# Sam Stone - Why do you hate America? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 30, 2010, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sam-stone-why-do-you-hate-america/552037 "2010-08-30T20:07:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sam-stone-why-do-you-hate-america/552037/241 "2010-09-04T00:19:53Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > You seem to think that I regard Sam as some deity, so you delight in pointing out where he and I disagree. Well, guess what, I don’t think that and I am perfectly fine with our disagreement. Fair enough Mr. Gas Bag. > [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > As far as “the science” on AGW–I’m the one following the science. I am perfectly happy accepting that the earth is warming and man caused it, as soon as that is proven by science that is free from the effects of politics and doesn’t rely so heavily on such subjective modeling. Feel free to declare victory and post a bunch of links, as is your wont. One link will suffice to demonstrate that you are not following the science, and it is posted to the edification of others and the demonstration of your hot air properties. > **[Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says](https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php)** > > Examines the science and arguments of global warming skepticism. Common objections like 'global warming is caused by the sun', 'temperature has changed naturally in the past' or 'other planets are warming too' are examined to see what the science... > [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Here’s something else for you to think about, as far as “the science”–why don’t you think that it’s too late to do anything about global warming? A lot of scientists are saying that. Why don’t you believe it? Why are you a denier on that point? You will need a link for that, but at this time I conclude that you are just a chicken shit coward as you are demonstrating that you are incapable of finding proper links that support your sorry points. I will have to assume that your feeble brain is just smart enough to know that your sources of information regarding this issue are crappy. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sam-stone-why-do-you-hate-america/552037/242 "2010-09-04T01:21:19Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > You will need a link for that, but at this time I conclude that you are just a chicken shit coward as you are demonstrating that you are incapable of finding proper links that support your sorry points. > > I will have to assume that your feeble brain is just smart enough to know that your sources of information regarding this issue are crappy. Here you go: > [@](#): > > Many of the best-informed scientists agree that we have left it too late to prevent anthropogenic climate change from bringing on a global catastrophe. Whether this results in actual extinction or merely the ruin of civilization is a matter they are still debating. From here: [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/clay-naff/the-end-of-times-do-scien\_b\_671489.html](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/clay-naff/the-end-of-times-do-scien_b_671489.html) I posted a link, so I win–that’s how it works in Gigo-land, right? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sam-stone-why-do-you-hate-america/552037/243 "2010-09-04T01:35:01Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > > [@GIGObuster](#): > > > > You will need a link for that, but at this time I conclude that you are just a chicken shit coward as you are demonstrating that you are incapable of finding proper links that support your sorry points. > > > > I will have to assume that your feeble brain is just smart enough to know that your sources of information regarding this issue are crappy. > > Here you go: > > > [@](#): > > > > Many of the best-informed scientists agree that we have left it too late to prevent anthropogenic climate change from bringing on a global catastrophe. Whether this results in actual extinction or merely the ruin of civilization is a matter they are still debating. > > From here: [The End of Times: Do Scientists and Fundamentalists Concur? | HuffPost Religion](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/clay-naff/the-end-of-times-do-scien_b_671489.html) > > I posted a link, so I win–that’s how it works in Gigo-land, right? Nope, feeble as predicted, I already posted before that the Huffignton Post is horrible for science matters. The pessimism you are referring is about being able to “limiting climate change to 1 or 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.” [http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/04/pessimism-reigns-at-climate-powwow/](http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/04/pessimism-reigns-at-climate-powwow/) And that was the reason why in Copenhagen the scientists settled for 2.0 degrees. The Huffpo writer is just taking things out of context to claim that most scientists are talking about doomsday. So, you always have to find if the information fits what the source was talking about. > **[potholer54](https://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/u/4/_PWDFzWt-Ag)** > > The purpose of this channel is to correct false scientific information on the internet. I am a former science journalist and geologist (see the "Who I am" video or channel trailer). > > Feel free to post. The only rules are : > > DON'T... > 1)... But so far you have not learned anything, you just demonstrated that you know how to Google vomit. Moron. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sam-stone-why-do-you-hate-america/552037/244 "2010-09-04T01:46:37Z")
Right, Huffington Post is of course terrible, but some website called “Skeptical Science” is holy scripture. Anyway, you are the one showing your ignorance here. You are not aware of the many scientists saying its too late to do anything. You are denying the science they do. You are a denier. More links: > **[It's too late to stop climate change, argues Ross Gelbspan -- so what do we...](https://grist.org/article/beyond-the-point-of-no-return/)** > > As the pace of global warming kicks into overdrive, the hollow optimism of climate activists, along with the desperate responses of some of the world's most prominent climate scientists, is preventing us from focusing on the survival requirements of... > **[Global Warming: It's Too Late](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/global-warming-its-too-la_b_438848)** > > In an exclusive Fresh Dialogues interview, Robert Ballard, ocean explorer of Titanic fame says, "If you want to know the truth: it's too late. All the ice is going to melt. There's a lag and it's already in the system." > **[BBC News - Today - Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'](http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8594000/8594561.stm)** > > Professor James Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has said it is too late to try and save the planet. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sam-stone-why-do-you-hate-america/552037/245 "2010-09-04T02:00:09Z")
I deny any suggestion that Oreos are as good as Hyrdox. That does not make me a “denier”. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sam-stone-why-do-you-hate-america/552037/246 "2010-09-04T02:02:32Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Right, Huffington Post is of course terrible, but some website called “Skeptical Science” is holy scripture. Coming with more evidence of moronic powers is really not helpful Mr. Hot Air **Rand**. The links show that published scientific papers are supporting their say so’s. But here you only demonstrated that your ignorance is a willful thing and not just a coincidence. > [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Anyway, you are the one showing your ignorance here. You are not aware of the many scientists saying its too late to do anything. You are denying the science they do. You are a denier. And I’ll leave others to read the links and see if the scientists really said that it is too late to do anything, the pessimism is about seeing governments doing anything now and to the level that is needed, a completely different thing than preaching doomsday. Everyone can see the difference, except morons. And on top of that a moronic and clear contradiction, if the problem is serious why your insistence that there is no problem at all? > [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > More links: > > [It's too late to stop climate change, argues Ross Gelbspan -- so what do we do now? | Grist](http://www.grist.org/article/beyond-the-point-of-no-return/) > > [Global Warming: It's Too Late | HuffPost Impact](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alison-van-diggelen/global-warming-its-too-la_b_438848.html) > > [BBC News - Today - Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'](http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8594000/8594561.stm) More stupidity. The Grist writer is not talking about doom but that it is too late to prevent several bad effects in the future, the point has been that it is moronic to talk about doomsday. Again with the discredited Huff po. And the BBC link is about James Lovelock, that **even on this thread** was denounced by me as an alarmist that is dismissed by the sources I look at for reliable Climate Change information. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sam-stone-why-do-you-hate-america/552037/247 "2010-09-04T02:16:04Z")
BTW, Many who are here also know that I mentioned before that scientists expect that the temperature will increase, the main point is that curtailing CO2 and other global warming gases now will prevent **even worse** temperature increases, so your point of me ignoring what the scientists said is false. It is known by the majority of researchers already, the controversy now is if 2 degrees will be safe or good and if we will be able to reach and maintain that limit. And many do agree that 4 or more degrees are possible by 2100\*\* if nothing is done\*\*. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sam-stone-why-do-you-hate-america/552037/248 "2010-09-06T02:25:40Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I don’t care if there’s 100 anti-Obama threads or just one. What I care about is that if someone starts one, it’s treated the same way that an anti-Republican thread is - i.e. don’t attack the poster for being a ‘partisan’ or subject their OP to a level of scrutiny you wouldn’t give to a pro-Obama or anti-Bush post. This would be great, do you think you can get the conservative members of this board to go along with that? Or is it your belief that conservatives never attack the poster for being “partisan?” Do you really think anti-Republican threads are treated differently than anti-Obama threads? > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > For example, look at the supposed errors that got my last thread pitted and myself labeled as a ‘joke’. I said that 'three strong Obama supporters have written scathing editorials against the administration’s policies", and then I listed them. You should at least realize that there was a ‘tone’ to your thread. The whole thing comes across as a big “neener neener your team sucks.” What were you expecting? It was complete partisan bullshit. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I will grant you that the adjective ‘strong’ may not have been necessary. And one of the three was only a supporter of some of Obama’s policies, and not necessarily of Obama himself. Another argument was that one of the three op-eds wasn’t really that strong in its condemnation. All fair, debatable points. But not exactly egregious errors, and all points could be reasonably debated without resorting to ad-hominem attacks or dismissals followed by rolleyes. So what did you expect? You were both overly aggressive, and wrong at the same time. You’re implied intent was that “Obama loyalists” were abandoning ship, and that proves Obama sucks, and that means Republicans rule. But you were wrong, so what was left to be \*reasonably \*debated? What’s worse is that you got called out and then sulked. You thought you had a big win but didn’t. Did you need someone to show you new Obama supporters? Does that balance out people jumping ship? > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Instead, we nitpicky details elevated to the level of lies, we got the usual character assassination crap and personal insults, we got a meta-discussion about my single-tracked anti-Obama brain, and the inevitable questions regarding my motivation, why I post on American politics as a Canadian, etc. Welcome to the SDMB, were you unfamiliar with this behavior? Do you think it only happens towards conservatives? > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > It’s true that I could have gotten a better result had I worded my OP in a less tendentious manner. I could have written it gently, being careful not to ruffle any feathers. I could have formed some statements as questions. But the fact is, if the result would have had any negative implications for Obama, I still would have been attacked by the usual suspects. That’s right, you could have worded it better, and you probably knew that before hand. Also, if you know there will be attacks, you should be better prepared. It was little more than an anti-Obama rant, so of course people are going to look at the “harsh criticisms” and they are going to look at the level of “support” each person had for Obama. Your “debate” hinged on the criticisms being both “harsh” and from “ex-Obama supporters.” So if neither was true, what are you left with. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > In the meantime, I run into gross errors all the time uttered by lefties on this board, and I let them go if they’re not central to the person’s point or if the correct answer doesn’t materially change their point, because I think that’s the fair way to debate. Bullshit. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Or if I correct them, I give the person the benefit of the doubt and assume they were simply mistaken, and not lying or acting as some shill for a political group, or just blurting out talking points from the DNC. Again, more bullshit. You are not a saint. And that’s fine, you don’t need to be a saint no one wants you to be a saint, nor expects you to be a saint. Just to act like a martyr every time you get called on your bullshit. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > The bottom line is that any conservative or anti-Obama post on this board automatically qualifies as ‘poking the bear’. There are a number of posters who simply become outraged any time I post something they don’t want to hear, and they start flinging poo. **Hentor** has made a career out of spending his time researching every post I’ve made in the past 11 years looking for ‘gotcha’ arguments or inconsistencies he can then use to attack me. China Guy demands that I go back and bring forward evidence that I am who I say I am. These are all personal attacks. They have nothing to do with what claims I happen to be making at any given time. Except the problem with what you wrote is that you assume all of the things you write are without fault and thus never deserving of poo. It’s not that you write something “conservative” it’s that you write something that shits on liberalism or socialism. Do you see the difference? When you shit on someone else’s beliefs or idiology, they are going to throw poo back. It’s the law of the jungle. But more importantly, there are a lot of shitty posters on this board. You have then on your side, we have then on our side. Unless you think poo is only thrown by liberals. So at the very least, you should be aware that if you start a thread about, “Obama sucks because he has the most fiscally irresponsible federal policies in U.S. history” the first thing people are going to do is look at what other president had fiscally irresponsible federal policies. Then they’re going to look at what you said about those presidents. In the end, they’ll probably find that you showed support for a president with even worse fiscal policies. So what does that say about you? You liked person x when he ran a deficit, you hate person y when he runs a deficit. As \*\*Bricker \*\*would say, are you concerned about the actions or the actor? And this is the point that the accusation of “partisan” gets brandied about. Why are you concerned about action x now (borrowing money to pay for a stimulus), when previously action x was a great idea (borrowing money to pay for two wars). > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > So to answer your first question, I don’t care if this board is conservative or liberal. I don’t care if I’m outnumbered 1000-1, or if there are 1000 anti-Republican posts for every anti-Democrat post. All I care about is that the content of each is treated fairly. Well, as far as I can tell, the conservatives on this board are treated with exactly the same disdain as the liberals. The real problem now is that you’re on record as being against personal attacks and accusations of being partisan. So I hope for your sake your careful in the next debate on fiscal policy. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sam-stone-why-do-you-hate-america/552037.md?page=12)