Its all our (US) fault !

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Really? Okay who does regulate emissions stronger than the US ?

Before we delve into this any further, where did you find your reference for the claim that "the US has the tightest regulations and has spent more money and effort to reduce emissioins than any other country on eatrh"?

Out of curiosity, have you ever downloaded the Google Toolbar for your Internet browser? It comes with a spellchecker.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

Before we delve into this any further, where did you find your reference for the claim that "the US has the tightest regulations and has spent more money and effort to reduce emissioins than any other country on eatrh"?

Out of curiosity, have you ever downloaded the Google Toolbar for your Internet browser? It comes with a spellchecker.

How about this, you prove me wrong. I tried to do a little searching and found it very very difficult to get past global warming propaganda and find actual facts. Only thing I keep getting is how the US leads in Co2 emissions

But call it a gut feeling in the meantime. Its the reason we are so dependant on forigen oil, cannot build nuclear facilitys, why cars are so damn expensive, and industrys scramble to comply with these 'lax' requiements often finding it financially un-sustainable and shut their doors.

In the meantime I dont really give a crap about my bad spelling in a forum.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

How about this, you prove me wrong.

You made the claim. The burden of proof is on you.

I tried to do a little searching and found it very very difficult to get past actual facts and find something that backs up my wild assertation.

Fixed that for you.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

You made the claim. The burden of proof is on you.
.

Nah not really its not worth my time. Just pass it off as a 'wild accusation'.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

You made the claim. The burden of proof is on you....

Wrong!!! You are the one that challenged that assertion. You should be the one putting your money where your mouth is.


Why is everyone so backwards here when it comes to crap like this? Are you all just too lazy to bring something to the table? I imagine a bunch of opinionated fat people sitting around a computer challenging something without wanting to put the effort in.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

And since I'm at it, I'm deeply concerned about our president running around and telling the world that we are bad people. He is running around to Arabs and telling them that we are in the wrong and they are in the right. Now this! He is making people that hate us hate us worse for no reason!

WTH is he up to?

-S

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Wrong!!! You are the one that challenged that assertion. You should be the one putting your money where your mouth is.


Why is everyone so backwards here when it comes to crap like this? Are you all just too lazy to bring something to the table? I imagine a bunch of opinionated fat people sitting around a computer challenging something without wanting to put the effort in.

-S

The sky is polka dotted.

By your logic, I'm right. Assertions pulled out of someone's ass aren't taken as fact.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

The sky is polka dotted.

By your logic, I'm right. Assertions pulled out of someone's ass aren't taken as fact.

Unless you can back that up, I disregard your allegations.

-S

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Unless you can back that up, I disregard your allegations.

-S

To quote someone:

Wrong!!! You are the one that challenged that assertion. You should be the one putting your money where your mouth is.

Sooooo....Exactly. Thank you for proving my point.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Wrong!!! You are the one that challenged that assertion. You should be the one putting your money where your mouth is.

If I make an assertion:
"There is a invisible unicorn in my garden."
And you challenge that assertion:
"Unicorns don't exist; there can not be on in your garden"
Where do you think the burden of proof is?
If it is with "the one that challenged that assertion", then good looking
finding the invisible unicorn; it is very, very small.

The burden of proof is always with the person who makes the assertion.
If someone challenges him, it is up to person who makes the assertion
to prove them wrong, not the other way around.

It is up to me to prove I have a unicorn, not up to you to prove I don't.

[Stealth Hunter]

No need to get worked up about Subman, guys. It appears that I've misjudged him in the past. He really does know nothing about intelligent debates or what makes them so. I gave him more credit than he deserves. Furthermore, why don't we all just disregard what he posts? Maybe then he'll go away lol.

As it stands, I'm still waiting for a citation, SteamWake.

[Max2147]

I actually think that mookie's claim about the polka-dotted sky is more credible than SteamWake's claim about the US having the toughest emission regulations. Now what, Subman?

Honestly, the facts matter. By their very nature, facts can't be something that you make up. Otherwise, what's the point of your fact if I can just make up another fact to counter it?

SteamWake makes up the "fact" that the US has the toughest emission regulations out there? Fine. I make up the "fact" that the US has the weakest emission regulations in the entire world, worse than China, India, Zimbabwe, and Somalia. If he doesn't have to back up his "fact" then I shouldn't have to back up mine.

[antikristuseke]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Wrong!!! You are the one that challenged that assertion. You should be the one putting your money where your mouth is.


-S

No, SUBMAN1, you are wrong here, very wrong in fact. The burden of proof allways rests on the one making a claim, regardless of how lagical said claim is it is only evidence that can validate it. Not taking assertions at face value, regardless of wether you like them or not, is called being concistent, something you seem to have trouble with.

Edit: Damnit, should hare read the rest of hte thread before having a knee jerk reaction at subbies post, aparently everything I say in this post has llready been told him ad nauseum and he still doesnt listen, imagine that.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by antikristuseke

No, SUBMAN1, you are wrong here, very wrong in fact. The burden of proof allways rests on the one making a claim, regardless of how lagical said claim is it is only evidence that can validate it. Not taking assertions at face value, regardless of wether you like them or not, is called being concistent, something you seem to have trouble with.

Edit: Damnit, should hare read the rest of hte thread before having a knee jerk reaction at subbies post, aparently everything I say in this post has llready been told him ad nauseum and he still doesnt listen, imagine that.

Without getting into the polemics* of this thread, what you have said is absolutely the truth. In the scientific and academic tradition, the party making the assertion is the same that holds the burden of proof. In the case above, it is the owner of the garden who must prove the existence of his invisible unicorn. In the scope of the original argument, the burden rests upon SteamWake.


*used very liberally here

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

How about this, you prove me wrong.

You were the one who made the original claim, ergo you must provide evidence. I have made no such claim; I simply have asked for evidence. It's quite simple really. If you can't provide it, then your statement is useless, not to mention baseless and evidently absent of factual backing.

Originally Posted by SteamWake

I tried to do a little searching and found it very very difficult to get past global warming propaganda and find actual facts.

Dig and find it, or admit it was not based around cold, hard facts and merely personal feeling/opinion.

Originally Posted by SteamWake

But call it a gut feeling in the meantime.

So it isn't based on hard fact. You can't apparently can't find sources either.

Thank you for clearing this issue up.

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Its the reason we are so dependant on forigen oil, cannot build nuclear facilitys, why cars are so damn expensive, and industrys scramble to comply with these 'lax' requiements often finding it financially un-sustainable and shut their doors.

And this is still based around your original claim that "the US has the tightest regulations and has spent more money and effort to reduce emissioins than any other country on eatrh", which still remains without a source of any kind.

We aren't drilling off our opposing coasts for oil because of the environmental ecosystem implications it would have, not because of CO2 levels; this has caused us to become dependent on foreign imports more than anything.

Additionally, nuclear facilities emit very low levels of CO2. The main problem with them is the waste they produce must be disposed of in a safe manner, and even then you'll be contaminating the environment to some extent. They're also expensive to build (takes a long time to construct them, too; up to a decade at the cost of several billion dollars; here's a fine example: http://www.tampabay.com/news/busines...icle701322.ece), maintain, and decomission.

Cars are now expensive because of inflation, not because of environmental laws revolving around the CO2 issue. It's not just cars though. When was the last time you went to the market? EVERYTHING has gotten higher in cost.

What industries? I haven't heard of any. Can you list some with a news article on the issue?

Originally Posted by SteamWake

In the meantime I dont really give a crap about my bad spelling in a forum.

You should. People will have a hard time understanding you.

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Nah not really its not worth my time.

No really it is. Otherwise, what reason do we have to trust what you say? Moreover, WHY should we trust you?