Today, Sup Forums, history has been made

Today, Sup Forums, history has been made.

Can't stump the Trump!

Other urls found in this thread:

pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>not a single word about climate change
>mentioned god like 10 times
I don't think Trump really cares about science or the future

He talked about exploring space Muhhamed, meanwhile king nigger shut down NASA

Even more so than W, he represents the backwater evangelical American moron.

He's a former democrat from New York. If anything, he's just playing lip service like he always does

fuck climate change

>not a single word about climate change
>talked about exploring space

Insightful. Clever. Smart. Too intelligent.

>Trips

Just for the record, he does accept the scientific claims on climate change. Read his 100 day proposal.
In it, he mentions defunding the study's done on climate change outside of the US and instead replacing that money towards environmental changes and using its energy, such as dams, solar panels, etc.

What he doesn't accept is "If we don't do something now to readily change climate change, we'll all be living on a Venus like Earth in 100 years" because it's untrue anyways.

Also, don't be so quick to judge a religious person when it comes to science. 50% of the worlds scientists are religious, including all of the great scientists in world history such as Gallelio, Newton, Patterson, Hubble, and Georges Lemaître who actually was a Belgian catholic priest who is known as "the father of the Big Bang."


Learn how to history.

Are scientists still religious nowadays?
Did religion contributed to science?
Does religion, as it is spread in the US, contributes to scientific research?

>tfw too smart to not pollute the planet

Scientists are some of the least religious people IIRC

Who the fuck is claiming religion contributes anything?
You're saying because someone is religious, they can't be a scientist or have a comprehension of science which is bullshit, considering most scientist throughout history were religious, and still today half of the scientist in the world are religious. You know, the ones at CERN, NASA, JPL, SpaceX, Harvard, or wherever the fuck you'd find a scientist.

I'm not religious personally, but what you're insinuating is simply false.

With that said, most scientific contributions were given by religious people. Your denial of that proves that even some agnostics/atheists are equally fucking blind.
Stop making us look bad.

I have no idea why these CTR cucks are still here

Still afraid of Trump driving the bankers and lobbyists out of washington?

Still butthurt about Trump bringing almost 5,000 jobs back to the US before he was even president?

Still angry about him redpilling America on the BS that is """"Man made Climate change"""".

Keep crying fags

#JFKTreatment4Trump

>today half of the scientist in the world are religious. You know, the ones at CERN, NASA, JPL, SpaceX, Harvard, or wherever the fuck you'd find a scientist.
I get what you're saying, but it's still wrong. 50% of people working at those institutions aren't religious. MAYBE 50% affiliate with some religion, like a someone who was raised a catholic, but never goes to church or actually believes in god.

Low tier bait. Have fun with your bogmonster.

...

no thats what mike pence is for

pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/

Study is about 9 years old now, but scroll down just a little bit to get right to it.
I'd imagine the numbers aren't that different from today.
If you don't like that source, then I'm sure it's somewhere else as well, but I'm not going to write a paper for Sup Forums

Would I, though, agree that religion will continually fall in numbers? Absolutely.

>driving bankers out of washington
>Treasury Secretary worked at Goldmann Sachs during the subprime mortgage crisis

5/10 made me reply

...

I'm not in denial or wathever.
You point about religion and scientists is interesting, but the way you say it is so... American.
Galileo (and not Gallelio) was religious but had several problems with religious authority. Religiosity can pose some threats to scientific research, even more in the US where creationism and other shits are somewhat popular.

You talk about several scientists as if they were all "religious", while you don't know what was their relation with religion. I think every one of them had a specific relation with it.

Usually scientists keep a distant relation with religiosity, for example most of the Enlightenment philosophers were deist or some shit, as if they couldn't escape from religious belief because of their education/tradition. Still, they wanted, or even needed to develop distance with the religious authorities of their time.

Btw I don't believe that 50% of scientists are religious. Probably only in the US only.

it is a good thing that trump believe in god!!

fucking hell wrong image

>Le goldman sach is inside the white house

The president can make 1300 appointments in the federal office and 5 of them were from sachs

The lead Trump’s National Economic Council

The Treasury Secretary

A senior White House advisor

Chief Strategist

And the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission chair

So 5 out of 1,300 big fucking Woop

Your argument is going in circles at this point.

The point is, you can be scientifically literate and religious at the same time. Not all of them take their shit literally.
That's all I am saying, I don't care how much or how little the individual contributes their church. If you say "I believe in god" then that means you're religious. Period.

And yes, the study was conducted world wide. This includes only Ph.D's in a science degree, nothing more nothing less.

Yeah, 5 of the most important ones that have significant control over the economy, retard. It's not like he appointed them to low-tier secretary shit, these are high and relatively influential positions

Religion is more important than superstition

If Trump perceives climate change as a serious issue, why would he appoint Rick Perry of all people to head the Department of Energy?

>literally all the important positions

>AMERICANS.jpg

>Still afraid of Trump driving the bankers and lobbyists out of washington?


Heres your (((YOU))) for the low quality bait

In all honesty, did Americans find the whole patriotic/christian thing a bit much? I obviously know his loyal supporters didn't, but I feel like even Americans aren't really that devout or nationalistic these days. I'm not judging, just asking

>climate change
The planet is already fucked up. Too late to change now

why would it be too much? it wasnt

> eurocuck
oh

I've seen the rhetoric from the right change three fucking times in my life when it comes to climate change.
First it didn't exist.
Then it did but we weren't causing it.
Then ok we caused it but we can't fix it.
What's next?

>unlock the mysteries of space

...Is he bogpilled?

Half of the scientists are religious, when something like 90% of the general population is religious. That means scientists are a lot more atheist than the general population.

I just go with whatever flavor of the month climate science is being pimped.
One scienctist is promoting a doomsday scenario where there is nothing that can be done cuz it is too fucked up already
Some other attention seeking faggot says we can fix it with giant balloons
Then some other asshole says climate would follow the same path anyway no matter what humans ever did

Nobody you elect, left wing or right wing, can do shit about it. Subsidies are only a small part of it. Guess who gives money for fossil fuel based industries and other contributing industries to sustain themselves?

>cuz
Yes that will make people take you seriously.

America's top priority principle.
This is commonplace as the President of the United States.

if anything that just proves he's playing a character of what he thinks republicans are really thinking

What did he mean by this?

Trump is just a symptom of the latest crisis of capitalism.

The problem is that every single person living in the Western world is contributing to it on an individual basis. Fossil fuels have been, for the last century or so, the basis of our civilization. Reliance on fossil fuels is not a problem that can be solved with fucking tax credits. The only solution would be an economically viable alternative of which there currently is none.

hence the need for eco-socialism

>Sup Forums
>Taken seriously
Are you lost?

This is from a man who does not believe in climate change or science and literally has no understanding of economic policy.

Not like Trump voters are smart enough to work in science, 9/10 of researchers I correspond with hate trump.

>Secretary of Treasury
>National Economic Council head
>Two of the biggest economic positions are run by goldman sachs

nice logic fucktard, back to Sup Forums,

Masters in environmental science here

you are literally retarded. there is CONSENSUS now, they disagree on minor things like "this method cannot be proven", or "temperature will be -5 rather than -4".

This kike-leashed orange simpleton is going to feed last civilized place in the world : Europe to the Russian dehumanized subhuman, to get Russian support in war against China.

If China loses the war, it will be a definite end of white race and christianity. If you are European, you must realize that your nations last hope is gving weapon to all citizens, breaking NPT by secret degelopment on nukes, and praying for China to win against jew-anglo attack

>Masters in environmental science here
LOLing at your life

This kike-leashed orange simpleton is going to feed last civilized place in the world : Europe to the Russian dehumanized subhuman, to get Russian support in war against China.

If China loses the war, it will be also a definite end of white race and christianity. If you are European, you must realize that your nations last hope is giving weapon to all citizens, breaking NPT by secret development on nukes, and praying for China to win against jew-anglo attack.

I had never realised how much Trump's speeches rely on the reinforcement of the cheering crowd before I watched this speech.

So much of this speech felt a bit weak and awkward because he didn't get much applause/cheering when he wanted it. And that made his rhetoric about fixing everything very plain to see and felt very empty.

>defunding the study's done on climate change
That right there is greatly misunderstanding science, especially if he's basing his decissions
>What he doesn't accept is "If we don't do something now to readily change climate change, we'll all be living on a Venus like Earth in 100 years"
on let's say for argument's sake an "expert's" interpretation (and not something out of his ass, or Bannon's) defunding research on something that you're making policy calls on is just plain irresponsible even if you were to buy that tripe that you wrote.

We all know he's defunding this research on political grounds and not budget considerations or any scientific grounds (no sane scientist would argue against continued research on what is basically an existential threat to mankind).

The worrysome part here is people like you either know this and don't care or are legit too stupid to understand it. This isn't a matter of "nuance" or opinion, it's black and white shutting down science on ideology. This is Islamic tier idiocy from a man who's supported anti-vaxers and intelligent design on right winger's old favorite "state rights"

It's intellectual cowardice and dishonesty. Let's be consistent and call a spade a spade.

>50% of the worlds scientists are religious, including all of the great scientists in world history such as Gallelio, Newton, Patterson, Hubble, and Georges Lemaître who actually was a Belgian catholic priest who is known as "the father of the Big Bang."
>gloalpokerface.jpg