this a "theory"? More "unsettled science"? Trump is shutting down and censoring climate research. Why do suppose he's doing that?

Speaking of heroes.

How about the black lesbian officer who shot the armed attacker at the congressional baseball field?

According to Mr. Paine and the Angry White Con-servatives her support for BLM would make her a member of a "hate group". BLM is openly supportive of the LBGTQ community. Some "hate group", eh? We know who the haters are.

And its OK to hate "hate groups", isn't it. BLM are just like white supremacists and Nazis, right?

But, wait.

There were "good people" marching with Nazis, but everyone marching with BLM are members of a hate group.

Curious double standard, isn't it?

This is what Trumpian racism looks like. Anyone who cannot see the racism in birther Trump cannot see racism in their own heart.

I'm not saying Mr. Paine is a racist. He just agrees with them that only haters march with BLM, but "good people" march with Nazis.

Mr. Paine is a good man, but unable to see the hate and racism from Angry White Con-servatives. But he more readily sees racism in Black people. He sees Obama as more to blame for racism than Birther Trump. He seems to agree with racists on that too.

He probably doesn't talk to many black people. And if so, speaking to armed white men isn't exactly the best way to get them to open up.

Just my impression.





woodenman said...

Yes, I agree those men are heroes for being altruistic and selfless to help strangers. But I do not think this happened in the 9th Ward when Katrina hit, 1500 people died because hardly any help was forth coming. When they start helping black people then I would call them HEROES!

Jefferson's Guardian said...

T. Paine: "I am afraid that I cannot agree with it being settled, sir. There are way too many holes in the theory that proponents simply cannot explain."

I realize you're afraid, Mr. Paine, because then it would mean reluctantly agreeing with a stance that you incorrectly view as leftist -- which is unacceptable to you.

Keep disagreeing, Mr. Paine, because the facts are facts and no matter how much you want to disagree with them, they aren't going away. It's scientific, you see, but no matter how much you want to disagree with science, it's still true. Increasing global temperatures will continue and weather phenomena will only be more catastrophic as the atmosphere and oceans continue to buildup and store more and more heat.

But, that wasn't necessarily what I was referring to...but it's certainly what is the ultimate reason for the greater and more frequent devastation we're experiencing.


"Regardless, there are indeed details we can and should address prior to disasters striking. Well-managed jurisdictions typically do this."

Indeed they do, but "well-managed jurisdictions" require a democratic and well-educated and civic-minded citizenry to make sure these tasks are placed as priority-one -- not the building of more and more homes on previously designated areas meant for water retention and wilderness areas for the capture of rainwater and overflow. This was the big mistake that Houston made -- along with hundreds of other communities around the country. It's another example of big business trumping democracy.

There will never be enough flatboats and heroic rescuers, Mr. Paine.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

T. Paine: "Fossil fuel engines are still the most efficient method we have for locomotion for cars, boats, and planes to this day. (not including nuclear reactors for some of our naval vessels.)"

Sure, if you don't account for the externalities -- the side effects or consequences of industrial or commercial activity that affects other parties without this being reflected in the cost of the goods or services involved -- released upon our environment, air and land. From the point of extraction, to refinement, to the burning of the fuel and its obvious contaminants and pollutants released as byproducts of combustion -- these are costs never accounted for in your statement.

Of course, capitalists never account for this true cost. They're comfortable letting the population-at-large pay these costs.


"I can only assume that our friends are not very fond of nuclear energy either though, despite it being the cleanest and most efficient form of energy we currently have."

Again, sure, if you're willing to allow the spent-fuels to be stored in your community. I'm not. Are you? (Since Yucca Mountain was abandoned as a potential national depository, I'm sure there are dozens of favorable sites all throughout Utah.)

Darrell Michaels said...

Dave, I was starting to write a long and detailed response to all of your absolute nonsense, and then I figured, " why bother"? I have already addressed your complaints and charges many many times in the past. I have given you tons of supporting data and evidence for my positions, all of which you discount because they fail to agree with your political agenda. That is fine. You are entitled to your beliefs. I am simply not going to waste my time trying to explain my positions to you repeatedly simply because you fail to agree or understand them, sir.

Darrell Michaels said...


Woodenman, I don't have any evidence of these folks helping people out during Katrina, but knowing the caliber of people that most of these heroes are, I'd bet my last dollar that they were there too. Indeed, Houston is a huge city that is quite diverse in its make-up. I have seen news clips and photos of these people helping everybody, including people of color there. Surely you don't think that these heroes on their airboats are simply zooming past all of the black people so they can get to the white people in distress, do you?

Darrell Michaels said...

JG, I don't summarily reject any given stance simply because it is seen as "leftist". As I will remind you once again, I agree with the left on several "leftist" stances, including on corporate personhood issues and many environmental issues too, notwithstanding man-caused global warming.

I do not agree with anthropogenic global warming because there are serious doubts as to the validity of many of the arguments for it. Further, there has been many cases where advocates and scientists have been caught cherry-picking or flat out falsifying data to corroborate their agenda. That alone would be completely unnecessary if AGW was true. All of the modeling for AGW has proven to be far worse far more quickly than what reality has shown. The fact of the matter is that there is not a reliable model yet that encompasses all of the myriads of variables so as to accurately predict the climate future. Indeed, we have not had any major hurricanes hit the United States in nearly a dozen years, and now that we have one hit and another one that may possibly hit us, the proponents are all claiming AGW as the cause. We cannot predict where Hurricane Irma will head along the U.S. only being a few days out, but you want me to believe we can predict the earth's temperature and water levels a decade from now? I am an engineer. I work based on evidence. Show me the causality and accurate scientific modeling, and then I will believe it. Until then, it appears to be the equivalent of science in the Middle Ages telling us that the earth was the center of the universe and the matter was settled.

As for the second part of your comment regarding well-managed jurisdictions, I am in agreement with you, sir.

Dave Dubya said...

This is not close to the truth. I have given you tons of supporting data and evidence for my positions..that BLM is a hate group.

If you have "tons of data and evidence", that commie card must get quite heavy. :-) But apparently that is what need to play as your trump card, so to speak.

There were "good people" or was it "very fine people", marching with Nazis, but everyone marching with BLM are members of a hate group.

Curious double standard, isn't it?

I showed your Trumpian double standard, and you have fled the topic, declaring you have presented "tons of data and evidence". In fact, you cherry-picked a few crimes by a small minority of supporters who ARE NOT MEMBERS of BLM.

But your mission is to smear them all as a hate group.

And you are playing right into this agenda:

Trump is giving extremists a huge boost. His birtherism brought them out in droves.

Rachel Pendergraft—a spokeswoman for the political arm of the Ku Klux Klan summed it up last year: "They may not be ready for the Ku Klux Klan yet, but as anti-white hatred escalates, they will."

They thank you for your service.

Darrell Michaels said...

Mr. Dubya, you really don't listen at all and see ONLY what you choose to see. I specifically said that those folks that were not racists that simply didn't want to see a statue of Robert E. Lee removed were tarnished because they did associate in a protest that included the KKK and neo-Nazis. I used that to compare to the good folks in BLM that simply wanted to see their legitimate grievances addressed that thus allowed violent, racist, destructive thugs to take over their marches and thus drown out their message. I asked you several times how come we didn't see such violence perpetrated with Dr. King during the civil rights marches. THAT is a question the will give you the answer you seek on this.

"No justice, no peace", "burn piggly wiggly", "pigs in a blanket; fry them like bacon", the myriads of businesses vandalized and looted by "other" protesters, and of course the list of ten racist "requests" from a BLM organizer are just a smattering of the evidence I have provided to you, Dave. You have either characterized it as "fringe" people not actually a part of the BLM organization or simply failed to acknowledge the evidence like when I gave you the "request" list from that organizer. THAT is the truth.

I have even looked at your evidence and consequently agreed with Trump's racism regarding several of the incidents. You have completely failed to acknowledge the same with your political fellow travelers. I guess politics trumps morality for some folks.

I am not arguing this with you any more. If you simply want to lash out in anger and hate, I suggest you go to the Daily Kos or elsewhere, sir.

Darrell Michaels said...

Dave, I am not equating the KKK with BLM in the murder and destruction that they have done. Obviously the KKK is far worse. That said, there is still violence and hate perpetrated by members of the BLM movement. The fact that you absolutely refuse to acknowledge that is proof of your blindness or political rigidness or both.

There are good people with legitimate grievances that march with BLM; in fact, a majority of folks associated with it probably are. However, they still do not reign in or disassociate themselves with the violent criminals that seem to come out of nowhere every time there is a march.

And then you go back to my "not being able to see Trump's racism" when I CLEARLY stated in my immediately preceding comment that I saw and agreed with you regarding some of the racist acts/comments that Trump has made. That said, if Trump made "requests" in favor of white people of the ilk that the one BLM leader did, you would clearly and correctly call it racism. Tell me it isn't so!

You simply want me to agree COMPLETELY with you and your twisted view on hate and racism. The fact that you use a discredited far left activist group like the SPLC to justify your similarly labeling conservative groups as hateful proves how out of touch you really are.

Regardless, I wish you the best, sir.

Dave Dubya said...

You have shown you don’t read, or choose to ignore, the facts that I offer and don’t make an effort to understand any of my reasoning. You cannot even address where you think I am in error. You played your commie card, and brought up irrelevancies instead.

Your “evidence” convicts a few, but condemns the entire BLM. Racists and Klan also judge the many by the acts of a few. Why do you want to be like them in that regard?

And you think I have a twisted view on hate and racism? Please find your conscience.

You can’t hide behind your half Hispanic kids, either. Zimmerman the stalker and killer is a half Hispanic racist. Sorry, your children offer you no insight or compassion for those who protest the brutal killing of unarmed Black Americans, including Trayvon Martin. One young victim was 12 years old. Now you accuse the mother of being a member of a hate group.

Please find your compassion.

Now all cops have to do after killing a Black American is say they felt afraid. Free pass. Go shoot another. (Yes, that happened. I wrote about it at my blog.)

All you have to do is admit BLM is not a hate group. I have agreed that too many who claim to support BLM have been criminals. But that doesn’t make them all a hate group. Only in your mind, and Trump’s mind, and the Klan’s mind.

You haven’t shown the insight, compassion or decency to admit BLM isn’t a hate group. Please find your conscience.

I know you have a conscience somewhere. Perhaps it is obscured by the racist smear of the majority for the acts of a few. I’m trying very hard to not see you as a racist for that glaring similarity of attitude.

Or perhaps your judgment is clouded by inner fears and anger. That would be more forgivable. But I cannot forgive willful ignorance and hate.

Peace.

Darrell Michaels said...


The protesters that caused the destruction and violence were not members of the BLM, according to Dave. How does he know this? Well, just because. There are some BLM leaders that have even responsibly denounced the violence and destruction perpetrated by these criminals "who are not members of the BLM". Again, we know this because... well... all BLM members would obviously not resort to such criminality, despite some of their hateful rhetoric.

As for the rest of your drivel, projection, and hate... good bye, Mr. Dubya.

Majormajor said...

Gone a week and DD still spewing his same ole drivel,
sigh. Must be his cult training.

Woody, RE: NOLA, have you forgotten the mayor of NOLA was black and a Democrat who did NOTHING to save his fellow black brothers? Guess so.
No justice no peace, except ion the case of Democrats.

Man caused climate change, can the same 98% of all scientists who believe this to be FACT, predict within 98% the number of hurricanes that will strike USA in 2018? Of course not, that's weather, LOL and yet the true believers in man caused climate change are stating the man has caused the hurricanes this year. Weather?? it depends, right?

Jefferson's Guardian said...

T. Paine: "I do not agree with anthropogenic global warming because there are serious doubts as to the validity of many of the arguments for it."

What are those "serious doubts", and who exactly supports them?


"...there has been many cases where advocates and scientists have been caught cherry-picking or flat out falsifying data to corroborate their agenda."

Not really. There have been a few, understandably, but the vast majority of climate scientists around the world are in agreement that there is a warming of the atmosphere, and that it coincides with the burning of fossil fuels.


"That alone would be completely unnecessary if AGW was true."

Well, your statement's not true. If the Right were intent on debunking the idea, which is evident that's the case, it certainly wouldn't be difficult to find someone -- or a few somebodies - to go along with disparaging or falsifying the data.

Otherwise, you're conceding that 98% of climate scientists, worldwide, are working together to conspire against all of humankind. That's one good damn conspiracy theory! ;-)


"All of the modeling for AGW has proven to be far worse far more quickly than what reality has shown."

You're opining, now, and haven't a clue as to what you're talking about. As a matter of fact, the opposite is true. Things are heating up much faster than what the models have shown.


"The fact of the matter is that there is not a reliable model yet that encompasses all of the myriads of variables so as to accurately predict the climate future."

The climatic future is that it's heating, along with the world's oceans. Both are facts. I'm really not sure how much accuracy you require or data you require. How many deviations from the norm are needed before you'll be confident in, and accepting of, these conclusions?

Jefferson's Guardian said...

"...we have not had any major hurricanes hit the United States in nearly a dozen years, and now that we have one hit and another one that may possibly hit us, the proponents are all claiming AGW as the cause."

Nobody's made any claim that Harvey or Irma were man-made phenomena, Mr. Paine, only that their intensities were/are due to warmer ocean waters and higher atmospheric saturation points -- allowing greater rainfall amounts and/or higher sustaining winds.


"We cannot predict where Hurricane Irma will head along the U.S. only being a few days out, but you want me to believe we can predict the earth's temperature and water levels a decade from now?"

Why did you combine these two sentences? Neither are related, and there isn't any cause-effect connection that I can determine.

As far as the second part of your sentence, sure! Are engineers not allowed to create models to simulate real life situations any longer?


"I am an engineer. I work based on evidence."

So do attorneys. And the evidence is real and not theoretical any longer. The skeptical conservative in you just chooses to ignore it.


"Show me the causality and accurate scientific modeling, and then I will believe it. Until then, it appears to be the equivalent of science in the Middle Ages telling us that the earth was the center of the universe and the matter was settled."

It has been modeled, and modeled dozens of ways using several variables, Mr. Paine. As previously mentioned, you've just made a decision to ignore the evidence and continue with the status quo. I've told you this before, you're comfortable with the current world paradigm and see no reason to change it.

By the way, there was hardly what we'd call an "enlightened" scientific community around during the middle ages. The proliferation of thought and ideas came later as the seedlings of democracy started germinating and well-informed inquirers loosened themselves from the strangling nooses of the Roman Catholic Church.

I see today's Right and Alt-Right movements as having the same effect on scientific inquiry today. The methodology to impede and squelch it, however, is just different -- but just as destructive to the spirit of humankind, and now the sustainability of its future.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Mr. Paine, I suggest you enroll in this course. I'll even pony up the fee so you're able to obtain the verifiable certificate and hang it on the wall next to your college engineering degree. ;-)

The lives you ultimately save may include your own. Good luck!

Majormajor said...

Mr.Paine,

You need to recognize that JG believes that the earth is a living, self aware organism. Which is god like and can deal out punishment or rewards to it's subjects, IE humans.

New age.

Majormajor said...

Mr. Paine,

16 years ago today, the USA was attacked. According to JG it was an "inside job". Just like Pearl Harbor.

Never forget that.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

As usual, when presented with reality and the facts, Chuck "Majormajor" Morre resorts to fallacies.

In this case he's employing any number of red herring fallacies, which I've come to expect of him. His inability to postulate a valid argument as a response to a position is chronic and habitual, and only proves he's the alt-right foot-soldier I've already claimed.

He continually chastises me for my beliefs about what occurred sixteen years ago, even when I've presented my reasons logically with evidence and facts, while he never offers a counterargument to refute my stance. Why? It's simple. He can't.

Chuck is the king of all fallacies, with never an original thought or a legitimate response to offer. He is, as Dave Dubya has offered time and time again, the consummate cultist. He'll believe what he's told as long as it fits within his narrow range of possibilities -- which is very narrow, indeed.

Majormajor said...

JG,,
Sure tell that to "Mother Earth".




Majormajor said...

Only JG would call disagreeing with him as "chastises" him, poor cult member.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

You're the perfect foot-soldier, Chuck, but you'll never be anything else.

As I said, never an original thought...

woodenman said...

I know very little about knitting, actually I am woefully ignorant about it. That is why I do not go on a knitting site and argue about knitting techniques.

Chuck does not have that awareness, he has super strong beliefs about 9/11 even though he has never stated a single fact to rebuke the idea that 9/11 was an inside job.

In 8 years he has only come up with snide remarks and insults.

Majormajor said...

Here's an original thought for you JG, you are a loonie.

Majormajor said...

Woody

Ever hear of Group Think?

Stick to woodworking, you're good at it.

Dave Dubya said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dave Dubya said...

Who ya gonna trust? Big Oil and their Republican stooges or the Pope?

While flying Sunday over areas in the Caribbean decimated by Hurricane Irma Pope Francis said, “Man is stupid,” referencing a passage in the Old Testament, according to the The New York Times and The Associated Press. “When you don’t want to see, you don’t see.”

A correspondent for Crux Now had a slightly different translation of the pontiff’s comments: “Man is a stupid and hard-headed being who doesn’t see.”

Francis said, "Those who deny this must go to the scientists and ask them. They speak very clearly," he said, referring to experts who blame global warming on man-made activities.

He also said scientists have also clearly charted what needed to be done to reverse course on global warming and said individuals and politicians had a "moral responsibility" to do their part.

"These aren't opinions pulled out of thin air. They are very clear," he said. "Then they (leaders) decide and history will judge those decisions."

“When you don’t want to see, you don’t see”... “a stupid and hard-headed being who doesn’t see”...Hmm. Why does this remind me of conservatives and Republicans?

And Major did bring up cults... They see only what their leaders tell them to see.

Majormajor said...

Dave

One thing for sure I'm not gonna trust you and your liberal group think!

Majormajor said...

Tom Degan said...

No, I do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

9/11/2017

Majormajor said...

Two examples of liberal group think:

1) Hillary is brilliant.
2) When you get to know her, Hillary is a warm, funny, vibrant real person.

TB3 said...

First I've heard those, MM. Know where one can go to see these examples of group think in action?

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Dave Dubya: "Major has a demented cult-fed notion that the 'liberal Pope' is now in league with a 'liberal group think' called peer-reviewed science. No doubt they are all commies, amirite? Or are they Nazis today?"

Dave, in Chuck's narrow view of reality, all science is suspect and never to be trusted. As we know, the only truth for him comes through his cult leaders and his fellow followers.

By the way, good find on Pope Frank's recent comment that "Man is stupid."

Obviously some, more than others. ;-)

Majormajor said...

JG

"As we know, the only truth for him comes through his cult leaders and his fellow followers."

Who is "we"?

Which "cult" believes in income redistribution?

Which "cult" believes 9-11 was an inside job?

Which "cult" believes abortion is not murder?


woodenman said...

It only take an hour or two of reading to come to the realization that the 9/11 report is so full of holes that is pure fiction.

Chuck, if 9/11 happened under Bill Clinton you would of been screaming Inside Job at the top of your lungs.

If you found out that YOUR SIDE committed 9/11 what would you do? Would you become an alcoholic? Have a nervous break down? Become a Liberal?




Majormajor said...

Woody,
So it was GWB's buddies who flew the planes 16 years ago and killed themselves and 3000 Americans?

Really?

Do you believe that Bush the senior flew in a Blackbird to Paris to get the release of the Americans held hostage by in Iraq?

Do you believe that HRC was the most qualified person to be President?

Do you believe that there is a "vast right wing conspiracy"?

Do you believe that Bill Clinton "did not have sex with that woman"?

Do you believe that there were 34 million Americans who needed health insurance and Obamacare provided it so there are no longer any Americans without health insurance?

Do you believe under Obamacare you can keep your DR, or that your insurance premiums would drop thousands of dollars?

Do you believe there are 57 States?

Just examples of Liberal Group Think.


P.S.
Tom Degan, not a Conservative nor a Republican, doesn't believe 9-11 was an inside job.






Jefferson's Guardian said...

Watch out, Woodenman1954, it looks like Chuck is falling to pieces, and his schizophrenic religiosity is boiling to the surface once again. It's always apparent when his tirades include ramblings about Bill Clinton's consensual tryst, or legal abortion. ;-) Not to be outdone, his responses about 9/11 are always ridiculous and never answer the questions posed.

As mentioned a few days ago, "Chuck is the king of all fallacies, with never an original thought or a legitimate response to offer."

Majormajor said...

And Earth is a god, right JG.

Majormajor said...

"fallacies" like 9-11 was an inside job and man caused climate change, and abortion doesn't end a human life.

Liberal Group Think.

woodenman said...

Chuck, the topic is 9/11, I bet you know so little about the entire 9/11 subject that you could not fill a post-it note with your thoughts. I dare you to go to Patriots Question 9/11 and spend a half hour reading about what happened that fateful day. Thousands of professional people put their photo and resume on the site and told their story of how 9/11 did not happen like we were told,even general Wesley Clark is there.

But you won't because you are scared of the truth.

Dave Dubya said...

Truth, honesty and self-reflection are all irrelevant to the Cult of Right-wing Authoritarian Personalities.

What they believe , or want to believe, is crap from their CRAP. “Fine people” march with Nazis, but anyone marching with BLM is in a racist hate group. Projection?

Now a truly conservative man like the Pope has called them stupid. Is it any wonder they hide behind deflections, accusations and demonization?

The CRAP needs to attack liberals, because the Pope called them stupid.

That is how they roll. That is what they are.

Denying science, along with supporting war based on lies, is about as stupid as humans can get as a species. It can only lead to ignorance and self-extinction.

Major Chuck is being stupid. The Pope agrees.

And Mr. Paine is strangely silent when the Pope agrees with reality, and liberals, from climate change to the inequalities, environmental destruction, and dangers of unchecked capitalism.

You can’t fool the CRAP. They know the Pope has fallen under the Satanic spell of the Great Global Conspiracy of Evil Climate Scientists.

Must be some “vast Left-wing conspiracy”, amirite?

Now let’s support that socialized relief for Texas and Florida, even though they helped put Trump in the White House.

After all socialism is far more Christian than capitalism. What did Jesus say about the rich? What did He say to the rich man? What did He say about conservative religious hypocrites? How did he treat the money changers? What did He say about paying taxes? (Even Rome had programs to feed the poor.)

Yes, socialism is far more Christian than capitalism. And for the stupid types, socialism is not Stalinism. Socialism is not a communist dictatorship.

We can lead a cultist to water, but he will only drink cult koolade...

Majormajor said...

Sigh, here we go again with the classic Dave Liberal Group Think, same ole same ole.

Golly DD do you realize how much of a cult you belong to? Do you not see how much you are closed minded to anything other liberalism?
Why do you bring up Stalin as if I BROUGHT UP Stalin?

Just another example of liberal Group Think.

P.S. I am not a Catholic, so with all respect due to Mr. Paine, I really don't care what the Pope says or thinks about me, if he says anything at all. So DD do you agree with the Pope's position on abortion?

Next up, DD plays the race card.

Tom Degan does not believe 9-11 was an inside job, so I guess he knows just enough about it to fill a post-it note. a

Darrell Michaels said...

For the record, I am obliged to follow my informed conscience on all matters. With that said, the Pope's role, through two millenia of apostolic succession from when Christ gave St. Peter the "keys to the kingdom" thus making him the first leader... the first pope... was to guide his flock in moral and spiritual matters. When it comes to my faith and morality, as a orthodox Catholic, I am obliged to follow Pope Francis.

When it comes to his OPINION on anthropogenic global warming, this is outside of my obligatory subservience to his dictates. The Pope is merely a human, with all of the faults and foibles that plague all of mankind. I think he is genuinely a good and loving man; however, I do not agree with him when it comes to AGW. This does not put me at odds with the Church, as the Pope has no authority to speak infallibly on this matter outside of doctrine.

Last, I think as a Christian, I have an obligation to care for and be a good steward of God's creation of the earth. I have long strived to do so and will continue to do so. That said, the THEORY of man-caused global warming has as many holes in it as a literal six day creation of the universe, in my opinion.

Dave Dubya said...

"These aren't opinions pulled out of thin air. They are very clear," he said. "Then they (leaders) decide and history will judge those decisions." The Pope said individuals and politicians had a "moral responsibility" to do their part.

The Pope is the Church’s voice of moral responsibility, is he not? If not, then his stance on abortion is also a mere “opinion”. Can’t have it both ways. Wait, who am I talking to? Cons always employ double standards to suit their ideology. I could make a list... starting with “fine people” who march with the Klan and everyone marching with BLM is a “racist hate group”.

Climate change is real. Climate change denial is a political opinion of the Republican Party and far Right.

Mr. Paine’s ideology tells him the Pope and science are holding a political opinion. And Mr. Paine’s political opinion holds science and the Pope as uninformed, or liars. There can be no other alternative.

No wonder the Pope thinks cons-servative political opinion is stupid. They can’t distinguish between a political opinion and a moral responsibility and choose the corporate PR of Big Oil over science. (I have previously shown that oil company scientists have linked their products to climate change, but the information was suppressed. This fact bounces off closed minds.)

Here’s the bottom line. If the Pope and science are correct. Mr. Paine and his fellow cons’ chosen ideological political opinions have failed both moral responsibility and life on Earth.

Their political opinions, their so-called values, blind them to moral responsibility.

That is the irony of con-servatism, as it seeks to strip safety nets from the poor and give tax cuts to the rich.

Darrell Michaels said...

Again, Mr. Dubya, you seem to only read what you want.

"The Pope said individuals and politicians had a 'moral responsibility' to do their part." ~ DD

If you will look back again to my previous comment, I said that we have a moral responsibility to take care of God's creation of the planet. This is true regardless of whether AGW is a fact or a political contrivance.

Now that doesn't mean that we eliminate all fossil fuels and throw our economies back into an unrecoverable depression. How does that help people, including the poorest among us?

It means we continue to educate and improve alternative clean energy solutions through the market... not the government. We don't need more handouts to politically-connected Solyndras that only end up failing.

Further, I will forgive your lack of knowledge on Catholic doctrine and morality, since you think the Pope's stance of abortion is merely his "opinion". There is myriads of tomes of discussion, including scripturally, let alone sacred tradition that Christians must protect all innocent life, even nascent life.

So your either/or false dichotomy is just that; false.

Dave, I really don't understand the anger and seeming hate in your heart for anyone that disagrees with you. It is almost to the point of being pathological, sir.

That is how you can end your latest diatribe with falsehoods and non-sequiturs. I am praying for you, sir.

Dave Dubya said...

Mr. Paine,
Once again you have accused me of falsehoods without the courtesy of offering evidence or facts. This is pathological on your part.

You are missing the point with, “since you think the Pope's stance of abortion is merely his "opinion". And yes, that is his opinion, a religious opinion. You are free to share it. I am personally against abortion, but support free reproductive choice, and will not condone imprisoning desperate women or their doctors.

And you missed the Pope’s point that it is not just an “opinion out of thin air”. You’re disagreement means the Pope is uninformed or a liar. Which is it?

I told you denial of climate change is the political, not scientific, opinion.

It means we continue to educate and improve alternative clean energy solutions through the market...

The market has no conscience. It has no wisdom. It serves its own bottom line and nothing more. The government serves the people.

Nobody says “we eliminate all fossil fuels and throw our economies back into an unrecoverable depression”.

That is your straw man. It’s always black and white with you. We say AGW is real and we need to cut back on fossil fuel burning by replacing it with alternative energy, and let both the government and market work towards cleaner energy.

Got it?

As I said, ignoring or denying real AGW is a moral failure. Pretend for a second AGW is real, and find your conscience.

Even if it isn’t real, we still get cleaner air. THAT alone is a moral responsibility to take care of God's creation of the planet.

Dooming our planet to your political opinion does nothing to take care of God's creation.

Majormajor said...

Yeah DD we "got it"...not too authoritarian of you, right?

Majormajor said...

"Climate change is real", maybe so the question is what part does mankind have in causing this change?

We all know what liberals who want larger govt control of humans believe.

Darrell Michaels said...


Here are your falsehoods, sir. (I might have known that you wouldn't admit them for being as such.)

1. "And yes, that is his opinion, a religious opinion." (re: abortion) ~ DD No, it is not opinion. It is doctrine, and as I said, it is based on scripture and millenia of Sacred Tradition. I don't really expect you to understand the difference, however.

2. "You’re disagreement means the Pope is uninformed or a liar. Which is it?" ~ DD Well, let's look at what a lie is. A lie is something one says or does that is contrary to what he KNOWS is the truth. By that definition, the Pope is certainly not a liar on this matter. Further, I don't think he is uninformed on the topic. Sadly, I do think he is misinformed, however.

3. "I told you denial of climate change is the political, not scientific, opinion." ~ DD That is also a willful falsehood. I don't deny climate change. It changes as a course of nature. What I deny is that it is irrefutably caused by mankind. Anthropogenic global warming is a THEORY. It is not a scientific fact. Your wish that it was, does not make it so.

4. "The government serves the people." ~ DD Okay, I'll give you some leeway on this one because I know you truly believe this nonsense, even though there are myriad examples of cases where the government is the problem for a vast number of our people. This is a falsehood, because it is not accurate in so many cases. It is not a lie, because you don't know that this is a falsehood.

5. "As I said, ignoring or denying real AGW is a moral failure." ~ DD This is also a falsehood, but not a lie, because I know you believe it. Simply because you seemingly revere the earth and humanistic practices over Christianity hardly make my scientifically-held reservations about AGW a moral failing. This is simply more of your self-righteous condescension, sir.

"We say AGW is real and we need to cut back on fossil fuel burning by replacing it with alternative energy..." ~ DD I think I said that even though I don't believe in global warming being man-caused, we do indeed need to work on clean energy alternatives. My disagreement with you comes in the fact that you think government should fund this with tax payer dollars regardless of our $20 trillion debt.

"Even if it isn’t real, we still get cleaner air. THAT alone is a moral responsibility to take care of God's creation of the planet." ~ DD Ahh! We can end on a note of agreement! I concur that we should still be looking at ways to be good stewards of God's creation, including to find clean energy alternatives that actually work.

Dooming our planet to socialism and the worship of mother earth Gaia does nothing to take care of God's children, however.

Darrell Michaels said...

" "Climate change is real', maybe so the question is what part does mankind have in causing this change? We all know what liberals who want larger govt control of humans believe."

And THAT, Majormajor, is exactly the motivation behind it for many AGW proponents. That, and keeping government funding of their "research" in order to "prove" this fallacy.

Dave Dubya said...

it is not opinion. It is doctrine

Doctrine and opinion are both beliefs. Beliefs are opinions.

Doctrine: a belief or set of beliefs held and taught by a church, political party, or other group.

Opinion: the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing.

Why am I trying? Only cons get to define words today, so liberals are always wrong.

So the Pope is misinformed instead of uninformed? Look who needs nuance now. How is the Pope so misinformed, Mr. No Facts Required?

Anthropogenic global warming is a THEORY. It is not a scientific fact.

And the theory of gravity? A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.

Greenhouse gasses are also not a theory. They have real effects and are measurable.

"Climate change is real', maybe so the question is what part does mankind have in causing this change? We all know what liberals who want larger govt control of humans believe."

And THAT, Majormajor, is exactly the motivation behind it for many AGW proponents. That, and keeping government funding of their "research" in order to "prove" this fallacy.


Proving once again the worst of motives is assigned to those hated most. Once again outright denial, couched in demonizing accusation, is your reality. Ignorance is strength.

what part does mankind have in causing this change? Who cares? Trump is shutting down the research. Why? Because geniuses like Mr. Paine and Trump know AGW is a “fallacy”.

There’s your proof of a closed mind. But it’s ok. Mr. Paine says he has “scientifically-held reservations”, so therefore it must be a fallacy.

Mr. Paine has beliefs and political opinions that trump science...all because liberals agree with science. That’s what it comes down to.

myriad examples of cases where the government is the problem for a vast number of our people.

Let’s spare Texas and Florida that evil socialized gubmit aid, then? Same for the elderly and the disabled and their Medicare and Social Security. Same for vets. Why should we coddle them to the grave, especially those who never saw combat? Evil gubmit VA anyways, amirite?

“Government is the problem” is of course a vague political opinion, not even a theory, let alone fact. Just like, “liberals who want larger govt control of humans”. Yes, specific cases of government abuse and inefficiency can be cited and reform suggested, but cons don’t want to open this issue where their pet causes like a failed war on drugs and wars based on lies are very real, costly and deadly affairs.

Simply because you seemingly revere the earth and humanistic practices over Christianity hardly make my scientifically-held reservations about AGW a moral failing.

It is science and the Pope, not “the earth and humanistic practices” that I side with. You are proving the Pope correct about that “stupid” bit.

So the bottom line for Mr. Paine is the Pope, and science, are “misinformed”.

Must be tough to have all the “scientifically-held reservations” as answers and never be able to share them.

Perhaps if the Kochs’ oily Heartland Institute paid you, you may share them?

We’ve heard your “scientifically-held reservations” from them before. It is corporate PR, and political propaganda, but you don’t know that, evidently.

"These aren't opinions pulled out of thin air. They are very clear," the Pope said. "Then they (leaders) decide and history will judge those decisions."

“When you don’t want to see, you don’t see”... “a stupid and hard-headed being who doesn’t see”...Hmm. Why does this remind me of conservatives and Republicans?

They prove the Pope correct every day.

Majormajor said...

Nice job Dave of just repeating the same stuff over and over again. It's called Liberal Group THOUGHT.

Fact is liberals believe the only way we can stop the supposed man caused climate change would be a huge increase in Govt control, a reduction in liberties and a further redistribution of income.

It's called socialism.

woodenman said...

This Global Warming argument seems pretty silly to me because simple logic will lead you to the truth.

The first premise is the heat trapping characteristics of the four Green House gases, this is beyond dispute. Anybody denying this is totally ignorant of basic science.

The second premise is that mankind produces an immense amount of these gases though industry, agriculture,and forestry.

The third premise is that the atmosphere is not infinite, the bulk of the atmosphere exists only up to eight miles high.

The total amount of GHGs produced per year is amazing, 10,000 million metric tons!

There are four types of people who believe or say man has no effect on on GW. Non Climate scientist who want attention in the Conservative community, Climate scientist who are on the payroll of fossil fuel companies, Republican politicians who get campaign contributions from said companies and finally Conservatives who believe the first three groups.

The fourth premise is that Conservatives believe no matter how much sugar you put into their coffee the taste will never change.

Majormajor said...

Woody,

Explain to me logically how hurricane seasons have been light for the past 10 years until this year, tell me how this has been caused by man?

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Woodenman1954, once again Chuck proves his ignorance, but more likely his stupidity, of not having a clue as to the difference between climate and weather.

I believe the latter.

Just the Facts! said...

So JG why don't you explaIn to me why believers in man caused climate change have said this years storms have been due the activity of man.
P.S.

9-11 was not an inside job.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Chuck "Just the Facts!" Morre: "So JG why don't you explaIn to me why believers in man caused climate change have said this years storms have been due the activity of man."

Chuck, "believers" haven't made such a claim. I'll reply to you, just as I did earlier on this thread to Mr. Paine. Hopefully, you'll be able to understand it this time around (but I'm not holding my breath).

"Nobody's made any claim that Harvey or Irma were man-made phenomena, Mr. Paine, only that their intensities were/are due to warmer ocean waters and higher atmospheric saturation points -- allowing greater rainfall amounts and/or higher sustaining winds."


"P.S. 9-11 was not an inside job."

P.S. Jesus was not supernatural.