Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

Sudden catastrophic change is a paranoid delusion.

And apparently you can't be bothered to Google simple facts.

(May 15, 2017 02:31 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Sudden catastrophic change is a paranoid delusion.

And apparently you can't be bothered to Google simple facts.

LoL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Founda...principles

Quote:The Foundation has spoken favorably of efforts to balance the federal budget with tax reform and significant spending cuts, such as the Bowles-Simpson plan,[26] the Ryan Plan,[27] and the Wyden-Coats plan.[28]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Foundation#History

Quote:The Tax Foundation was organized on December 5, 1937 in New York City by Alfred P. Sloan, Jr., Chairman of the General Motors Corporation; Donaldson Brown, GM Financial Vice President; William S. Farish, President of Standard Oil Company of New Jersey (Exxon); and Lewis H. Brown, President of Johns-Manville Corporation, who later became the first Chairman of the Board of The Tax Foundation.[10] The stated goal of the organization was "to monitor the tax and spending policies of government agencies".[11] Its offices were located at 50 Rockefeller Plaza and later 30 Rockefeller Plaza.

you really are bought & sold by alt-right corporate america

Quote:Syne
Sudden catastrophic change is a paranoid delusion.

changing the nature of the arguement to attempt to illigitamise the premise of the original topic.
LoL.
where is your evidence ? you didnt even bother to post any links to the subject you tried to change to
you didnt post any because your using dog whistle politics for the ignorant & idiots to try and garner blind believers as followers.

seriousely ?
i think i have become bored with your alt-right flat earth propoganda.

Yeah, that's the fallacy of poisoning the well, where you attempt to impugn a source to avoid having to refute the actual substance of the data. It's a fallacy in lieu of actual argument, and no argument requires no refute. I don't give a shit what you think of the source. Speak to the data offered or be shown to be dodging it. If you bothered, you'd know that the ultimate source of that data is the IRS and other legit statistics. So good luck finding refuting data...but I think you're far too lazy to even look.

Skepticism of sudden catastrophic climate change is called the "null hypothesis" in science. It is the default position until evidence to the contrary can be demonstrated...and not merely with computer models. Got any demonstrable evidence? No? Didn't think so. That's why you have to resort to bigoted and ad hominem stereotyping. Resorting to that demonstrates that even you know that you've already lost.

Proven to be dodging the actual facts it is then.