New Leaked Russian Documents

[Stewy]

(07-20-2021, 03:52 PM)Dill Wrote: The tee could be a little straighter, I guess. 

I don't know what you mean when you say a "subject" isn't "all on the left's side." 

My point would be that the greatest organized resistance to the scientific consensus on climate change in the U.S. is currently to be found in the Trump party.

And I'll add that the resistance was initially orchestrated by Big Oil, though they are no longer in control of the narrative.

Now the point is ready for a swing.

I used to engage in this subject a lot.  I wrote, deleted and re-wrote several intro's to this reply, but I think I'm sticking with not adding more.  I just strongly suggest everyone stick with peer reviewed scientific articles, and not anyone's summary/opinion on any of the matters.

• 3 words - Vostok Ice Core - https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7rx4413n
• Thermohaline Circulation Slowdown/Shutdown
  

Those are key things that may be of interest.

[Dill]

(07-20-2021, 06:03 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You state that like it's a fact, but to me, it sounds more like a directed talking point to avoid scrutiny over what transpired.

Well yes, Sunset. 

I am stating that Trump's claim the election was stolen from him is a BIG LIE, and stating it as a fact settled months ago. 

No one has avoided "scrutiny" over what has transpired.

E.g., Michigan has gone above and beyond to the call of duty to refute every unsubstantiated claim and rumor about the election there.

The only party effort to avoid scrutiny over election shennanigans, that we have seen over the past 6 months, is the GOP effort to stall investigation into the Capitol Insurrection.

[Dill]

(07-20-2021, 06:34 PM)Stewy Wrote: I used to engage in this subject a lot.  I wrote, deleted and re-wrote several intro's to this reply, but I think I'm sticking with not adding more.  I just strongly suggest everyone stick with peer reviewed scientific articles, and not anyone's summary/opinion on any of the matters.

• 3 words - Vostok Ice Core - https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7rx4413n
• Thermohaline Circulation Slowdown/Shutdown
  

Those are key things that may be of interest.

Can't really follow the math. 

Think I understood this part, though:

Finally, COand CH concentrations are strongly correlated with Antarctic temperatures; this is because, overall, our results support the idea that greenhouse gases have contributed significantly to the glacial –interglacial change. This correlation,together with the uniquely elevated concentrations of these gases today, is of relevance with respect to the continuing debate on the future of Earth’s climate.

[BigPapaKain]

(07-20-2021, 06:14 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: BRB gonna go smash my nuts in a car door. It takes away some of the pain from the Trump and qanon pro insurrection anti-democracy party lecturing me about both sides doing it.

You're gonna be mad as hell when a bunch of rainbow wearing, transgendered, weed smoking socialists storm the Capitol and get baked AF.

[SunsetBengal]

(07-20-2021, 06:36 PM)Dill Wrote: Well yes, Sunset. 

I am stating that Trump's claim the election was stolen from him is a BIG LIE, and stating it as a fact settled months ago. 

No one has avoided "scrutiny" over what has transpired.

E.g., Michigan has gone above and beyond to the call of duty to refute every unsubstantiated claim and rumor about the election there.

The only party effort to avoid scrutiny over election shennanigans, that we have seen over the past 6 months, is the GOP effort to stall investigation into the Capitol Insurrection.

Oh, I'm not so sure about that.  The States of Georgia and Texas have been dragged through the mud, for simply wanting to add a little security to their elections, measures that don't even reach the bar of some other States..

Maybe instead of BIG LIE, some folks view it as the BIG coverup?

[Dill]

(07-20-2021, 04:09 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Yeah, I'm not taking it.  It's been made clear lately to tread lightly on here when talking about it.

What current issue that involves science isn't on the left's side?  Think about it long enough and you'll figure it out.

Honestly Wes, I won't figure it out from a cue that vague.  

And if you are not personally attacking people, there is no need to "tread lightly" on any subject in this forum.

I should add that I have been talking about parties and political behavior/judgment of their members.  

I have not characterized science as itself "left" or "right." 

[Dill]

(07-20-2021, 07:01 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Oh, I'm not so sure about that.  The States of Georgia and Texas have been dragged through the mud, for simply wanting to add a little security to their elections, measures that don't even reach the bar of some other States..

Maybe instead of BIG LIE, some folks view it as the BIG coverup?

Texas is dragged through the mud for proposing legislation to make voting harder--apparently in hopes that will shave off a fraction of Dem votes in 2020.

So far, the biggest threat to the integrity of Georgia's election appears to have been Trump himself. 

But you say they want "security"? 

You say "cover up"--of what, where? Is there evidence of such, beyond the fact Trump lost? 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-20-2021, 06:14 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: BRB gonna go smash my nuts in a car door. It takes away some of the pain from the Trump and qanon pro insurrection anti-democracy party lecturing me about both sides doing it.

You'd probably have to find someone actually doing that in this thread first.  Literally not a single person here is doing anything remotely close to what you're describing.

[SunsetBengal]

(07-20-2021, 07:10 PM)Dill Wrote: Texas is dragged through the mud for proposing legislation to make voting harder--apparently in hopes that will shave off a fraction of Dem votes in 2020.

So far, the biggest threat to the integrity of Georgia's election appears to have been Trump himself. 

But you say they want "security"? 

You say "cover up"--of what, where? Is there evidence of such, beyond the fact Trump lost? 

Not really, on either.  Both Georgia and Texas' proposed voting law amendments are only to insure integrity to the elections, at a level of security less than some Blue States.  So, are you really putting facts out there, or are you parroting "talking points"?

[Wes Mantooth]

(07-20-2021, 07:04 PM)Dill Wrote: Honestly Wes, I won't figure it out from a cue that vague.  

And if you are not personally attacking people, there is no need to "tread lightly" on any subject in this forum.

I should add that I have been talking about parties and political behavior/judgment of their members.  

I have not characterized science as itself "left" or "right." 

The blurring of sex and gender.  It wasn't too long ago many on the left recognized a clear difference, now I'm not so sure.

[CarolinaBengalFanGuy]

(07-20-2021, 01:43 PM)CarolinaBengalFanGuy Wrote: The dumb thing is what the describe can easily apply to leftist as well as right wing people.

Bengalfan4life27c Wrote:
It must be nice being a GOP/Trump supporters to live in a bubble. anything they don't like is fake and the deepstate. Things they do like are unequivocally true regardless of source

I was talking about this btw

[Dill]

(07-20-2021, 09:16 PM)CarolinaBengalFanGuy Wrote: Bengalfan4life27c Wrote:
It must be nice being a GOP/Trump supporters to live in a bubble. anything they don't like is fake and the deepstate. Things they do like are unequivocally true regardless of source

I was talking about this btw

I assumed you were. 

That's why I raised the issue of mass delusion--about the Russia "hoax," the impeachment "witch hunt," and the Big Lie. 

Those phenomena indicate an insulated sphere of groupthink based on disinformation, under the control of one person.

[hollodero]

(07-20-2021, 07:29 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Not really, on either.  Both Georgia and Texas' proposed voting law amendments are only to insure integrity to the elections, at a level of security less than some Blue States.  So, are you really putting facts out there, or are you parroting "talking points"?

Securing the integrity of the election, hm. I wonder how you would assess Trump calling the Georgia Secretary of State and urging him to just "find", as he said, the exact number of votes for him that would turn the result in his favor, because "give him a break". Would you say that is adding integrity to the elections? Presidents caling Secretaries of State and urging them - including with threats - to just change the results so it fits them better?

if Hillary had ever done that, calling in a favor to just turn an election around that was found to be fair and accurate by every official and every audit, it would be appalling for sure. 
Thankfully the GOP also was appalled in this case. Not by Trump though, by their Secretary of State for not obeying Trump. Appears super-integrity first.

[hollodero]

(07-20-2021, 08:22 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: The blurring of sex and gender.  It wasn't too long ago many on the left recognized a clear difference, now I'm not so sure.

Then let me assure you that the left still recognize a clear common difference between the male and female sex.

That they somehow do not or are no longer able to is such an overblown and overmentioned point.

They want to be inclusive towards people that feel said blurring within themselves, that cannot see themselves as so clearly male or female as most people do. It's also hard for me to fathom sometimes, but one can simply accept that some people feel that way and don't want to be put into a box, or into their birth-determined box. Being accepting of that does not justify to be made fun of so extensively by the "non-left", haha leftists don't know gender any longer, hahaha. It's uncalled for and it's cheap.

[hollodero]

(07-20-2021, 03:50 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Probably a similar percentage to that of the DNC that beleived that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election.

In all fairness though, Trump's son was caught trying to collude with Russia to win the 2016 election.

As was Paul Manafort.

As was Roger Stone.

So it seems hard to compare these two instances as equally out of touch with reality.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-21-2021, 11:27 AM)Dill Wrote: I assumed you were. 

That's why I raised the issue of mass delusion--about the Russia "hoax," the impeachment "witch hunt," and the Big Lie. 

Those phenomena indicate an insulated sphere of groupthink based on disinformation, under the control of one person.

Translation; if you disagree with Dill you're involved in a hivemind and can't think for yourself.

(07-21-2021, 12:13 PM)hollodero Wrote: Securing the integrity of the election, hm. I wonder how you would assess Trump calling the Georgia Secretary of State and urging him to just "find", as he said, the exact number of votes for him that would turn the result in his favor, because "give him a break". Would you say that is adding integrity to the elections? Presidents caling Secretaries of State and urging them - including with threats - to just change the results so it fits them better?

if Hillary had ever done that, calling in a favor to just turn an election around that was found to be fair and accurate by every official and every audit, it would be appalling for sure. 
Thankfully the GOP also was appalled in this case. Not by Trump though, by their Secretary of State for not obeying Trump. Appears super-integrity first.

Here's the issue with this thread.  You can not believe in Trump's "the election was stolen" story and still not have many, or any, issues with the voting restrictions being imposed in states like GA or TX.  Here's the real question that should be asked, are there states with even more restrictive voting laws already in place that are not red states, or even deep blue states such as Delaware?  If the answer to this question is yes then one must question why these new laws are inviting this level of scrutiny but these other states aren't being mentioned at all.

I'm much more liberal on this issue than most would assume.  I have zero issue with election day being a federal holiday.  I think any citizen of legal age who wants to to vote should be able to.  But I don't think things such as restricting early voting, absentee ballots or requiring an ID to vote prevent anyone who wants to vote from actually doing so.  If there are obstacles for some that they cannot personally overcome then change the purpose of groups that, for example collect absentee ballots for people, instead focus on assisting those people in getting what they need to vote, e.g. an ID, a birth certificate, etc.

[Dill]

(07-20-2021, 07:29 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Not really, on either.  Both Georgia and Texas' proposed voting law amendments are only to insure integrity to the elections, at a level of security less than some Blue States.  So, are you really putting facts out there, or are you parroting "talking points"?

You seem to think that "putting facts out there" is incompatible with Dem "talking points." Whereas my point would be that Dem talking points are fact based when it comes to issues of election integrity--it's the GOP's that are not.

Let's start here:

Is it a "fact" that GOP allegations of Dem fraud in Georgia have all proven baseless? 
https://factcheck.afp.com/georgia-video-ballots-suitcases-does-not-show-election-fraud

Is Trump's attempt to manipulate the Georgia vote via telephone a parroted "talking point" or a "fact"? 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIJU3M-kKhI

If it is a "fact," then the only thing which prevented that manipulation was one courageous GOP secretary of state.

And if that is the case, then how will Georgia's Election Integrity Act of 2021 (SB 202) fix that problem?

The answer is, it won't. Rather it will remove the Secretary of State's control of certification and election challenges, and give it
to a Republican dominated board, and ultimately the GOP dominated legislature--the same people who keep alleging baseless fraud.
https://www.vox.com/22352112/georgia-voting-sb-202-explained

The most significant provisions in SB 202 don’t create new election rules, exactly. Instead, they change who gets to determine how those rules are implemented — handing significant power to the Republicans who control the state legislature, called the General Assembly.. . . 

Under current law, key issues in election management — including decisions on disqualifying ballots and voter eligibility — are made by county boards of election. The new law allows the State Board of Elections to determine that these county boards are performing poorly, replacing the entire board with an administrator chosen at the state level.

At the same time, the bill enhances the General Assembly’s control over the state board.
It removes Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican who famously stood up to Trump’s attempts to overturn the election results in Georgia, from his role as both chair and voting member of the board. The new chair would be appointed by the legislature, which already appoints two members of the five-person board — meaning that a full majority of the board will now be appointed by the Republican-dominated body.

To simplify: The state board, which now will be fully controlled by the Republican legislative majority, is unilaterally empowered to take over (among other things) the process of disqualifying ballots across the state. Given that Georgia Republicans have helped promote false allegations of voter fraud, it’s easy to see why handing them so much power over local election authorities is so worrying.

The greatest area of concern here for Democrats is Fulton County, home to Atlanta and a disproportionate number of Black voters. Republicans have baselessly alleged that this Democratic bastion was a major site of fraud, citing (among other things) a purported video of ballot-stuffing in the county. Though official investigations, court cases, and independent fact-checks found no evidence of such fraud — in the video or otherwise — the myth that it happened persists.

The new bill would allow Republicans to seize control of how elections are administered in Fulton County and other heavily Democratic areas, disqualifying voters and ballots as they see fit.
.....................

Now people who are angry that Raffensberger stood his ground against Trump will get to decide which votes count.

And voter ID laws will not protect voters against GOP control baked into law.

[hollodero]

(07-21-2021, 12:33 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Translation; if you disagree with Dill you're involved in a hivemind and can't think for yourself.


Here's the issue with this thread.  You can not believe in Trump's "the election was stolen" story and still not have many, or any, issues with the voting restrictions being imposed in states like GA or TX.  Here's the real question that should be asked, are there states with even more restrictive voting laws already in place that are not red states, or even deep blue states such as Delaware?  If the answer to this question is yes then one must question why these new laws are inviting this level of scrutiny but these other states aren't being mentioned at all.

I'm much more liberal on this issue than most would assume.  I have zero issue with election day being a federal holiday.  I think any citizen of legal age who wants to to vote should be able to.  But I don't think things such as restricting early voting, absentee ballots or requiring an ID to vote prevent anyone who wants to vote from actually doing so.  If there are obstacles for some that they cannot personally overcome then change the purpose of groups that, for example collect absentee ballots for people, instead focus on assisting those people in getting what they need to vote, e.g. an ID, a birth certificate, etc.

Yeah, my position on all this is not so clearly in line with the democrat's point of view regarding many of these laws. It's often the Puerto Rico conundrum all over again for me. I figure the GOP does indeed introduce these laws because in their calculation it probably helps them. That doesn't mean these measures are all wrong or appalling. (I do think some of these laws take it too far though, but far from all.)

I do have a hard time though to listen to Trump or ardent Trump supporters that are all for securing the election integrity, while at the same time not finding it in themselves to condemn attempts to pressure officials into changing the official (and many times controlled and audited) results in Trump's favor. On the contrary, they have no issue with such attempts at all. That has zero to do with securing election integrity, it is the opposite of that and hence the whole "we're just about election integrity" point sounds real hollow if made by the very same people. And as someone advocating for consistency I figure you can acknowledge that point.

[Wes Mantooth]

(07-21-2021, 12:27 PM)hollodero Wrote: Then let me assure you that the left still recognize a clear common difference between the male and female sex.

That they somehow do not or are no longer able to is such an overblown and overmentioned point.

They want to be inclusive towards people that feel said blurring within themselves, that cannot see themselves as so clearly male or female as most people do. It's also hard for me to fathom sometimes, but one can simply accept that some people feel that way and don't want to be put into a box, or into their birth-determined box. Being accepting of that does not justify to be made fun of so extensively by the "non-left", haha leftists don't know gender any longer, hahaha. It's uncalled for and it's cheap.

Tell that to those on the left that are sending JK Rowling death threats for statements like these:

“If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn’t hate to speak the truth,” she tweeted. “The idea that women like me, who’ve been empathetic to trans people for decades, feeling kinship because they’re vulnerable in the same way as women—i.e., to male violence—‘hate’ trans people because they think sex is real and has lived consequences—is a nonsense.”

She continued, “I respect every trans person’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them. I’d march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans. At the same time, my life has been shaped by being female. I do not believe it’s hateful to say so.”

Or this: https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/

I'm not sure she could be more clear.  She says that she supports trans people but there is a difference between the lived experiences of a biological woman and a trans woman.  One could come up with any number of things to describe this scientifically.  Yet it doesn't matter to these people.

There's been a ton of different articles written attacking this woman, 100x the amount of tweets doing the same, people getting rid of and even burning her books, the actors in her films denouncing her, and even Stephen King weighing in against her. 

And this didn't happened to some woman on the right, whose known to be controversial on LGBTQ issues.  This is a woman who's been one of their biggest and most vocal supporters these last 2 decades.  The entire Harry Potter series is filled with inlcusionary messages.  The left is eating itself here, all because she dared to differentiate between sex and gender.

[Dill]

(07-21-2021, 12:33 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Translation; if you disagree with Dill you're involved in a hivemind and can't think for yourself.

LOL "Translation" looks a lot easier than actually addressing the points I made. 

So who here disagrees that Trump was lying about the stolen election, the Russia "hoax," and his obstruction of justice? 

Or that millions of his followers believe the lies?