MoveOn.Org: Censor The Climate Change Deniers?

whitegp wrote: Well Fred
Debate ? How ?
What I have read on this and the Pine Study is a slow spiral into a right wing circle where debate is a long lost memory. Few of the Independent, Unafiliated or even Liberal posters have bothered with the same old right wing dogma. You guys just make stuff up. Then personally come after anyone who has an opinion that differs. Facts?

Look at this thread.
The Rev fails to read his own data from reliable site, the National Snow and Ice Data Center.
When questioned goes into a juvenial rant calling any and all he can children.
This is debate?
In a mature debate the Rev would have retracted any impression he may have given that the Artic Sea Ice is increasing when the Data Center clearly does not support that as factual.

You guys want to whine about Gore. Go for it. But do not pretend that this is some real and factual debate about climate change. Because the debate on the facts has long been settled, and you deniers --- lost---lost because the facts do not support your beliefs.

Debate? No thanks Fred. I read the same old same old on here enough to know where your debate will wind up. I got much better things to do.

But do not be supprised when us Independent and Unafiliated voters vote against the Repubs again, and again and again. Your 1/3 is hardly inclusive to other viewpoints. I would call it snarky to outright hostile.
Debate from this Forum and the Pine Study disappeared under the landslide of right wing snark long ago. Who needs it?

I'm sorry that not everyone was agreeing with you. (stomping feet, running into the corner whining).

whitegp wrote: Debate from this Forum and the Pine Study disappeared under the landslide of right wing snark long ago. Who needs it?

The left wing snark is dominated by VL and the queen of snark appears to be MIA. What was your point in chiming in if you don't plan to stick around and discuss current topics? Why don't you post something that you're interested in and see how much "snark" you get in return. I'll bet you don't get a single snarky comment unless you instigate it first.

I think you'd lose that bet Rick. WhiteGP is correct. Anyone who holds a different viewpoint will be piled on here as if they were LJ or VL. Its as if those two posters' tactics justify the same treatment to anyone on that side of the aisle.

Well Rick you can see the snarky comments starting from the Rev and his failure to support his own post. Fortunatly the Rev stomped his feet and ran off into a corner and we no longer need to include his juvenile comments.

This thread has now reached three pages and the only facts presented here were from the National Snow and Ice Data center. http://nsidc.org/

So, in the interest of debate and because the original post was about the Newspapers no longer publishing deniers letters, post some facts. Facts that refute the information from the NSIDC.
Not opinion about Gore, facts.

A real post of facts with links just as if the post was going to the Denver Paper.

towermonkey wrote: I think you'd lose that bet Rick. WhiteGP is correct. Anyone who holds a different viewpoint will be piled on here as if they were LJ or VL. Its as if those two posters' tactics justify the same treatment to anyone on that side of the aisle.

I give back what I get. VL's style is to attack the person and bypass the debate... although today he seems to be a little more willing to discuss although tainted with plagiarism.

whitegp wrote: Well Rick you can see the snarky comments starting from the Rev and his failure to support his own post. Fortunatly the Rev stomped his feet and ran off into a corner and we no longer need to include his juvenile comments.

This thread has now reached three pages and the only facts presented here were from the National Snow and Ice Data center. http://nsidc.org/

So, in the interest of debate and because the original post was about the Newspapers no longer publishing deniers letters, post some facts. Facts that refute the information from the NSIDC.
Not opinion about Gore, facts.

A real post of facts with links just as if the post was going to the Denver Paper.

Everyone has the right to their opinion and the right to express it in their own way. Did he attack your comment first or did you attack his? Take a look.

whitegp wrote: Well Rev Relevent did you intentionally not read the http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ web site which is where you cherry picked your climate denier graph?

I mean- you did read the article that included your graph didn't you?


Any wonder that the News quit printing Flat Earth letters?
Should they keep printing Birther letters?

It appears that YOU layed the snark on him first does it not? I could say something snarky now, but I think I made the point clear enough.

And just so you covered everybody....

whitegp wrote:
Now all you right wingers -- get back in your circle.

whitegp wrote: Well Rick you can see the snarky comments starting from the Rev and his failure to support his own post. Fortunatly the Rev stomped his feet and ran off into a corner and we no longer need to include his juvenile comments.

This thread has now reached three pages and the only facts presented here were from the National Snow and Ice Data center. http://nsidc.org/

So, in the interest of debate and because the original post was about the Newspapers no longer publishing deniers letters, post some facts. Facts that refute the information from the NSIDC.
Not opinion about Gore, facts.

A real post of facts with links just as if the post was going to the Denver Paper.

The thread started out just asking if the Denver Post should refuse to print the letters of climate change deniers. You need quotes to defend your approval of censorship? Maybe Stalin?

Fred, censorship is when the government does it, the Denver Post is a private business and if posting letters from Right Wing Whacko's cost them business, they'll stop posting them. I know I got a call recently to re suscribe, and I told them I wouldn't ever subscribe to that "Right Wing, Corporate Propaganda Piece of $h!t, F*&%#ing, *&^%$# Loving, *&^% #$$%^ ass munching @(*&^% #$%^$ *& *&^%$ ( &%^$# EVER!"

Once again you are incorrect. A man can self censor himself. I know you have never considered this. American papers would self censor their coverage during World War II. For example not showing dead GI's.