CommentsDisplaying Vil's 10 most recent comments.

• GOP Rep. Will Introduce New Strict Gun Law

  January 13, 2011 at 12:51am

  Gun control: use two hands.

• Shocking Vid: Uncle Whips His Nephew for ‘Gangster’ Facebook Posts

  January 13, 2011 at 12:48am

  If we had MORE people like this uncle, we wouldn’t have the problem with street gangs that we do. THAT is the answer.

• ‘No Pressure’: New Environmental Campaign Glorifies Eco-Fascism

  October 4, 2010 at 9:07pm

  In reply to Juggalojohn.

  Ah, another fan of Your Lord and Master, Foamy.

• ‘No Pressure’: New Environmental Campaign Glorifies Eco-Fascism

  October 4, 2010 at 8:06pm

  First, I happen to belong to PETA. As a proud member of People Eating Tasty Animals, I’m pleased to announce that I would NEVER put such absurd crap on the internet, save maybe on 1st April, as a prank. As for the *other* PETA, well, those people are who they are. Don’t worry. I don’t eat the same paint chips.

  Now, on to the point at hand. This so-called “scientific consensus” is a bunch of crap. The only “consensus” is among those whose goals are political and financial. Until and unless EVERY real scientist (I would say “credible” scientist, but in this age of smears and misinformation, I avoid such terms) agrees with irrefutable, absolutely proven facts (not just fancy models), there is no real consensus. Instead, that c-world is just a polite way to tell anyone who might object that they’re stupid and need to shut up. I, Myself, am a skeptic, but that doesn‘t mean that I’m going to take every single “debunking” on a skeptic sight as truth. Why? Well, to be a skeptic, a true skeptic, you have to be willing to be skeptical of ALL things, including the skepticism.

  Further, as an avid skeptic, I’m often viewing the material of the Skeptic Society, and I find some of it to be based on faith and conviction, not on true skepticism. For example, I have seen statements by them that anyone whose views are on the right is driven by religion and faith, while those on the left are by rationality. This statement, in of itself rings of belief over fact. I, for one, lean far more to the right than I do to the left. I’m one of those “dangerous” Libertarian types. According to this politically convenient blanket statement, I must be driven by My faith in Jesus Christ. There’s a slight problem with this. I’m not religious. I don’t believe that Jesus Christ ever existed, as all records of his life are from a religious source, and as I don’t belong to any other religion, I obviously cannot be driven by faith, rather it is in Jesus or anything or anyone else.

  While I will never use such blanket accusations as to suggest that everyone on one or another side of the political drive, save for the extremists of both, is insane, I can name several people that I know who are liberal Democrats and completely out of their minds. One is schizophrenic (no, I don’t mean to suggest that schizophrenia leads to being a Democrat, so kindly don’t twist My words). According to the skeptic society, liberals are all very rational, yet My friend‘s schizophrenia is severe enough that to suggest that he’s capable of enough rational thought to have, in clear, unclouded thinking, come to the conclusions that he holds, is about as believable as to tell an adult that Santa Claus is real.

  All of that said, those who use the argument of supposed skeptics (or agenda believers who frame themselves as skeptics) to “debunk” any scientific argument against their faith (man-made global warming) are speaking without the whole use of facts. Neither is it true that the opposing side in this view have no facts by which we back up that man-made global warming is a lie. Just because your side of the argument try to sweep those arguments (all backed up by REAL science) under the rug and label them as the ravings of idiots and the insane, this does not make the argument any less valid.

  Of course, it’s also an easy cop-out for the pro-man-made global warming crowd to try to refute the validity of those of us who don’t buy into their paradigm by throwing back the accusations made at their scientists and then claiming that this means that we have no science (except for what they conveniently ignore) and only supposedly empty arguments. There are two key problems with this. The first is at the very heart of Climate Gate, where the supposedly reputable scientists that feed us this crap were exposed for the charlatans that they are. Secondly, it is in the lack of any intellectual foundation upon which the argument is framed that if we caught them with their hand in the cookie jar, that we are without a real argument. Really? No. What’s going on is that the environmental lobby, having received a black eye, is now trying their hardest to invalidate any and all arguments against their lunacy. They would have us to trust them without question, and anyone who does not agree with them must be silenced. It won’t work. When the Telegraph UK even calls you on it, your days are truly numbered.

  Further, since I’m sure that censorship will see that video disappear for the sake of “protecting the public”, I have downloaded it. ANY AND EVERY time that some environmental nutjob tries to spew his or her rhetoric and then frame Myself or any others as cruel, inhumane, or uncaring, I’m going to post this video to remind them of the truth of who and what they are. For this reason, I’m truly grateful for its production.

• ‘No Pressure’: New Environmental Campaign Glorifies Eco-Fascism

  October 4, 2010 at 12:56pm

  In reply to Punky.

  What happens to students who try to present the other side?
  The reply, I’m sure, will be as sad as it is funny.

• ‘No Pressure’: New Environmental Campaign Glorifies Eco-Fascism

  October 4, 2010 at 11:05am

  In reply to BoilitDown.

  MESO71 I only woke up and did NOT mean to REPORT your post, but to reply to it and realized what I did after the fact. Anyway, what I was trying to say where I THOUGHT that I was replying, was that while you are right, what you said must go unsaid. When you suggest that we use our constitutional right to rise up and take matters into our own hands, you are giving those who would label every Libertarian (hi), every Republican, and every moderate Democrat, as well as anyone else who doesn’t fall in and goose-step with the far left, as “dangerous extremists”. That language is backed up by the Constitution, but with things like the Patriot Act, a dumbed down public, and morons everywhere, such language puts you in danger of arrest and members of this forum in danger of being monitored. I hate to sound like one of those tinfoil hat people, but I truly believe that some caution is advisable in our politically-correct world.

• Elmo, Internet Czar & FCC Work to Redistribute Wealth With Free Broadband

  September 17, 2010 at 3:40pm

  Actually, the answer is an impossibility, because no one with the power to do what I suggest would willingly give it up. What we need we can’t have. What we need is for a monomaniacal dictator to take control of the United States and rule it in such a way that Pol Pot looks like Jesus Christ. Have this person rule us for about a decade, and then, over night, have the dictator suddenly return us to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, as they were before the Neocons and the Neocoms got their grubby hands on it. I’ll bet that after that, people would not be in a hurry to move away from the Constitution again! Of course, ignorance could still bring back the same problems, so education remains, even then, vitally important.

• Elmo, Internet Czar & FCC Work to Redistribute Wealth With Free Broadband

  September 17, 2010 at 4:24am

  In reply to TexasGirlAmyK.

  That was My reply, and your amendment to it is spot on.

• Elmo, Internet Czar & FCC Work to Redistribute Wealth With Free Broadband

  September 16, 2010 at 5:03pm

  The whole issue of government control is an annoying one. The thing is, there will always be pirates. The government will crack down, and we’ll crack around. That is not to say that we should do nothing, however. Of greater importance to Me, personally, is the idea of anyone using Elmo to indoctrinate children. Elmo should be teaching kids to read, not teaching them Marx and Engels!

• Elmo, Internet Czar & FCC Work to Redistribute Wealth With Free Broadband

  September 16, 2010 at 3:37pm

  In reply to diablosho.

  I‘m surprised that you didn’t get jumped. I wonder if, after getting the crap kicked out of you, you wouldn’t have been brought up on hate speech charges!