Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 09 Oct 2025, 7:25 am » wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2025, 7:25 am

.
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/07/us/p ... -noaa.html

Senate Confirms ‘Sharpiegate’ Meteorologist to Lead NOAA

Dr. Jacobs was found to have violated NOAA’s code of ethics in 2020 after an investigation into an incident that centered on an altered hurricane forecast map President Trump presented in the Oval Office in 2019. The investigation found he had bowed to political pressure in releasing a statement critical of National Weather Service forecasters in Alabama, who had stressed on social media that Hurricane Dorian was not expected to affect that state, despite warnings to the contrary from Mr. Trump

Can't question his credentials....he must be a dumb ****.

Blackvegetable » 09 Oct 2025, 7:25 am » wrote: ↑

09 Oct 2025, 7:25 am

.
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/07/us/p ... -noaa.html

Senate Confirms ‘Sharpiegate’ Meteorologist to Lead NOAA

Dr. Jacobs was found to have violated NOAA’s code of ethics in 2020 after an investigation into an incident that centered on an altered hurricane forecast map President Trump presented in the Oval Office in 2019. The investigation found he had bowed to political pressure in releasing a statement critical of National Weather Service forecasters in Alabama, who had stressed on social media that Hurricane Dorian was not expected to affect that state, despite warnings to the contrary from Mr. Trump

Can't question his credentials....he must be a dumb ****.

Let me prove how predictable you narcissists are. Watch this:

1. Phase 1: You will say that you answered it.
Phase 2: I will remind you of :"are these your words?" from yesterday and if "will" is future tense. 
Phase 3: You will deny that I showed you, because of your meltdown with my link provided...and then you will say "I didn't ask for a link."
Repeat

2. Your next move will be to claim that you answered it by giving your definition, to which I replied that isn't the question...etc...etc...blah...blah...blah..

3. You will also say that you answered through your non-answers. 

Moron.

Deal: If Veghead can prove that he answered the survivorship multiple choice question, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back for as long as I live. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why. 

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post: [/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...

From which you are running...