LOL! Donald Trump: "Global Warming threatens my golf course!"

[2MuchMark]

I ... I just... for fuck sakes.

Donald Trump calls global warming a hoax, until it threatens his golf course

A statement of environmental impact filed by the Trump International Golf Links & Hotel Ireland, owned by the presumptive Republican nominee, cited rising sea levels and extreme weather due to global warming as the reason the company needed to build a seawall to protect its coastal resort, Politico reported Monday. The sea wall is necessary protect the course from “global warming and its effects.”

And also:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...s-golf-course/

Sigh. Just, sigh...

[Brian8377]

This is proof he will build the wall

[Bladewire]

Originally Posted by Brian8377

This is proof he will build the wall

Actions are proof, talk is cheap.

[SuckOnThis]

But but BENGHAZI!

Hillary gave a speech!

[Bladewire]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

But but BENGHAZI!

Hillary gave a speech!

[RebelR]

I'm curious as to what in the article, points out that Trump has changed his position on Climate Change?

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

But but BENGHAZI!

Hillary gave a speech!

We need to have another investigation into Benghazi.

And the speeches... Why are we discussing how much money a former Secretary of State makes on speeches while the other candidate makes BILLIONS from illegal immigrant labor?

[dyna mo]

here's a less sensationalized viewpoint that just came out a few days ago, before the sound bite drama in the op, Trump has republicans worried that he's to the left of them on the environment.

Republican leaders worry that Mr. Trump’s views, his climate-denying Twitter messages notwithstanding, could end up somewhere left of the party’s mainstream.

“I think there is concern about where he stands because he hasn’t come out strongly one way or another,” said a Republican aide who insisted on anonymity because she was not authorized to speak publicly about the matter.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/sc...in-cramer.html

[oppoten]

Originally Posted by **********

I ... I just... for fuck sakes.

Sigh. Just, sigh...

Spit it out...

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

here's a less sensationalized viewpoint that just came out a few days ago, before the sound bite drama in the op, Trump has republicans worried that he's to the left of them on the environment.

Republican leaders worry that Mr. Trump’s views, his climate-denying Twitter messages notwithstanding, could end up somewhere left of the party’s mainstream.

“I think there is concern about where he stands because he hasn’t come out strongly one way or another,” said a Republican aide who insisted on anonymity because she was not authorized to speak publicly about the matter.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/sc...in-cramer.html

In other words he does believe in climate change but just says it's bullshit to give the Trumpanzees a hard on.

[Bladewire]

Originally Posted by RebelR

I'm curious as to what in the article, points out that Trump has changed his position on Climate Change?

The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/265895292191248385

[SuckOnThis]

In other news....


Trump hoped you lost your house in 2008

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

In other words he does believe in climate change but just says it's bullshit just to give the Trumpanzees a hard on.

from what i can gather, he believes in global warming but not completely sold on man-made global warming.

"HIATT: Last one: You think climate change is a real thing? Is there human-caused climate change?

TRUMP: I think there?s a change in weather. I am not a great believer in man-made climate change. I?m not a great believer. There is certainly a change in weather that goes ? if you look, they had global cooling in the 1920s and now they have global warming, although now they don?t know if they have global warming. They call it all sorts of different things; now they?re using ?extreme weather? I guess more than any other phrase. I am not ? I know it hurts me with this room, and I know it?s probably a killer with this room ? but I am not a believer. Perhaps there?s a minor effect, but I?m not a big believer in man-made climate change."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/sc...in-cramer.html

[Paul Markham]

This article has to be a hoax. The great man has told us what global warming is.







https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...s-golf-course/

Was he lying then, lying now, or lying both times? Can you explain, please Dyna Moo

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

This article has to be a hoax. The great man has told us what global warming is.







https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...s-golf-course/

Was he lying then, lying now, or lying both times? Can you explain, please Dyna Moo

gofuckyourself. you, like some others, seem to think that because i try and inform myself on wtf is actually happening re: Trump that i'm an apologist for posting, you know, wtf is actually happening with Trump.

if you can't carry on an actual point-counterpoint without the name calling and putting me on the fucking hook for explaining Trump to you, then don't even fucking bother with me.

[RebelR]

Originally Posted by Bladewire

The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonal...95292191248385

The article is arguing semantics. When climate change (I believe that's the term now used instead of global warming) is argued, it always hinges on whether the change is naturally occuring, or man made. The article deliberately plays on the meaning behind global warming.

Articles from the left or right biased media, I don't care what it is, that deliberately try and mislead the reader to push an agenda, I have little time for. Gone are the days when the media presented the facts and allowed the reader to form an opinion for themselves.

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

TRUMP: I think there’s a change in weather. I am not a great believer in man-made climate change. I’m not a great believer. There is certainly a change in weather that goes – if you look, they had global cooling in the 1920s and now they have global warming, although now they don’t know if they have global warming. They call it all sorts of different things; now they’re using “extreme weather” I guess more than any other phrase. I am not – I know it hurts me with this room, and I know it’s probably a killer with this room – but I am not a believer. Perhaps there’s a minor effect, but I’m not a big believer in man-made climate change."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/sc...in-cramer.html

Ok...does this inarticulate gibberish sound like the thoughts of an informed, intelligent person? Can you answer that question directly with a yes or no answer?

Saying either yes or no won't support your obligatory contrarian devil's advocate position which you take in every argument, so I'm expecting you to talk around it.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by bronco67

Ok...does this inarticulate gibberish sound like the thoughts of an informed, intelligent person? Can you answer that question directly with a yes or no answer?

Saying either yes or no won't support your obligatory contrarian devil's advocate position which you take in every argument, so I'm expecting you to talk around it.

you too fail to realize where i'm coming from . i've even spelled it out for you here plenty of times. so i couldn't really give a fuck what you expect, you're one of the ones that seems to think my pragmatic approach to understanding the Trump phenomenon while stating unequivocally and often that Bernie is my guy all while have a fucking bernie avatar is too much to comprehend.


nevertheless, i'll try it one more time because i'm right and you are wrong.

AGAIN bernie is my guy and i saw a long time ago that attacks on Trump only propel him, and in fucking fact, they've propelled him to winning the Republican nod. you and people like you have been attacking him since his mexico rapist sound bite.

so it's beyond fucking clear to me that it's way past time people like you and all the other anti-Trumpsters realize that attacking him doesn't work. you're fucking it up for winning.

again:

you and simpleton liberals like you are the ones fucking it up for democrats.


you're going to be scratching your fucking head the day after the election incredulous to how the fuck Trump won but it will be because of you attacking him. especially for trivial election shit like fucking global warming. people don't give a shit about global warming this election cycle.

anyway, sure, i'll answer your stupid fucking question. i couldn't give a fuck what Trump's view is on global warming. he's not my fucking guy.

[Sednub997]

yeah that mean he is against the global warming to make that clear use the golf course

[Rochard]

he should build a wall.

[plaster]

Originally Posted by Rochard

he should build a wall.

Word! Who's going to pay for this wall?

[crockett]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

here's a less sensationalized viewpoint that just came out a few days ago, before the sound bite drama in the op, Trump has republicans worried that he's to the left of them on the environment.

Republican leaders worry that Mr. Trump?s views, his climate-denying Twitter messages notwithstanding, could end up somewhere left of the party?s mainstream.

?I think there is concern about where he stands because he hasn?t come out strongly one way or another,? said a Republican aide who insisted on anonymity because she was not authorized to speak publicly about the matter.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/sc...in-cramer.html

The funny part you didn't seem to grasp in that less sensationalized version, is that tje right openly admits they see the environment as a political issue, not a we need to protect it issue..

How can anyone support a group of cock gobbler who make everything a political issue then try to turn around and claim the other guys turned it into a political issue..

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by crockett

The funny part you didn't seem to grasp in that less sensationalized version, is that tje right openly admits they see the environment as a political issue, not a we need to protect it issue..

How can anyone support a group of cock gobbler who make everything a political issue then try to turn around and claim the other guys turned it into a political issue..

the funnier part is you didn't seem to grasp that what i'm trying to do is understand the enemy better.

it's like none of you have read sun tzu. keep underestimating and not understanding your enemy and watch him defeat you. just like what is happening irl. Trump is winning and that's because liberals don't even try to understand Trump and they certainly underestimate him. and throw in a truly weak candidate to defeat him, hills, and you're looking at a loss.

[dyna mo]

sun tzu on strategic attack:




知彼知己，百戰不殆；不知彼而知己，一勝一負；不知彼，不知己，每戰必殆

It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.

Variant translations
If you know others and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know others but know yourself, you win one and lose one; if you do not know others and do not know yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.

Know your enemy and know yourself, find naught in fear for 100 battles. Know yourself but not your enemy, find level of loss and victory.

Know thy enemy but not yourself, wallow in defeat every time.

[Joshua G]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

it's like none of you have read sun tzu. keep underestimating and not understanding your enemy and watch him defeat you. just like what is happening irl. Trump is winning and that's because liberals don't even try to understand Trump and they certainly underestimate him. and throw in a truly weak candidate to defeat him, hills, and you're looking at a loss.

that is correct. crockett et al are the dumbasses in back of the class, with brains, but never applied themselves, & make judgments based on ignorance. they will believe right to the bitter end that trump has no shot, all based on watching late night comedy bits.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Joshua G

that is correct. crockett et al are the dumbasses in back of the class, with brains, but never applied themselves, & make judgments based on ignorance. they will believe right to the bitter end that trump has no shot, all based on watching late night comedy bits.

Why you so angry all the time? Why don't you show us on the doll where the liberal touched you..

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

gofuckyourself. you, like some others, seem to think that because i try and inform myself on wtf is actually happening re: Trump that i'm an apologist for posting, you know, wtf is actually happening with Trump.

if you can't carry on an actual point-counterpoint without the name calling and putting me on the fucking hook for explaining Trump to you, then don't even fucking bother with me.

So despite what he posted on Twitter, he meant "Man-made Global Warming".

He needs to be a lot clearer then. Like when he says the US should go bomb people in the ME, then he says the US shouldn't get involved, then he says they should get involved. He flip-flops so much on issues it's hard to know what he will do.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by RebelR

The article is arguing semantics. When climate change (I believe that's the term now used instead of global warming) is argued, it always hinges on whether the change is naturally occuring, or man made. The article deliberately plays on the meaning behind global warming.

Articles from the left or right biased media, I don't care what it is, that deliberately try and mislead the reader to push an agenda, I have little time for. Gone are the days when the media presented the facts and allowed the reader to form an opinion for themselves.

The facts are there. Global warming is created by both Natural Rotation and Man. The devastating effects is will cause on Man are made worse by Man.

Global Warming is a natural phenomenon. The damage Man is causing to the Earth is making it worse. Anyone who doesn't get that is a moron.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by bronco67

Ok...does this inarticulate gibberish sound like the thoughts of an informed, intelligent person? Can you answer that question directly with a yes or no answer?

Saying either yes or no won't support your obligatory contrarian devil's advocate position which you take in every argument, so I'm expecting you to talk around it.

He's not addressing the intelligent. He's going after the "Common Man" vote. They see every attempt to limit them speeding up global warming as an infringement on their rights. The US is the biggest consumer and the biggest polluter, be that in China where they produce goods for the world.

We're losing rain forest at an unsustainable rate, ploughing up fields and concreting the areas, reproducing at a rate that means billions will starve to death, losing wildlife at an unprecedented rate. The debate is over, Man is assisting the Natural World to make the coming disaster more lethal.

Saw a program recently about Las Vegas running out of water. Instead of turning off the fountains, consuming less water, putting up the price, etc. They proposed they build more but smaller dams upstream. Which will mean even less flows through the system.

Lake Mead and others are stark evidence of what Man is doing.



Rain Forest loss.



Droughts.



But don't worry a city in the Desert is still keeping the fountains on.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Joshua G

I have nothing of intelligence or anything interesting to say, therfore I will just copy and paste dumb shit that sounds smart. I will then complain about liberals so the guys on my team think I'm cool and one of them.

You don't say?

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by RebelR

The article is arguing semantics. When climate change (I believe that's the term now used instead of global warming) is argued, it always hinges on whether the change is naturally occuring, or man made. The article deliberately plays on the meaning behind global warming.

Articles from the left or right biased media, I don't care what it is, that deliberately try and mislead the reader to push an agenda, I have little time for. Gone are the days when the media presented the facts and allowed the reader to form an opinion for themselves.

[romeo22]

seems no water no life

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

you too fail to realize where i'm coming from . i've even spelled it out for you here plenty of times. so i couldn't really give a fuck what you expect, you're one of the ones that seems to think my pragmatic approach to understanding the Trump phenomenon while stating unequivocally and often that Bernie is my guy all while have a fucking bernie avatar is too much to comprehend.


nevertheless, i'll try it one more time because i'm right and you are wrong.

AGAIN bernie is my guy and i saw a long time ago that attacks on Trump only propel him, and in fucking fact, they've propelled him to winning the Republican nod. you and people like you have been attacking him since his mexico rapist sound bite.

so it's beyond fucking clear to me that it's way past time people like you and all the other anti-Trumpsters realize that attacking him doesn't work. you're fucking it up for winning.

again:

you and simpleton liberals like you are the ones fucking it up for democrats.


you're going to be scratching your fucking head the day after the election incredulous to how the fuck Trump won but it will be because of you attacking him. especially for trivial election shit like fucking global warming. people don't give a shit about global warming this election cycle.

anyway, sure, i'll answer your stupid fucking question. i couldn't give a fuck what Trump's view is on global warming. he's not my fucking guy.

No one here believes you like Bernie Sanders.

and you did exactly what I said you would, which is to not answer the question.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by bronco67

No one here believes you like Bernie Sanders.

and you did exactly what I said you would, which is to not answer the question.

that only proves my point, liberals fail to believe reality. regardless of being slapped in the face with it multiple times.


that's because i'm not here to be deposed by bronco67 esq.

[Paul Markham]

Now I'm now expert on coastal erosion. BUT!!

Anyone who builds a golf course on the West Coast of Ireland and didn't think of the consequences is a fucking moron.



If that person also built a golf course on a coastline where a wind farm might be placed. He also qualifies for the tag stupid.



Should he plan to build a five-star hotel overlooking trashy farms. He's certifiable.



His problem is he thinks everyone will roll over or stick their asses in the air. Or that the wind won't blow to hard on the West Coast of Ireland.

Still some believe he will be fine given the biggest armed forces in the World and their lives to play with.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

that only proves my point, liberals fail to believe reality. regardless of being slapped in the face with it multiple times.

Trump also fails to believe in reality. Proven by my last post.

As for you supporting Sanders, not convinced.

[EonBlue]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

He's not addressing the intelligent. He's going after the "Common Man" vote. They see every attempt to limit them speeding up global warming as an infringement on their rights. The US is the biggest consumer and the biggest polluter, be that in China where they produce goods for the world.

We're losing rain forest at an unsustainable rate, ploughing up fields and concreting the areas, reproducing at a rate that means billions will starve to death, losing wildlife at an unprecedented rate. The debate is over, Man is assisting the Natural World to make the coming disaster more lethal.

Saw a program recently about Las Vegas running out of water. Instead of turning off the fountains, consuming less water, putting up the price, etc. They proposed they build more but smaller dams upstream. Which will mean even less flows through the system.

Lake Mead and others are stark evidence of what Man is doing.



Rain Forest loss.



Droughts.



But don't worry a city in the Desert is still keeping the fountains on.

Yes, rain forest loss is a huge problem. That's why we should spend trillions trying to reduce CO2 and forget about piddly little problems like this. Along the way we'll ingore the fact that rain forest loss leads to increased CO2.

And it's laughable that you think droughts are a new man made problem caused by global warming. Mega droughts have hit the southwest US and other areas of the world in the past and they had nothing to do with man or global warming.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megadrought




.

[2MuchMark]

Originally Posted by crockett

Why you so angry all the time? Why don't you show us on the doll where the liberal touched you..

Joshua G needs a hug!

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by EonBlue

Yes, rain forest loss is a huge problem. That's why we should spend trillions trying to reduce CO2 and forget about piddly little problems like this. Along the way we'll ingore the fact that rain forest loss leads to increased CO2.

And it's laughable that you think droughts are a new man made problem caused by global warming. Mega droughts have hit the southwest US and other areas of the world in the past and they had nothing to do with man or global warming.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megadrought

.

Droughts in one country or ones that pass aren't the problem. It's the accumulation of problems that will cause the decimation of populations and wipe some out.

You're doing what climate change deniers do, selecting small bits of evidence to support the wrong view. Global Warming works on cycles of 1,000s to 100,000 of years. A world population of 5000,000 found it hard to cope. 7 billion can't cope,

[12clicks]

so basically its only ok for liberals to take advantage of this scam?

[beerptrol]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

so basically its only ok for liberals to take advantage of this scam?

If that isn't the pot calling the kettle black!

[EonBlue]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Droughts in one country or ones that pass aren't the problem. It's the accumulation of problems that will cause the decimation of populations and wipe some out.

You're doing what climate change deniers do, selecting small bits of evidence to support the wrong view. Global Warming works on cycles of 1,000s to 100,000 of years. A world population of 5000,000 found it hard to cope. 7 billion can't cope,

Where is this so called accumulation of problems supposedly tied to global warming that you speak of? Humans are doing far more damage to other humans than global warming ever has or likely ever will. Besides, you seem to be in favour of wiping out some populations so why do you even care if some might be threatened by global warming?

You're doing what climate change alarmists do, selecting small bits of evidence to support the wrong view. [gibberish deleted]




.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Trump also fails to believe in reality. Proven by my last post.

As for you supporting Sanders, not convinced.

Ahahahahahahahaahahahahaha

Like I give 1 single fuck about convincing you who I support for Potus of my country.


You're too fucking stupid to even see that I get blasted from both sides for going otr with Sanders being my guy.

You're too fucking stupid to even ask why Sanders is my guy prior to your stupid fucking view that I'm supposed to convince you that Sanders is my guy. What the fuck reason would there even be for that.

You fucking joke.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

Ahahahahahahahaahahahahaha

Like I give 1 single fuck about convincing you who I support for Potus of my country.


You're too fucking stupid to even see that I get blasted from both sides for going otr with Sanders being my guy.

You're too fucking stupid to even ask why Sanders is my guy prior to your stupid fucking view that I'm supposed to convince you that Sanders is my guy. What the fuck reason would there even be for that.

You fucking joke.

You don't realise I don't give a fuck what you think about me.

I care why you keep supporting a guy that could take us into WW3, will bankrupt the US, and certainly a danger to the US.

So why do you prefer Sanders?

I like what he has to say except on migration.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by EonBlue

Where is this so called accumulation of problems supposedly tied to global warming that you speak of? Humans are doing far more damage to other humans than global warming ever has or likely ever will. Besides, you seem to be in favour of wiping out some populations so why do you even care if some might be threatened by global warming?

You're doing what climate change alarmists do, selecting small bits of evidence to support the wrong view. [gibberish deleted]
.

Yes humans are killing humans at a faster pace than climate change.

50,000 to 250,000 they don't know.

Somalia famine 'killed 260,000 people

As for accumulated. Well, you're not getting it. Or doing the Nelson Blind Eye trick.









Now rather than just say it isn't so. Find evidence to back up your theory.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

You don't realise I don't give a fuck what you think about me.

I care why you keep supporting a guy that could take us into WW3, will bankrupt the US, and certainly a danger to the US.

So why do you prefer Sanders?

I like what he has to say except on migration.

Clown, you think I'm going to take the time to explain to you why I support Sanders after you post you're not convinced who I support in my country for Potus?

Gofuckyourself.

After your fucking country jumped in to help kickstart start BOTH world wars you claim I'm supposed to convince you my choice isn't Trump because you of all people think he'll start ww3?

Gofuckyourself.

You confuse my view of reality as support. You, like other simpletons, think that in order to support sanders I'm supposed to high 5 with you over bad-mouthing Trump.

Gofuckyourself.