Quote:
Originally Posted by Daywolf
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Well my whole thing about this as with most anything is that when someone approaches me or the general population with a theory, idea, presumption, declaration, the burden of providing conclusive evidence falls upon their shoulders. This applies to global warming, climate change (their new buzz word since climategate), 911 truthers, fake moon landing crowd, or any other idea that has not been substantiated with conclusive evidence. Until there is solid proof, not just a “trust me” argument, no action should be taken, zero. No cap and trade. No Kyoto accord. No UN global warming initiative. No anything that comes down the pike.
|
By this logic, shouldn't we be waiting until we are attacked by terrorists again since we don’t actually have any proof of who is going to try and attack us?
I could probably think of a dozen other situations where this mindset would be extremely detrimental but I'm sure you realize this now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daywolf
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I see nothing but a full fledged scam perpetrated by get-rich-quick power hungry con-artists, from scientists down to politicians. I say that because they try to force all this stuff on us with simply a "trust me" argument. That's indicative of a con-artist. All they need are jackboots and their attire would be complete. Prolly on layaway for the moment...
|
This type of shit doesn't belong anywhere in a debate. It's all heresay.