Difference between revisions of "Talk:Settled science"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(stop wasting my time)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
  
 
::I assume that if liberals reply with jokes, etc., it means they ''acknowledge'' that they cannot dispute the facts or principles involved. Why else would they try to make a distraction? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 21:00, 7 July 2007 (EDT)
 
::I assume that if liberals reply with jokes, etc., it means they ''acknowledge'' that they cannot dispute the facts or principles involved. Why else would they try to make a distraction? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 21:00, 7 July 2007 (EDT)
 +
:::Uh, Ed, while I do consider myself liberal in many areas, I can still see that the person who originally said the quote is quite obviously a severely closed-minded nut.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 22:54, 7 July 2007 (EDT)
  
−
:So being a free marketeer with respect for science makes one a liberal? I have no problem with the science behind global warming. It seems pretty koscher to me. The external link was a well put argument for free trade. Something with which I whole heartedly agree. Of course my preference for facts and evidence over blind belief may not go down well here. Who has a monopoly on Conservatism? What is the joke? This encyclopedia or the experience that freedom and free market economies are irreseprable? Free people may think what they may, but without free economies they would hardly be in a position to do so. If freedom and facts are [[liberal]] then a liberal I am - your words not mine! Now stop wasting my time and create some wealth! (or articles for some points in Mr. [[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]]'s [[talk:Main_Page#Mikhail_Kalashnikov|New socialst plan]]). [[User:BritishConservative|BritishConservative]] 22:29, 7 July 2007 (EDT)
+
Can I assume real conservatives are not welcome here and their contributions will be [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Settled_science&diff=221475&oldid=221463 deleted] by [[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]]'s socialist [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Police thought police]. [[User:BritishConservative|BritishConservative]] 13:56, 8 July 2007 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
Yanno what? You're being a troll, BritishConservative. --[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 15:23, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 19:23, July 8, 2007

€d why wa$te a good opportunity to i££u$trate the $en$e of free trade? The
¢urrent arti¢£e cou£d be u$ed to ju$sify £ibera£ Fa£$ehood$ that ¢onfu$e ab$o£ute advantage with ¢omparative advantage i.e. off$horing and the importation of unde$ired produ¢t$. Even £ibera£ prote¢tioni$t
e¢onomi¢$ are pedd£ed here. i$ thi$ ¢ommypedia? BritishConservative 20:35, 7 July 2007 (EDT)

I believe this is meant to illustrate the silliness of "settled science".--Autofire 20:38, 7 July 2007 (EDT)

You know, if you'd quit using currency symbols in place of letters, it would make your statement much easier to understand.--Autofire 20:44, 7 July 2007 (EDT)
I assume that if liberals reply with jokes, etc., it means they acknowledge that they cannot dispute the facts or principles involved. Why else would they try to make a distraction? --Ed Poor Talk 21:00, 7 July 2007 (EDT)
Uh, Ed, while I do consider myself liberal in many areas, I can still see that the person who originally said the quote is quite obviously a severely closed-minded nut.--Autofire 22:54, 7 July 2007 (EDT)

Can I assume real conservatives are not welcome here and their contributions will be deleted by Aschlafly's socialist thought police. BritishConservative 13:56, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

Yanno what? You're being a troll, BritishConservative. --Autofire 15:23, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Settled_science&oldid=222009"