U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-23-2012, 10:19 AM
 
Location: NC
1,946 posts, read 1,537,727 times
Reputation: 883

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
What benefits is he not taking? Are you sure of this? As for his not taking SService protection, he certainly is to be commended for that. I have never understood offering this to candidates? Do I critizine those who accept it? No, it is offered and some feel the need. I do think he beleives in most of what he preaches, but I don't think that makes him right and no, there are not a few billion people he cares about. Of course I am sure you posted that, tongue in cheek, right?:think Natural510 said it best: he carries things too far.
The main gripe I have with people like you, and the likes of you who make up the bulk of the GOP is that you are all just TALK when it comes to spending, deficits & taxes. When someone actually wants to WALK, you say it's "carrying things too far". No wonder we never get anything done. You yap, but you never act. But, congratulations, you are in the majority and we true fiscal conservatives are in the minority.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-23-2012, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
71,671 posts, read 83,230,487 times
Reputation: 41503
Quote:
Originally Posted by moving_pains View Post
The main gripe I have with people like you, and the likes of you who make up the bulk of the GOP is that you are all just TALK when it comes to spending, deficits & taxes. When someone actually wants to WALK, you say it's "carrying things too far". No wonder we never get anything done. You yap, but you never act. But, congratulations, you are in the majority and we true fiscal conservatives are in the minority.
you have every right to your beliefs but I will still stand by, "he carries things to the extreme".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 10:44 AM
 
8,487 posts, read 5,885,972 times
Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
What benefits is he not taking? Are you sure of this? As for his not taking SService protection, he certainly is to be commended for that. I have never understood offering this to candidates? Do I critizine those who accept it? No, it is offered and some feel the need. I do think he beleives in most of what he preaches, but I don't think that makes him right and no, there are not a few billion people he cares about. Of course I am sure you posted that, tongue in cheek, right?:think Natural510 said it best: he carries things too far.
Moving_Pains listed things concerning benefits he isn't taking. No, I sincerely meant a few billion. I think RP cares about the US and the people of the world. You maybe surprised how many people sincerely care about the people on this planet and their well-being.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 10:49 AM
 
8,487 posts, read 5,885,972 times
Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Onions View Post
Huh? That makes absolutely no sense at all. How do you imagine that radioactivity in geologic strata is somehow linked to the measurement of the ratio of C-14 to C-12/C-13 in inert organic matter?

You obviously haven't the foggiest idea what you're talking about.

Again, carbon-dating has nothing -- absolutely nothing -- to do with measuring the age of the Earth. You're the one who linked them.
I didn't link them I was making a reference to wide-spread excepted scientific theories and measure. You linked them. I don't have time to look the article up now. If you want to know what I was referring to do some research. Anyway, it has nothing to do with anything in this thread ok?

Here This isn't the article, but it is similar event, I believe to what I was discussing. If you are curious. But no more off topic.

Last edited by CDusr; 03-23-2012 at 11:14 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 10:52 AM
 
Location: A great city, by a Great Lake!
15,908 posts, read 10,041,138 times
Reputation: 7456
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
you have every right to your beliefs but I will still stand by, "he carries things to the extreme".

What is extreme about a policy for example, being a non-interventionalist? I'm all for defending our country if it's attacked. I'm not for pre-emptive strikes, propping up regimes, or nation building half a world away for special interests.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 11:57 AM
 
Location: West Egg
2,161 posts, read 1,659,406 times
Reputation: 1278
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDusr View Post
I didn't link them I was making a reference to wide-spread excepted scientific theories and measure. You linked them. I don't have time to look the article up now. If you want to know what I was referring to do some research. Anyway, it has nothing to do with anything in this thread ok?

Here This isn't the article, but it is similar event, I believe to what I was discussing. If you are curious. But no more off topic.
No, you linked them, in a reply to someone commenting on Paul and the 6000-year-old Earth claim:
Ok. already addressed. Haven't seen evidence it is true and they are now thinking carbon dating has been wrong.

Look, I get that you don't want to be held for making the idiotic connection between the age of the Earth and carbon dating. The solution is not to make idiotic assumptions in the first place, not to make them and then lie and claim you never made such connections.

And now, yet again acting as clueless as you possible can act, you link to an article about radiocarbon calibration, a technique integral to refining the carbon-dating process to make it even more precise, as an example of how 'they' (your nonsensical word) think it 'has been wrong'. And if you think your link suggests that radioactive geologic strata 'influenced' (your word) the C-14/C-12 and C-13 ratio, then you are even further confused.

You really should have quit while you were ahead (or, rather, only so far behind) because with every post you underscore that your understanding of science is at about the third-grade level.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 11:59 AM
 
8,266 posts, read 10,681,989 times
Reputation: 4769
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1brownsfan View Post
What is extreme about a policy for example, being a non-interventionalist?
Without arguing the merits of interventionalist vs. non-interventionalist the fact that he is the only candidate with such a non-interventionalist policy and that said policy is counter to existing US policy that has been in place for decades it is fairly safe to call it an extreme policy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 12:03 PM
 
Location: A great city, by a Great Lake!
15,908 posts, read 10,041,138 times
Reputation: 7456
Quote:
Originally Posted by slackjaw View Post
Without arguing the merits of interventionalist vs. non-interventionalist the fact that he is the only candidate with such a non-interventionalist policy and that said policy is counter to existing US policy that has been in place for decades it is fairly safe to call it an extreme policy.

Oh you mean the policy of propping up other regimes? The policy of nation building? That existing policy? The one that is making more enemies than allies?

How about we worry about ourselves OVER HERE for once?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 12:06 PM
 
8,266 posts, read 10,681,989 times
Reputation: 4769
Again I wasn't debating the merits of the policy, just saying his views on it are counter to almost everyone else's and what has been implemented in this country for a long time, so they are probably fairly labeled extreme.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 12:26 PM
 
8,487 posts, read 5,885,972 times
Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Onions View Post
No, you linked them, in a reply to someone commenting on Paul and the 6000-year-old Earth claim:
Ok. already addressed. Haven't seen evidence it is true and they are now thinking carbon dating has been wrong.

Look, I get that you don't want to be held for making the idiotic connection between the age of the Earth and carbon dating. The solution is not to make idiotic assumptions in the first place, not to make them and then lie and claim you never made such connections.

And now, yet again acting as clueless as you possible can act, you link to an article about radiocarbon calibration, a technique integral to refining the carbon-dating process to make it even more precise, as an example of how 'they' (your nonsensical word) think it 'has been wrong'. And if you think your link suggests that radioactive geologic strata 'influenced' (your word) the C-14/C-12 and C-13 ratio, then you are even further confused.

You really should have quit while you were ahead (or, rather, only so far behind) because with every post you underscore that your understanding of science is at about the third-grade level.
I am not lying. You assumed the connection. I never said carbon dating is how you determine the age of the earth. Where? (Though it is brought up in regard to Creationism.) You alluded to that. I told you what I intended. DO NOT call me a liar. It is amazing you would rather call someone a liar than consider you misunderstood. BTW I never said geologic strata.

If you read the link and researched (I did try to find a ref to the article I was referring) you would understand the affect of radiation on carbon dating. Which was what I was making reference to. The article I posted is NOT about 'radiocarbon calibration'. You want to keep on being rude go ahead. I will be ignoring you.

From the beginning of the article.

THE PALEOINDIAN OCCUPATION of North America, theoretically the point of entry of the first people to the Americas, is traditionally assumed to have occurred within a short time span beginning at about 12,000 yr B.P. This is inconsistent with much older South American dates of around 32,000 yr B.P.1 and the similarity of the Paleoindian toolkit to Mousterian traditions that disappeared about 30,000 years ago.2 A pattern of unusually young radiocarbon dates in the Northeast has been noted by Bonnichsen and Will.3,4 Our research indicates that the entire Great Lakes region (and beyond) was subjected to particle bombardment and a catastrophic nuclear irradiation that produced secondary thermal neutrons from cosmic ray interactions. The neutrons produced unusually large quantities of 239 Pu and substantially altered the natural uranium abundance ratios ( 235 U/238 U) in artifacts and in other exposed materials including cherts, sediments, and the entire landscape. These neutrons necessarily transmuted residual nitrogen ( 14 N) in the dated charcoals to radiocarbon, thus explaining anomalous dates.

Last edited by CDusr; 03-23-2012 at 01:43 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:30 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top