Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Trump Says Disqualifying Stupid Stuff About Climate Science: 'It'll Change Back'" video.

  1. You don't know many scientists.
    3
  2. I am a scientist and Kyle shows his ignorance again. Also, scientists are not making strong conclusions on climate change.
    2
  3. So Democrats creating false allegations against a man ruining his life, or calling people who disagree with them racist or sexist with no justification, or pushing for mob behavior are not dangerous? Republicans support science, they just want government out of it.
    1
  4.  @joanrobinson504  , government means bureaucracy and corruption which hinders progress. I want science to progress.
    1
  5. Noam Chomsky is a fool. He is a guy who sounds smart but isn't.
    1
  6.  @joanrobinson504 , Noam Chomsky in his field had a strong influence. The issue is that outside of his field he is a fool. He is a prime example of someone so involved in his field that he has no connection with the common man or reality. I give credit where credit is due, in his field he has made a strong impact. Because of his field he can write and speak well to where he can pull wool over the eyes of the common person. But what he talks about outside of his field is very foolish. He called major corporation coercive and oppressive. For as bad as Walmart may be I have never seen them use a gun to force people to buy their products or work for them. He praised Venezuela's model before it went to crap. And this comment about Republicans is strong evidence of how foolish he is. I just gave you evidence. I am a PhD candidate myself. I understand people with PhDs. They are intelligent, but typically get too involved in their field and lack experience outside of it. But because of their ego they have a strong opinion on it no matter how wrong they are. Now mix in the fact that Chomsky's field essentially made him an expert in writing and speaking and people decided to give him air time, you have someone who gets away saying foolish things. I gave you examples and I can give more. Fact is that I am not blinded by how he speaks, I actually listen to what he says.
    1
  7.  @joanrobinson504  , there is plenty of evidence of government not being efficient in delivering the programs. Heck, police and fire departments are ran locally but you seem to be pushing for expansion of federal government.
    1
  8.  @doc7000  , the republican party is right now the moderate party. Problem is the political left is too extreme, that seems to be you.
    1
  9.  @jojoboko6990 , they are moderate in that they are willing to listen to the other side as opposed to just dismissing them. They are also willing to reach out to the common man and relate to them.
    1
  10.  @doc7000  , the republican party is moderate. How are they corrupt?
    1
  11.  @jojoboko6990 , every party is corrupt I would agree. The democrats have established politicians like Bernie and Pelosi who have no desire to connect with the common man. All they care about are themselves. That makes them more corrupt. Republicans at least try to relate to the common man by having a discussion with them and listening to what they have to say.
    1
  12.  @doc7000 , there really isn't a religious right at this point. Do you really think Trump is religious? I can make a long list in how radical the left is, but I do lack time. I will create a short one Climate change Right: Says it is happening, but feel the government is not the solution. Also, question if it is a threat Left: Calls anyone who disagrees with them a denier even though the people who disagree with them admits climate change is happening Healthcare: Right: Says we need to improve it but feels government regulations are a problem and we need to alleviate them Left: Cries for the complete dismantle of private insurance and pushes for the federal government overtaking the entire system Medicare/Medicaid/SS Right: Wants to reform it as it is running out of money. They want to keep it, but realize it is not stable in its current form and thus want to reform it Left: Wants to raise taxes and expand it to the point they want medicare for all while claiming the political right wants to completely do away with it Now which party is radical? Keep in mind that the left has no desire to listen to the other side.  I can go with what Kyle says to really show how extreme the left is.
    1
  13. jojo, I am a moderate. I am not partisan. I have voted for both sides and have said many times Bill Clinton is one of the best presidents we ever had. Right now democrats are extreme and they are doubling down on it. Republicans can become extreme and Bush was not a good president which is why Jeb Bush lost so badly. But right now democrats are the radical ones.
    1
  14. jojo, I wasn't old enough to vote for Bill, but I felt he was a moderate and a strong president. He connected with the common man, understood (at least pretended to) their position, and was willing to work with both sides.
    1
  15. jojo, a corrupt politician is a career politician that has no desire to connect with the common man. They will say political talking points while ignoring the other side. You see that with people like Bernie and Pelosi. Meanwhile, many republicans sleep in their DC offices as opposed to paying rent. Paul Ryan was willing to step down from his position on his own terms. Many republicans voted with democrats where right now almost no democrats are voting in support of Trump.
    1
  16. jojo, that would be part of it.
    1
  17. Small government means government has no power to sell. Corporations have no power at all.
    1
  18.  @jojoboko6990 , a small government is possible. We are actually moving towards that now.
    1
  19.  @jojoboko6990 , with Trump he is reducing the size of the federal government and establishing more state rights.
    1
  20.  @joanrobinson504  , there is a strong debate. You saying there isn't a debate is you dismissing the other side because you can't form a strong argument to support your ideas.
    1
  21. Joan, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that government is not the best source for providing healthcare. I am busy today but when I get back in town tonight I will give you data and studies to counter what you say. Same with your other long comments. It is noon right now where I am at so at 11 pm at the latest you will hear from me.
    1
  22. So saying that the climate change is going to change back is denying climate change? Wow, the left is really dumb on this one.
    1
  23. Exxon donated money to put windmills up in CA, just saying.
    1
  24. I am great at time management.
    1
  25. Zidneya, I admit that humans play a role in climate change.
    1
  26. Zidneya, when did I that humans are not influencing climate change? I have said many times that it is.
    1
  27. Zidneya, me saying "how much of a role we play is in question" is me saying that yes, we play a role, we just don't know how much. Why is everything so black and white with you guys?
    1
  28. Zidneya, Kyle is ignorant. That is why I am able to give strong counter arguments to what he says and his fans, like you, just mock me.
    1
  29. Zidneya, Coulter has debated many people. Kyle is a nobody that acts like an arrogant, immature prick who refuses to accept the other side's position. I can see why no one wants to debate a nobody that acts like a child, it is a waste of time.
    1
  30.  @zidneya , I did say that. Fact is that Kyle is a nobody. Why would Coulter waste her time with a nobody? If Kyle becomes a bigger name she can. If Kyle backed down it would just him living in a bubble.
    1
  31.  @zidneya , Kyle needs to prove his worth. Coulter has best selling books and is a well known name.
    1
  32. I give plenty of facts.
    1
  33. jojo, I believe humans play a role. How much is the question. We can't say how much humans contribute as there is no control to compare to. Yes, humans play a role, but we don't know how much.
    1
  34. Justice, on the issue of healthcare I provide plenty of evidence and sources. I notice how when I do you can never counter.
    1
  35. jojo, how can you make that conclusion?
    1
  36. Justice, you have not read the book. If you did than you could tell me what is in it and why they are wrong.
    1
  37. Obscure, in other videos I have given a lot of evidence especially related to the issue of healthcare.
    1
  38. jojo, how can you say we are responsible for most of it? What control do you have to compare to? You have to remember that correlation does not equal causation.
    1
  39. Deez Nuts, but yet you are so wiling to follow Kyle who has been saying the same talking points for years. And you now see him going crazy considering how successful Trump is. I can't wait until the midterms, if the Republicans win I imagine Kyle will go off the rails.
    1
  40. Obscure, look at other videos and follow me throughout the next few weeks, you will see.
    1
  41. Obscure, in this case the issue is that that science is not settled. Let me ask you, why are we not seeing scientists going on the media making strong conclusions on climate change like politicians and media personal are?
    1
  42. Obscure, on climate change it comes down to two things 1. Lack of evidence to support the strong claims the left makes 2. The fact that science is hardly settled.
    1
  43.  @obscureinception8302  1. Why do you say the earth is warming faster? What do you have to compare to? Yes, temperatures are rising, but is the rate faster than normal? Where is your control? 2. Humans play a role, but how much? 3. Why do you think the consequences will be serious? What do you base that off of? A driving force of evolution is climate change. What makes you think the ecosystem won't evolve? 4. Change what? How? What do you suggest? 5. So it is selfish to push for success? I feel you are being selfish pushing for economic changes on something with so much doubt. There are many arguments for pushing against those regulations that are not based on greed or selfishness. I am looking at the science as I am a scientist myself. You making the conclusion that current climate change will have negative effects is a problem. Science is not making that strong of a conclusion. It is a possibility, but not a conclusion. You attacking my intelligence and knowledge is unjust as well.
    1
  44. Deez Nuts, I am not going to tell people my real name on here. Too many creeps and I have said things that can be used against me.
    1
  45. Obscure 1. There are limitations in the tests. Also, just because something happened in the past does not mean it should happen in the future. Again, no control so you have nothing to compare to. 2. Correlation does not equal causation. What data points? 3. Why do you say the rate of climate change is too great? What do you have to base that standard off of? Evolution has not time scale, it can be quick or slow depending on the situation. 4. You do know the US has dropped in carbon emission? At this point I doubt it as you have not provided anything of substance beyond talking points. 5. Denial of what? Of the fact that in science there is doubt? Tell me, why do you deny evolution? Why do you hate science so much? You do know a driving force in science is doubt?
    1
  46.  @deeznutsanyachin2027 , talking political issues can alienate people. So I don't want my name to be exposed. You don't have to believe I am a scientist, my work with my peers speak for themselves. It is my actual career.
    1
  47.  @jojoboko6990 ,  1. When you ask about carbon cycle do you mean fast or slow? How detailed do you want me go get? Do you want me to get very broad on the idea of photosynthesis or do you want me to dig deep and cite the works of Greg Engel and Graham Fleming on their work of photosynthesis using 2D EV? 2. Water, CO2, Methane 3. Uh, what? This can mean a lot. Do you want me to discuss it with electronics? 4. Ice cores is one. I will punt on the 2nd one as that is not my field of work. My field is spectroscopy particularly in vibrational states using multidimensional techniques, or non-linear techniques. I really don't see how your questions prove anything because one can look it up in google and find something vague.
    1
  48.  @deeznutsanyachin2027  , beyond me showing you my work I have no other way to completely prove who i am.
    1
  49.  @jojoboko6990 , your questions are vague and hardly scratch the surface of the issue. Does man play a role a climate change? Yes. But how much we don't know. You can't make a hard conclusion on that. A bigger issue is if current climate change is even a threat. I bring up photosynthesis because very little is known about that. Greg Engel talked at my university (I had lunch with him) and in the presentation he showed a picture of photosynthesis from a 7th grade textbook. It is a basic concept but when you get to the quantum level so little is known about it. I have a friend who does theoretical work on it and he tells me that the process should be as low as 30% efficient and no more than 50% efficient. But in nature it is 90% efficient. We don't know why. People like Engel and Flemming have done work with non-linear, ultra fast visible spectroscopy to gather experimental information to determine why, but that is limited as biological materials are difficult to study. My line of work studies biological materials at different temperatures and pH levels to study the folding and dynamics of them. So far we have gone to a 4 residue peptide and others have gone as large as 6 to 8. Peptides are much larger but there are difficulties doing experimental work on them. We are progressing but we are not there yet. My point in all of this is that we have very limited knowledge in biological systems. We can't make a hard conclusion that the current climate change will be bad or is a major threat as we don't know how the ecosystem will evolve or react. This is why I say the science is not settled and there is so much we don't know. You are hardly scratching the surface of the issue. When you dig deeper you end up with less answers and more questions.
    1
  50.  @deeznutsanyachin2027 , proving what I do is revealing who I am.
    1
  51.  @jojoboko6990 , what makes you think I don't have any authority on the subject? You asked me vague questions on a complex issue. As a scientist I think much deeper on this topic than others. Most hardly scratch the surface where I have experience to understand how complex the issue is. Climate change involves many fields. I, as a physical chemist, can say I do studies on it with my studies on biological materials. I am not studying the climate directly, but I study the influence of temperature and pH changes to a system. How a protein or RNA folds on itself in different conditions. How vibrational energy is transfer based on such conditions. How a chemical reaction takes place in such conditions. Is my expertise on the climate in general? No. But mine is in a field of science. I use non-linear, ultra fast techniques to study these systems in different conditions to build up towards being able to study larger ones in varying ways. We have limited knowledge in science which is why we can't make strong conclusions and do radical changes.
    1
  52. jojo, saying "carbon cycle" is vague. I was similar to when a 7th grader asked me to help her on the question of "what are the parts of the atom and their functions". I can answer that in many ways with a long explanation. Why? Because I have experience to look at something so simple in many ways where at the 7th grade level the answer is more direct. As for negative and positive feedback, again, vague. That can be related to electronics. Water and water vapor are the same things. Water vapor is water in the gas form. What makes you an authority figure? You are, again, looking for simple answers on complex issues. You are playing games to avoid discussing a point you know little about. You don't have to believe that I am an authority figure. I never claimed to be. I am a scientist and understand how scientists think. You are not an authority figure either. Neither is Kyle. Neither is someone like Bernie and so on. Climate change is a complex issue that very few, if any, fully understand. So in the end, I ask, what's your point?
    1
  53. jojo, if you want to go very basic we can. I am coming here to go beyond that because this is a complex issue. I never claimed to be an authority figure. I said I was a scientist and study it for a living. I understand how complex the issue is. Going back to the atom example, you can go very basic, or you can dig deeper. I have an entire textbook called 'The Physics of the Atom". Again, I never claimed to be an authority figure on climate change. If you want to go that route neither are you, nor Kyle, nor Bernie, nor others on this comment section. I expect you to hold everyone to the same standard. You have not shown anything that says you know more about the subject than I do. All you are doing is distracting. You are avoiding the topic.
    1
  54. jojo, my field is science. Climate change is one area of science. I come at this topic understanding the complexity involved in fields in science. You come here looking for simple answers making you out to be a fool. Bu then you claim you know more about this topic than me.
    1
  55. jojo, I agree that humans are responsible for the current rise in CO2. I never denied that. My point is that you cannot say how much they have contributed to that rise. Also, you cannot say if it is a threat or not.
    1
  56. jojo, as with anything else there are many factors. It isn't just one thing and thus you cannot determine what factor contributes the most weight. To give an example in another field I am strong at, athletics. In the 90s home runs per games went up in major league baseball. Some blamed steroids for that. While they did contribute in the 90s you also saw the addition of the Marlins, Rockies, Diamondbacks and Devil Rays. More teams meant more pitchers who should be in the minors but instead are in the majors and are allowing more home runs. That played a role as well. With climate change humans do play a role, now how much? And why do you come to that conclusion? Also, it is a major threat? And why do you feel that way? Look at the success we have had and how much we have grown since the industrial revolution.
    1
  57. jojo, I agree, but also during that time our wealth increased, life expectancy increased, the overall population increased, etc. So are you saying that what happened from that time on should not have taken place?
    1
  58. jojo, I say it plays a role. I cannot say it is the main factor as we have no control to compare to. The climate has changed for over 4 billion years. Many factors influence that.
    1
  59.  @jojoboko6990 , I don't know a lot about plants and biology as I am a physical chemist who has a physics degree. I study biological materials such as short peptides. Does man play a role? Yes. How much we don't know. That is the point. There is a collection of things happening. potholer54 is a hack as he cherry picks studies and gives a broad interpretation of what they say. I called him out on his tactics and he responded. We had a back and forth where he kept baiting me to name call him but never did it. He had no response to what I was saying besides that. He pushes this narrative as if he is an expert in the topic but he has never done formal research in it. He needs to give disclaimers on that. Also, he goes after easy targets. One video he went after a 14 year old girl. In another he attacked PragerU but was hypocritical in doing so. He is catering to an audience as opposed to being fair and trying to educated people.
    1
  60.  @jojoboko6990  , one source is the change of temperature in the oceans. That changes the solubility rate of CO2 in water.
    1
  61. jojo, human activity could very well be causing a rise in temperature. Is it CO2 related or related to the simple fact that we have more people on earth and thus entropy increased? There is a correlation of population growth and temperature increase.
    1
  62. jojo, do you have sources for your claims?
    1
  63. Obscure Inception, the fact you keep calling me a denier makes your entire comment irrelevant. I don't deny anything, I doubt some conclusions related to climate change. There is a difference.
    1
  64. @cabadejo , it isn't so much them saying the earth is not warming, it is. But is this normal? We can't say if it is or not. Is it bad? We can't say that either. Also, you are correct that most scientists don't deal with the climate. But one can argue that most scientist do have their hand in climate change in some way. I can even say that with my research. Why? Because it is a broad field and it complex. Thus strong conclusions cannot be made.
    1
  65. Same can be said about Kyle and many on the left.
    1
  66. What was stupid about what he said?
    1
  67. LionPlateado, how is that stupid? The climate has been changing for over 4 billion years.
    1