Police Brutality Memorial at San Jose City College
A friend of ours sent us a picture of the Police Brutality Memorial that sits at the front desk of the San Jose City College in California. Our friend noticed this picture in the collage;
Recognize him? It’s Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, the Chattanooga shooter, the fellow who killed four US servicemen before he himself was taken down by a good guy with a gun. I guess it was police brutality to stop an active shooter from killing more people in uniform.
It makes you wonder what they’re teaching college students these days, doesn’t it? If you’re interested in what they’re teaching at San Jose, the contact information for President Byron Clift Breland is (408) 288-3725 SJCCPres@sjcc.edu
Category: Dumbass Bullshit
You have awesome friends. Good eye.
Typical lib bullshit, throw something up on the wall without error checking it. Global warming anyone?
So in your mind the lack of fact checking done by some community college kids is more evidence that overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change is wrong.
Where is the word “consensus” found in the definition and description of the scientific method? And lack of fact checking is not limited to those “community college kids” you look down your nose upon….Mr. 400%.
Reminds me of the lack of fact checking when the name Tamerlan Tsarnaev was read aloud as a memorial to gun violence. He’s one half of the Boston bombers. And I love when liberals can’t defend their positions. They’re like “Oh yeah? Global warming…”
At different times, the overwhelming “scientific consensus” was that the sun and planets revolved around the Earth; that atoms were indivisible; and that light propagated through a medium called “ether”.
“Scientific consensus” does not equate to “guaranteed to be correct”. Fairly often throughout history, scientific consensus has turned out to be just plain wrong.
The scientific method did not exist prior to the 17th century, so there was no scientific consensus that the sun revolved around the Earth. That was simply an ancient belief to which there had been infrequent challenges.
luminiferous aether was a postulated theory but there was never a consensus. There was no way to test the hypothesis so it was just one of may theories being debated, including the particle theory which turned out to be more or less correct.
And comparing the capacity of 18th century natural philosophers to make accurate predictions of the nature of light to modern climatologists who are able to measure trillions of data points a year is absurd.
I like how you invoke the scientific method while simultaneously ignoring my question above. Of course, that’s nothing new for you L. Taylor. So before you have a chance to ask, “What are you asking?” again. Here it is. Cut and paste, nothing up my sleeves: Where is the word “consensus” found in the definition and description of the scientific method?
I’d bet if you tallied up disproven theories versus proven ones, you’d find that science is mostly wrong.
Consensus requires scientists agreeing. However, when they instead discredit all opposed viewpoints, it’s not a consensus.
that is not what is happening, nor does a consensus require all scientists to agree.
Ohhhh “Pinkie”, here you go again, let’s not forget about how data was manipulated in “proving” your global warming fairytale! You promised you were leaving, my thin-skinned creampuff, but you apparently enjoy being a human dartboard/pincushion. What’s the topic of this thread? Oh right, it’s about a “memorial” put up by moonbats like you, but you have to come and hijack it for your attention fix, you must be a social reject even among your fellow moonbats, o snotty little bag of poodle dicks!
You must be in great shape from moving those goal posts so much, Lars…
I’ll gladly put Steven Goddard and Anthony Watts up against anyone spouting that horseshit, Lars. Thinking of you, sonny boy.
There’s only “overwhelming scientific consensus” if you carefully cherry-pick your sources, Lars. There’s lots of folks with PhDs who study shit for a living who don’t buy it, and that number is increasing. Even among those who believe it, many of them can hardly agree on the color of the sky.
Never mind the fact that a lot of the baseline data in support of global warming/anthropological climate change/whatever was falsified to scam more grant money, and a lot more data gets “adjusted” (i.e. “altered to appear more in-line with our claims). And even you cannot deny that there’s a metric fuckload of money at stake for the pro-climate change crowd.
Your credibility tends to suffer when you sound like Al Gore or Mikey Fatass Moore.
No, there is not. There are a handful that question specific aspects of the IPCC climate projections. They do not deny climate change is real, only the accuracy of the predictive models.
There are a few that challenge whether we can conclude that it is man made. Essentially arguing that we cannot determine the cause yet. Again, they do not deny it is real.
There are a few that argue it is due to natural processes. As opposed to arguing that the cause is unknown. Again, non denying that it is real.
There have been fewer than 50 peer reviewed studies that argue climate change is not man made.
Over 4000 either argue it is, accept as an assumption it is, or argue that it is natural causes and aggravated by human activity.
The “consensus” is overwhelming. There is a debate whether is is 97% or not, but the number of scientists accepting that it is real is near 100% and the percentage accepting that human activity is a factor or primary driver is well over 75%.
So, the fact that the scientists took neither Siberian or Antarctic temperatures into account for their climate models is standard for GLOBAL temperature averages?
I remember not too long ago when the Carter Administration was prepping the country for the inevitable Ice Age that was coming based on their climate models. There were almost as many “Ice Age Deniers” that were saying it wasn’t true. The difference was that the politicians were not calling people “climate terrorists” for denying the coming Ice Age.
The problem is that the Climate Change people are backed by politicians and political money, so they have to keep making up new studies to account for the data. Too Bad the sun is experiencing a Deep Solar Minimum which was observed during the last mini ice age.
“I remember not too long ago when the Carter Administration was prepping the country for the inevitable Ice Age that was coming based on their climate models.”
No shit. I wrote a letter to a gal back then in which I said, “Soon the earth will be covered under a thick block of ice, so what’s the point.” True story.
How many hurricanes did we have this year?
Damn facts:
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses/
Let’s ignore previous historical examples of inaccurate consensus, including the belief that vermin were spontaneously created from trash, or that meteorites didn’t exist, or that the sun revolved around the earth.
Let us consider that the formula used for CO2 feedback was a formula for feedback in an electronic circuit. Or that the warmists have consistently used feedback values far in excess of observed data. Or that their temperature predictions have consistently been much higher than observed values. Or that their models still can’t explain phenomena like the Medieval Warm Period, or the Little Ice Age.
Hell, they haven’t even determined if rising CO2 values are a leading or a trailing indicator. But when they see a big storm, or a long drought, it’s oh, noes!! global warmening!!! even though they are remarkably quiet when their predictions have been falsified, such as the claim that ice & snow would disappear from Britain, or the NASA scientist who predicted that the Arctic ice would disappear by 2012.
So, no, Lars, the warmists have been remarkably sloppy in their fact-checking.
Poijnting out a paper out of thousands that used an inaccurate formula, or a scientist that made a wrong prediction is an absurd justification for dismissing the hundreds of thousands of pages of reports and trillions of data points, and thousands of peer reviewed papers.
Scientists are frequently off on predictions. To argue that it is evidence that climate change is not real is absurd.
It’s a lot less absurd than some of your crap, Lars. “400% more” ring any bells?
“Pinky”-Lars, you really need to get out more, and I don’t mean to
your usual moonbat hippie holes.
Ok, kid.
OOOHHH “Pinky”, are you THAT starved for attention?
Just ignore him. Soon his mommy will tell him to get off the interwebs and get ready for bed.
That’s hard for me to do Flagwaver, everyone else has gotten to sink their teeth into ‘lil rudy-poo “Pinky’ Lars, and now i feel like it’s MY TURN before the cotton candy-assed little poodle turd retreats for a few more days while he gets warm enemas from his mommy!!
No question what colleges are teaching gullible young people…..SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM! all courtesy of the N.E.A.!
Oh, they don’t care if it’s right or wrong as long as it pushes the narrative.
Reminds me of when some gun-grabber group was reading out a list of names of “victims of gun violence”, and their list of “victims” included Christopher Dorner and Tamerlan Tsarnaev.
I was wondering if those moonbats didn’t have them on their wall as well? Moonbats will be moonbats, they’re mindless slaves unto their political agenda!
Victims of gun violence? Tamerlan Tsarnaev was run over by his brothe Jokhar driving Tamerlan’s truck or SUV, or whatever it was. He wasn’t killed by gunfire.
That’s pure BS, but I guess the truth is inconvenient to these twits, isn’t it?
Howie Carr refers to him as Speedbump.
Little Dzhokar should get burned alive on the coals used to smoke a pig.
Don’t ruin a good BBQ.
No doubt that display is at the front desk of their journalism department. The ONLY reason the left is successful with their politically correct bullshit is because they control academia and mainstream media.
If we ever get to the point of a left/right civil war in this country, the best first strike by the right should be on ALL mainstream media outlets followed by a cleaning out of all college faculties. Cut off the snake’s poisonous head and the body may continue to whip around for a while but the creature is ultimately dead.
Mr. Poe – Have you noticed that the words “skeptical” and “skeptical thinking” have been co-opted by the left as a code word for atheism? They have articles, websites, podcasts, reddit threads, etc. dedicated to “The Skeptical Thinker” and all you will find there are attacks on religion. I find it interesting that the liberals can wrap themselves up in the banner of skeptical thought, yet never question climate data, or gun violence data, or car manufacturer emissions data, or data suggesting Obama experienced 400% more death threats than his predecessors, etc., etc. If I had a bully pulpit, I might be inclined to write about it… Staying in the Lane of Skepticism.
I agree with your main point, but having known quite a few atheists and agnostics in my time, I find that they don’t use code words. They’ll tell you they’re an atheist, and they’ll tell you why, too! For the sake of full disclosure, I have to say that the atheists I’ve known have all been conservatives, and they have no problem knocking down global warming, car emissions data, mining impact data, or unicorns or skittles or kool-aid, or anything else most liberals hold dear.
Atheists are a diverse group, PN. I’ve met some like you describe, who don’t make a big deal about it.
I’ve also met plenty of Bill Maher-type insecure assholes who can’t stand the thought of somebody believing in something. They’re the ones who, if they find out that I’m Catholic (it’s not like I walk around wearing it on a T-shirt), will start loudly accusing me of “trying to ram my religion down their throats,” which is especially ridiculous when they’re the ones who brought up the topic of religion in the first place.
It can go either way. As a Roman Catholic Christian, I feel that somebody else’s religious beliefs are between them and God, and none of my business. I’ll explain mine if asked, but I don’t go looking for that conversation. If somebody is atheist and not a prick about it, great. But there’s plenty who are complete assholes about it, too.
My thoughts were not so much about atheists and their behaviors (just to point out, I am one), but rather to observe that I have found no “skeptical thinking” venue that is truly willing to question anything and/or everything. Religion, open season. Global warming, don’t you dare.
AS TO behavior, I do not attack anyone for their religious beliefs. In truth, I am generally envious of folks who hold sincere profound beliefs and faith that give them comfort… something, up to this point in my life, I have not known.
Others who don’t believe, like me, can be as cantankerous as any of our christian friends…but mostly we just don’t think about religion until some well meaning individual starts telling us how we need the good lord to save us…then I’m an asshole to be sure…
For the record belief in global warming doesn’t enter into it…it’s not a belief system I’m interested in, it’s factual data and it’s clear there is a significant data stream to support several theories over what’s happening with the climate. So it’s hardly settled for me, but I am also aware of the concept that both sides have serious skin in the game. A lot of the anti science is funded by those who win if we do nothing, and a lot of the pro science is funded by those who win if we do something proactive.
Corruption and the constant promotion of doubt worked well for big tobacco and the lesson wasn’t lost on other industries where they know what’s going on but pretend they don’t. The lesson from big tobacco was simple, even though they knew back in the early 60s that they were peddling death they paid scientists to refute the evidence and make the claim the science was not settled while people died every year in the hundreds of thousands due to smoking related illnesses.
Anyone thinking that lesson, that you can sell death while denying it and continue to make tons of money, was lost on the other heavy industries of the nation if a fucking moron.
Being skeptical means being skeptical of both the conventional wisdom and the non-conventional wisdom, especially when the old adage Follow the Money is as true today as when it was first coined so very long ago…
My hesitation on going “all in” on global warming is that I have yet to see a clean data set AND the proponent scientists of global warming have been unable to model and predict, based on their “science”. To me, this indicates an unconfirmed hypothesis and worthy of more inquiry. Not faith.
Agreed, your comment is to the point and spot on.
I always thought it ironic that the masthead of the official Soviet newspaper was ‘Pravda’.
I was just reading an article on the old M1917 “US Enfield” rifle, and came across an interesting fact about honesty in the media.
The US entered WWI in April of 1917, and was critically short of infantry weapons for the mass mobilization that ensued, including M1903 rifles. Since retooling factories for M1903s would take months, and Remington, Winchester, and Eddystone had just completed large orders of P1914 Enfields for the British and Canadians, the Army chose to adopt the P’14 chambered in .30-06 as the US M1917, to be issued concurrently with the M1903.
Enter the New York Times, who published a lengthy front-page article about how the M1917 sucked, the troops were being sent to war with a useless weapon, Congress should hold hearings, etc. Their sources? A few tumors, plus the journalist’s imagination. As it turns out, the M1917 was a great rifle that equipped most of the American Expeditionary Force. It was most likely the rifle used by Alvin York (accounts vary, some say he carried an M1903). It was still in service during WWII.
That NYT article was easily disproven (any of the hundreds of thousands of troops who carried one could refute the whole thing), but lots of people believed it, and it created a scandal. But as mentioned before, the NYT article was bullshit with exactly zero facts to back it up. The “most trusted newspaper in America” LIED.
Apparently some things never change.
If you want to read something entertaining, look up “trigger warnings” and college classes…
Apparently we now have professors who are required to provide “trigger warnings” for every class they teach to alert the special snowflakes at college that they might see or hear something offensive to some identified victim group or another…
So some 18-24 year olds are crying in class over what they’ve seen in a college class while others the same age are fighting the GWOT and seeing actual trauma and carnage….
If that’s not indicative of the nation of pussies we are raising, I’ve no idea what is…everybody gets a trophy so trophies are meaningless. No one can be offended, no one’s supposed to have their feelings hurt…Jesus H. Christ we are so fucking soft it’s a wonder we can walk erect.
Thank you and well said Sir.
Occasionally, one finds a breath of fresh air, in the person of a professor who actually has his head screwed on the right way.
This is the first sentence in the second paragraph about his introduction to his class, “Let’s get something straight right now. You have no right to be unoffended.” I’m sure that Professor Adams will give Lars the vapors, if he chooses to read the article.
http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/professors-epic-class-intro-has-gone-viral-heres-why
Oh HELL YEAH, we need at least a Brigade’s worth of Profs like him all through every one of today’s colleges. Just think of how many young snowflakes might wake up with a dose of reality like that! The one that wouldn’t, oh well, “Pinky”-Lars needs some company for a group hug!
Fired off an email to President Breland. Doubt if will do any good, but it made me feel better. As you can tell by my moniker I have a son who is Infantry(currently deployed to Korea). The fact that they tout this this murdering scum as a victim when he killed four servicemen really bites Also I’m a retired police officer and the whole idea of this memorial just pisses me off.
Every time something like this is done, it puts our officer’s lives in even greater danger. This is a prime example of bleeding hearts causing more problems than they solve, and it will result in the shedding of more officer’s blood.
Anyone have some acetone or MEK to spray on that display? Just to see both it, and the Libtard’s emotions, melting.
Acetone is easy to find, it’s sold over the counter at auto parts stores! 😀
It’s nail polish remover. You can get it at any drug store.
Yes Ma’am, but it’s cheaper at the auto parts stores, drug stores and supermarkets give it SUCH a high retail markup!!
Just got a call back from the College. The photobhas been removed and they apologized fkr it going up in the first place. Mind you the call was from the Veteran Services office at the college and not the presidents office, but at least they responded quickly in getting it down.
Our tipster ripped the picture down yesterday after he took a picture of it. Fox News has been talking to us about it all day.
He’s not going to get in trouble for taking the picture down, is he?
Nope. he’s good.