Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Osiruz

San Antonio Saints forthcoming?

32 posts in this topic

All the conservative climate change deniers in N.O. are going to be having issue when the entire city is permanently under water. Probably wasn't a good idea to build it below the water line.

It would not surprise me if that city is the first major catastrophe to modern climate change as far as going away forever.

Osiruz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, MAD597 said:

All the conservative climate change deniers in N.O. are going to be having issue when the entire city is permanently under water. Probably wasn't a good idea to build it below the water line.

It would not surprise me if that city is the first major catastrophe to modern climate change as far as going away forever.

Sweet, political agendas being pushed in the football section. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DD: Objective Elite said:

Sweet, political agendas being pushed in the football section. 

Why was a weather report for a city not the ATL even posted here in the first place?

The thread itself is off topic my post post is very relevant to the actual topic unlike yours.

NeonDeion likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MAD597 said:

Why was a weather report for a city not the ATL even posted here in the first place?

The thread itself is off topic my post post is very relevant to the actual topic unlike yours.

This is ********, if you were not pushing an agenda you wouldn't have mentioned conservatives.

cnst likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LouDog said:

Eventually they are just going to have to give up on that city. Can't just keep rebuilding it every few years. 

Mother Nature has decided to flush Nawlins and there's not much that can be done to stop her.

Drew4719 and LouDog like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Osiruz said:

:lol: That just rolls off the tongue better, but seriously Nawlins is under water right now. Hope Y'all saints trolls/fans here are safe though.

 

5d271a4f47990.image.jpg?resize=750,500

 

 

Their levees are at risk again.  Definitely not something to joke about.  I know you aren’t.  Just hope nobody does.  

The fact those levees were not all fixed and made fail safe after Katrina is inexcusable.  And of course the levees at risk are in the poor or downtrodden areas

 

But If one were to make a playful joke, their name would be: The San Antonio Refugees

Emmitt likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MAD597 said:

All the conservative climate change deniers in N.O. are going to be having issue when the entire city is permanently under water. Probably wasn't a good idea to build it below the water line.

It would not surprise me if that city is the first major catastrophe to modern climate change as far as going away forever.

I live on what amounts to a reclaimed sandbar in Florida.  Miami, Key West and Naples will be Mother Nature’s first casualties on the continental US

Osiruz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DD: Objective Elite said:

This is ********, if you were not pushing an agenda you wouldn't have mentioned conservatives.

Call it an agenda or whatever you like, but facts are facts.  Close to half of registered Republicans do not 'believe' in climate change & if I'm not mistaken there are no Republicans in the US Senate or Congress that publicly acknowledge climate change is real and man made.  That is one of the many reasons we are laughed at by other civilized countries across the world.   The Republican party is addicted to Koch, that fossil fuel money is good..

Osiruz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Falcons_Pantera_KoRn said:

Call it an agenda or whatever you like, but facts are facts.  Close to half of registered Republicans do not 'believe' in climate change & if I'm not mistaken there are no Republicans in the US Senate or Congress that publicly acknowledge climate change is real and man made.  That is one of the many reasons we are laughed at by other civilized countries across the world.   The Republican party is addicted to Koch, that fossil fuel money is good..

Why does it have to be interjected in the TATF forum?

Shouldn't these political opinions stay in the sub-forum created to host them?

Perhaps, this is one of the reasons many people stopped posting here, myself included.

Osiruz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DD: Objective Elite said:

Why does it have to be interjected in the TATF forum?

Shouldn't these political opinions stay in the sub-forum created to host them?

Perhaps, this is one of the reasons many people stopped posting here, myself included.

WGAF...people take this message board too seriously.  I enjoy talking football and reading everything people posts, but seriously who gives AF.  Just move on to the next.

Osiruz and FalconsIn2020 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Falcons_Pantera_KoRn said:

Call it an agenda or whatever you like, but facts are facts.  Close to half of registered Republicans do not 'believe' in climate change & if I'm not mistaken there are no Republicans in the US Senate or Congress that publicly acknowledge climate change is real and man made.  That is one of the many reasons we are laughed at by other civilized countries across the world.   The Republican party is addicted to Koch, that fossil fuel money is good..

Yep, if my remark offended him so much it seems he identified to close to them. 

The entire post is off topic and should probably be moved but he decided to pick on me correctly pointing out conservatives are the ones denying climate change. And they call liberal snowflakes? Pretty funny how sensitive conservatives can get when they are called out for their actions.

Osiruz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FalconsIn2020 said:

Their levees are at risk again.  Definitely not something to joke about.  I know you aren’t.  Just hope nobody does.  

The fact those levees were not all fixed and made fail safe after Katrina is inexcusable.  And of course the levees at risk are in the poor or downtrodden areas

 

But If one were to make a playful joke, their name would be: The San Antonio Refugees

Had no idea, how they gonna go through several debilitating hurricanes and not have enough sense to fix those levees? This is why I don't, care too much for Louisiana as a state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Osiruz said:

Had no idea, how they gonna go through several debilitating hurricanes and not have enough sense to fix those levees? This is why I don't, care too much for Louisiana as a state.

I blame the State & Federal legislature.  The poor people in the area can’t do anything. It’s where the section 8 housing is.  It’s always been that way since the beginning of time.

Osiruz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, MAD597 said:

Yep, if my remark offended him so much it seems he identified to close to them. 

The entire post is off topic and should probably be moved but he decided to pick on me correctly pointing out conservatives are the ones denying climate change. And they call liberal snowflakes? Pretty funny how sensitive conservatives can get when they are called out for their actions.

Look no further than their Dear Leader, the Snowflake in Chief who sits in the Oval Office

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DD: Objective Elite said:

This is ********, if you were not pushing an agenda you wouldn't have mentioned conservatives.

I'm a conservative and very republican, but he is not wrong.  The city will be underwater in the next 50 years and there is no denying the fact that the global mean average temperature is rising faster than anytime in history and that ocean levels are raising by inches every decade. 

JBender and Osiruz like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, octoslash said:

mad

  • adj.
    Angry; resentful: synonym: angry.
  • adj.
    Mentally deranged.
wordnik.2x.pngMore at Wordnik from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.

a word definition where all the options are actually good for the description, nice!    Looks like they need to get out the big plunger again, apparently the toilet is stopped up where all those drunk cajins are peeeing in the streets

 

:ninja::lol:

 

 

in all seriousness, football rivalry aside, y'all stay safe down there

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 we need you around to taunt this year  :lol:

Osiruz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MAD597 said:

All the conservative climate change deniers in N.O. are going to be having issue when the entire city is permanently under water. Probably wasn't a good idea to build it below the water line.

It would not surprise me if that city is the first major catastrophe to modern climate change as far as going away forever.

You do realize that New Orleans has been flooding for hundreds of years. Seems to always coincide with a major storm passing over a dumping a ton of water on a city that is below sea level. Go figure. And no, the frequency of major storms has not increased over the last 100 years.

papachaz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, 2_legit_2_legit_2_quit said:

You do realize that New Orleans has been flooding for hundreds of years. Seems to always coincide with a major storm passing over a dumping a ton of water on a city that is below sea level. Go figure. And no, the frequency of major storms has not increased over the last 100 years.

now now, don't go clouding some dipsticks agenda with actual facts.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thermometer was invented 300 years ago by Fahrenheit.  Modern global temp readings started about 130 years ago.  So how can 130 years be a large enough sample to establish a trend for our established atmosphere believed to be around 4 billion years old?  To put it in terms of a human life span of 85 years, that's a sample size 1.5 minutes. Can you trend a human’s past or present based on 1.5 minutes?

Now should we take prudent steps for clean air and water?  Absolutely.  But when I see politicians waiving their arms screaming we'll die in 10 years, I get suspicious and nervous.  Classic MO of those desiring power - create a life threatening problem and put yourself between the masses and the problem.  Instant power.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0