Those whiny, sniveling, lazy, commie, socialist LIBERALS!!!!

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Patricio Da Silva, Dec 26, 2024.

  1. Nwolfe35

    Nwolfe35 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,361
    Likes Received:
    7,586
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That is funny.

    You think "Carbon footprint" has something to do with how much land area something takes up?

    ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!
     
    Patricio Da Silva likes this.
  2. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    29,361
    Likes Received:
    12,300
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    He never said "Carbon" footprint.
     
    Mitt Ryan, popscott and Turtledude like this.
  3. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    19,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    See my other rebuttal, I forgot to add this:

    Get your history right before you hit the 'post reply' button.


     
  4. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    19,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    'Footprint' in terms of environmental pollution, is no doubt more often associated with carbon than others.

    However, it can be used in terms of:

    However, in any of these 'footprints', WBK's singular photo of a strip mine, and an oil rig, are wholly inadequate to use as comparative basis as WBK is assuming that because a single strip mine is larger than a single oil rig, he claims the lithium strip mine (associated in the manufacture of EVs) the 'footprint' is therefore larger than that of the oil rig (associated with gas cars), and so his logic is specious.

    The footprint, of any of the above types mentioned, cannot be assessed by looking at the two photos which WBK posted.

    so my point, regardless of the type of footprint, isn't changed, that the carbon footprint resulting from EV use and manufacture, is less than all of that associated with the gas engine vehicles.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2024
  5. Shutcie

    Shutcie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2021
    Messages:
    5,129
    Likes Received:
    4,339
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    On the topic of which polluted less, EV or Fossil fuel, let's remember that crude oil is every bit as organic as a pine tree.
    Modern technology has made the recovery, refining, transport and use of fossil fuels very much more economical friendly than even 15 years ago.

    It polluted less than burning that pine tree.

    Ev is not much different given that the "E" in EV is still pretty much generated by burning fossil fuels with the added pollution of mining, refining and manufacture of lithium for batteries.

    And we haven't even talked about the conversion of a gallon of fossil fuel to create that "E" in EV.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2024
  6. Shutcie

    Shutcie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2021
    Messages:
    5,129
    Likes Received:
    4,339
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This is incorrect.
     
    Turtledude likes this.
  7. Bullseye

    Bullseye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2021
    Messages:
    15,413
    Likes Received:
    12,900
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not your call. You run to this tactic any time you have no solid defense.
    More AI gobbledygook. Do you own work once in a while.
     
    Turtledude likes this.
  8. Bullseye

    Bullseye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2021
    Messages:
    15,413
    Likes Received:
    12,900
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    All you've proved is your adroitness with AI.
     
    Turtledude likes this.
  9. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    20,184
    Likes Received:
    11,885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is what I posted above. Nowhere did a say demagoguery was simple falsehood. I supplied the formal definition in my last post.

    So now you have exposed yourself as a dishonest poster. You are intentionally misrepresenting what I posted. Talk about a fail.

    I have no idea why you people think you can post outright falsehoods when what I’ve posted is permanent record on PF.

    You have destroyed your credibility and that of your copilot. You have both gone down in a fiery crash. And you are now drowning in your own OP demagoguery.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2024
    Turtledude likes this.
  10. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    29,361
    Likes Received:
    12,300
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    He showed the picture of a relatively small oil well pump with a huge mining pit in the background. He was obviously referring to the size of the physical footprint of the two. I have driven by numerous oil pumps. Cattle graze and they farm all around them. It is obviously impossible to farm in a mining pit.
     
  11. Wild Bill Kelsoe

    Wild Bill Kelsoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Messages:
    33,285
    Likes Received:
    23,913
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How much diesel fuel is burnt to mine that lithium? How many hundreds of thousands (millions?) of gallons?
     
    Turtledude likes this.
  12. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    19,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    How many hundreds and hundreds of millions of cars are there in the world? imagine none of them burning fossil fuel.
    Clearly that net savings in carbon is an improvement overall
     
  13. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    19,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That's not a counter argument
     
  14. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,808
    Likes Received:
    2,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In what way is savings in "carbon" an improvement overall?
     
  15. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    19,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Clearly you do not have clue as to what the conversation was about. Back track a bit, then read the exchange we were having.

    Maybe you'll get it, maybe you won't. Given your history on this forum, I doubt it.
     
  16. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    19,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'll file that in the Assorted Unicorn Dreams file.

    You are being ridiculous. You have egregiously overreacted and kneejerked hysterics to the meme.

    First, you completely misunderstood the point of the meme.

    The point of the meme is that liberals are the driving force behind the vast majority of progressive reforms, given that the tone and tenor of the meme is light-hearted 'tongue-in-cheek', by definition, TIC is not obliged to be picture perfect, it just has to have a large element of truth, and that it does.

    The meme doesn't claim conservatives didn't contribute, the meme isn't asserting that ( they just aren't mentioned, but it would be false if you are claiming the meme is saying that conservatives did not support some of the reforms, but they are not the point of the thread, and you have thus misunderstood the point).

    Your reaction is given to hysterics, I'm really astonished at your reaction, and, also, I resent your accusation.

    What's particularly offensive is your accusation is based on conclusions that you kneejerked, and you have made the colossal blunder of not querying before you conclude. You could have queried, 'do you actually mean to say (blah blah) ? (that sort of thing), but no, you didn't, no, you have thus succeeded in putting your proverbial foot in your mouth.

    I put the following to Copilot (note that the correct way to use Ai is not to ask leading questions or tell it what kind of output you are looking for (by 'what kind of output you are looking for', it is meant not to tell AI which side of the argument you are hoping for, your own or that of your opponent? -- which the prompt below does not).

    You made the rather tragic mistake of singling out #4, which was signed into law by Theodore Roosevelt, a republican, the bill of which was presented to congress and the senate by republicans, this gives the impression that the claim in the meme is false, but is it?

    You conclusion was a kneejerk, you didn't do your homework, 557.

    So, what is the truth? The claim is that liberals are the driving force behind most of the progressive reforms, the point of the meme was NOT 'repubs made zero contribution to social reforms'. Okay, perhaps I should have mentioned it, but it was a light hearted MEME, not a documentary of facts. You treated it as if it were supposed to be a picture perfect documentation, but clearly, it wasn't. Therefore, your conclusion was PREMATURE.

    Okay, 557, here is the truth on item #4:

    To understand the truth of #4 you have to do research Upton Sinclair.

    Upton Sinclair was a social progressive muckraker who wrote a book ("The Jungle") that caused a public blacklash forcing repubs in office to draft and pass the Pure Food and Drug act, which was the only point, the point being that the meme point given in the OP is essentially accurate. Should it have mentioned that was signed into law by a repub prez, and repub legislature? Sure, I will acknowledge fault in that omission, but on your point of dishonest, that's a hollow allegation, given the incontrovertible and historical fact that, without the liberal (socialist, actually) Upton sinclair, who was invited to the WH to discuss his book "Is it true" Roosevelt asked of Sinclair, the book inciting public blacklash over the manner in which the public's meat was being processed via his very popular book at the time is was published, it is highly unlikely such legislation would have ever made to the floor in a republican controlled congress and senate, given Republicans vast history of siding with Corporations and not 'the people'.

    But Sinclair's objective was to to implement social change for the worker, whose labor he believed was being exploited, and to improve the working conditions. His book did, in point of fact, result in improvements of the quality of food and how safely it was being prepared, and paved the way for unions to proliferate and via unions, the working conditions, pay, etc., improved. But these are largely the result of LIBERALS, not conservatives, whose corporations propping up repubs/conservatives, etc., did not like unions, did not like costing big business more money because of improved pay and working conditions.

    That is history. Study it

    https://www.history.com/news/upton-sinclair-the-jungle-us-food-safety-reforms

    (Summary of the article) Upton Sinclair's 1906 novel The Jungle aimed to expose the harsh conditions faced by immigrant workers in Chicago's meatpacking industry and promote socialism. However, its graphic depictions of unsanitary meat processing shocked the American public and sparked a movement for food safety reform instead. President Theodore Roosevelt, already supportive of food safety legislation, took notice of the public outcry following the book's release. He dispatched inspectors to investigate the meatpacking facilities, and their findings confirmed Sinclair's allegations. This led to the passage of the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act on June 30, 1906, establishing federal food safety regulations for the first time. Though Sinclair's intention was to highlight labor exploitation, The Jungle inadvertently resulted in significant food safety reforms in the United States.
    https://teachdemocracy.org/online-l...e-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry

    (Summary of the article) Upton Sinclair's novel "The Jungle," published in 1906, aimed to expose the horrific working conditions and unsanitary practices in the meat-packing industry in Chicago. The story follows Jurgis Rudkis, a Lithuanian immigrant, who faces exploitation, injury, and poverty while working in the brutal environment of Packingtown. Sinclair's graphic depictions of diseased meat processing shocked the public and led to significant reforms.

    The novel sparked outrage, primarily focusing on the appalling quality of meat rather than the plight of workers. In response to public demand for reform, President Theodore Roosevelt invited Sinclair to the White House and established a special commission to investigate the industry. The commission confirmed Sinclair's accounts, leading to the passage of the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906. These laws instituted federal regulations to ensure food safety and cleanliness, marking a significant increase in government oversight of the food industry. Despite Sinclair’s socialist ideals advocating for public ownership of industries, the novel ultimately brought attention to consumer safety and the need for government intervention in corporate practices.






    Now, do you have any other fake outrage you'd like to kneejerk for the forum, or would you like to dig deeper into any points given in the meme, and I promise that, if Repubs/conservatives contributed, I'll make it a point to mention them, but the overall riding point of the meme was that social progressivity is largely a liberal thing much more than a conservative thing, and I thought this was conventional wisdom, and you are disputing this?
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2024
  17. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    19,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Okay, what do you think the DEI policy is?

    Tell us what you think about it, why you think it's unfair.

    Have you bothered to research it, or have you only been listening to right wing TV and radio shows?
     
  18. Patricio Da Silva

    Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2020
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    19,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I am saying that, all factors considered, their direct output into the environment and the factors of their manufacture, EVs are better for the environment, overall, than fossil fuel burning cars.
     
  19. CKW

    CKW Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    15,872
    Likes Received:
    3,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, company towns is not an example of Capitalism. Its a microcosm of socialism itself. The town was set up with a powerful single entity in control of the economy. There was nothing "capitalist" about it. It was capitalism itself that brought the decline of Company Towns, with job competition, a stronger economy based on capitalistic principals of innovation and competition.
     
  20. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,808
    Likes Received:
    2,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So you really don't know.

    Okay, fair enough.
     
  21. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    29,361
    Likes Received:
    12,300
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Then why do you suppose he showed the picture of that little oil well pump and that huge mining pit?

    He even pointed out what they were.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2024
  22. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    20,184
    Likes Received:
    11,885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I’m uninterested in taking any long flight with you and your copilot. You’ve blatantly misrepresented what I posted. And what YOU posted.

    Let’s recap. From your OP.

    Not only is this statement false, it’s demagoguery because it’s irrational and it appeals to bias. I pointed this out in my first post in this thread.

    Now, no matter how much you spin, your OP made a categorically false claim as the capstone of its premise. Asking copilot to spin for you doesn’t change the FACT your OP is factually incorrect as shown by EVIDENCE I produced and you intentionally omitted initially. You had NO idea Republicans introduced and wrote the bill and did the pre bill research.

    On the other hand, I’m well aware of Sinclair. As a socialist I’ve not only studied his work on that level, but as someone who took classes in beef fabrication and raises beef I’ve studied The Jungle in that context as well. The thing is, Sinclair is irrelevant to the OP demagoguery claim that Republicans fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys.

    Look, you posted demagoguery that also contains information that is categorically false. Your copilot can’t get you out of that. You spinning about Sinclair can’t get you out of that.

    If you want to be taken seriously, don’t support you arguments with falsehoods and irrational appeals to bias.

    And don’t claim other posters said something the opposite of what they said.

    Pointing out your OP is not only full of disinformation but also is demagoguery is not “knee jerk”. It’s just correcting your errors and the errors in the OP “story”. I’m sorry I destroyed your false premise. But that’s how it goes when you post stuff that isn’t true. I’m a freaking socialist/liberal myself. I loathe the Republican Party. But what I dislike even more is people who claim to be liberal posting false garbage like the OP story. I don’t want to be lumped in with a bunch that thinks dishonesty is cool or even acceptable.
     
  23. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    47,291
    Likes Received:
    21,446
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Obviously less carbon less contaminants, less Global Warming..... etc.

    If the question was meant to try to introduce Science denialism into the conversation, don't bother. I'm not interested in discussing settled science.

    But if it was a legitimate question, there is your legitimate answer. And if this is the case, please accept my apologies. You must understand that this is the kind of questions (which they, in their ignorance, consider "gotcha questions") the pseudo-science apologists ask all too often.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2024
  24. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    62,175
    Likes Received:
    19,637
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Water quality standards go back to the victorian age. By the way OP I've have indeed seen that before it was garbage then it is no different now.
     
  25. Shutcie

    Shutcie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2021
    Messages:
    5,129
    Likes Received:
    4,339
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's all the post deserves.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2024

Share This Page