Kirk went up against some very smart liberals but when your foundation is all lies, you cannot debate the truth

And that is just 2 out of a whole lot more of those "geniuses". The left is full of these people who cannot stand reality.

Yeah... and not one of them would ever dare to debate Kirk...

Debate me on climate change then, see how long you last

Okay. Why is it that global warming/climate change was introduced in the 1980's by the United Nations to climate scientists to come with the science that would support their policy that the earth is warming? Why is it that every single proposed solution is to take everyone's freedom away and force them to live in "Smart" or "15-Minute" cities?

Global Warming/Climate change is a political idea where scientists were offered grant money if they could make the science fit around the notion.

And no, this is not a conspiracy theory, this is a fact. This is what the UN's Agenda 21 and 2030 are all based on. The UN invented global warming for power and control. Then years later the World Economic Forum picked up and ran with it.

Why is it that every time there is any kind of weather event, those who believe it are the first ones to say it was caused by climate change? When they started with the idea research was done to show that since 1970 there have been more and more hurricanes and typhons. The research was never done to support climate change but it was incorporated into it. The problem is it only starts at 1970. In the 1930's we had much more intense weather than at any time during the global warming/climate change era.

Did you know that every single scientific prediction that included a year when it would happen has failed. It didn't fail because the timing was off, it failed because it never happened, not even the ones that happened 30 years ago.

Do you remember about 20 years ago when the Climate Research Unit at Cambridge University had their emails leaked, not once but twice. And each time it was revealed that much of their data came from essentially random number generators. All climate data for global warming came from one of three places and the CRU at Cambridge was one of them. At that time no other research centers were doing climate research.

Also all of the thermometers around the world that were used to say the planet is warming are all horribly inaccurate. Many of them haven't been maintain since they were installed. Some are installed in forests while others are installed on the side of buildings and in parking lots. All of global warming science depends heavily on those thermometers and it is entirely unreliable.

Then there's Al Gore's hockey stick that completely ignored the Maunder and Dalton minimums and the Medieval warming trend.

Should I go on?

You forgot the scientist that came out and admitted they made up the data that most of the climate models are based on?

That's true. There are a lot of scientists whose findings were never intended to support climate change but found their work hijacked. Others were very happen to take the research money and say what ever the politicians tell them to say.

The idea of a scientific consensus never happened. We were just lied to about a consensus to make some people believe it is true. Many scientists believe some things are happening but it is not part of a greater whole.

I'm still waiting for Florida to be underwater. I wonder why so many rich libs buy beachfront property and then talk about the rising ocean water.

https://www.youtube.com/@thesoypill

I have some news for you, we do, in fact, have one. Kinda.

He's not debating anyone. He's just a pundit. I'm talking about some who will sit down and have a polite conversation.

The closet I know of is Bill Maher. Maher finds the "woke" left ridiculous.

You cannot rationally debate "woke" ideology without getting logically and factually stomped on.

heres the debate channel if you wanna look at that https://www.youtube.com/@SoyPillStreams/videos

Ill take a look at it.

I found one where he was on Tim Pool's show and he is reviewing that show. That show is 2.5 hours long. I'm pretty sure I don't want to spend that much time watching it.

I did watch a few minutes in and they started talking about masculinity. That one guy, who's name I forgot, was talking about his masculinity has been pushed out of society. But then somehow they equated masculinity with wife beating. No. they are not the same thing. Wife beating means you're an idiot who does not deserve to be married to the woman. Masculinity is being a good father and husband. There's nothing wrong with masculinity. There's a whole lot wrong with beating your wife, husband, partner or anyone else.

I don't know where I have seen Tim Pool before. I never watched his show, I didn't even know he had a show. I've just seen him on stuff. That other guy, who's name I forgot, I've seen him on stuff before also. I didn't really know they were political because I just can't remember where I have seen them before. It's been on video, I didn't meet them in real life.

Anyway. I'll watch a little more.

he does but thats on his stream channel. he debated tim pool a bit ago.

Did Pool stomp all over him?

Way back in the 1970's there used to be a talk show host named Phil Donahue. Most of the time he just had liberals on his show but occasionally he would invite a conservative or libertarian on his show. He would organize a panel of libs. The conservative would get half a sentence out and Donahue and his panel would then procede to talk all over the guest. They would put words in the guests mouths and then beat him up for those words he never said.

There were only two guests that I remember where he didn't do this to, Ayn Rand (author of Atlas Shrugged) and Milton Friedman (Nobel prize winning economist).

Milton Friedman just left Donahue speechless. Donahue didn't even know what hit him.

The Ayn Rand interview was less political from what I remember.

Back in the 70's libs weren't even close to as radical as they are now. Some of them came close to making sense.

I saw your comment that you deleted op.

I deleted it because I felt it came across to rude. It didn't want to be rude. I should have never posted it.

Do you seriously think MLK would have anything to do with liberals today? Not a single lib alive today cares anything about the content of one's character. It's all about DEI and quotas.

MLK would completely dump the Democrats and go back his father's party, Republican.

I believe if MLK were alive today he would very much be shocked on how ignorance has replaced the GOP with maga, Trump, sycophants.

Do you even know who MLK was?

Someone who would never support Trump or maga.

Maybe he would maybe he wouldn't. I never said he would but seeing the most blacks voted for Trump than any other Republican president. The last time they voted that heavily Republican was before Lyndon Johnson's Great Society that pull nearly ever black out of the Republican Party into the Democrat Party. That's when LBJ said, "We'll have those [n-words] voting Democrat for the next 100 years".

MLK Sr was a Republican.

I can pretty much tell that I'm very confident that MLK never would have gone for taking school without parental consent or knowledge and mutilating their bodies. He also wouldn't have gone with the "we don't know what a woman is" people. I seriously doubt he would have supported the murder of babies in the womb.

I don't know MLK, I never met him and if I ever did I would have been too young to remember. But I know he was a Reverend and back then they just didn't have lefty preachers like they have now.

If you could just pull your head out of the liberal propaganda you might have a clue as to what Trump is actually doing for America. Tariffs are being used to equalize trade between us and other nations. It will stop China from undercutting American businesses so much that they can't even complete. This way Trump will bring businesses back to America and resurrect businesses that have long died. This will then create more jobs. But you probably didn't know that, did you?

That makes no sense.