• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TheAce

  1. 25 minutes ago, falcon45ca said:

    Science did not teach those things, and it was science who refuted those teachings. 

    The geocentric model was the leading theory for nearly 1500 years before Kepler and Galileo came along.... and yes, science did end up refuting it but thats exactly my point. In 20 years from now some of the current scientific theories will be updated or found out to be wrong as new scientific info is learned

  2. 1 hour ago, kingofsurrey said:

    So you are saying we need to ignore Science...   really ?

    Are you also against vacinations ? 

    not at all, what im saying is science has a history of not always being correct. as new information comes out, theories will change. Is climate changing ?  Yes....   Should we as humans be doing everything we can to limit the damage being done to this earth ?  absolutely.....   But ever since i was a kid ive been hearing about another ice age is coming or acid rain is gonna get us all, etc etc.....  

  3. 41 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

    Believe whatever you want.  I could care less.    You should start to believe in Science though and get informed about climate change.....


     The problem is that Science, especially this branch of science , hasnt always been correct . Science used to teach that little rocks fell slower than big rocks, science used to teach that the planets rotated around the earth,  etc etc etc . And even now more than ever, science has become political depending on who is funding the grants as to which results get published.

    • Hydration 1
    • Upvote 1

  4. 1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

    I want Canada to have jobs and industry. I particularly want first nations people to be able to get out of the devastating poverty cycle. You seem to value vague notions of being a climate activist but all you're doing is giving more opportunity to the Saudi's and Russia to sell oil and have our own people hurt. Give your head a shake man, and think about the consequences of what you're talking about. And spare me the climate spew, if the Cree first nation is OK with the project you should be too. 

    careful Jimmy,  you are starting to sound like a Conservative with posts like this  ;)

    • Haha 3

  5. 3 hours ago, canuckster19 said:

    They do this in Sweden too, deport people who have been here long, integrated into the country, have nice societal standing but were lost in the cracks of the system years ago.


    But then they won't enforce deportations of criminal elements because of fears of what might happen to them, kinda sad really.

    Even some who werent lost in the cracks..... i had a friend who came here from England on a work visa. Was here for 5 years with a decent paying job, paying taxes, never got in trouble with the law and was applying for PR and was denied, tried applying for an extension on his work visa and was also denied. The owner of his company wrote and called the gov't pleading to allow him to stay because he was such a valuable member of his work ( he ended up in the management ) but to no avail. Was given a date and sent home. Yet we have our RCMP waiting at known illegal points of entry to help carry luggage over and our country is paying for them to stay in 5 star hotels. Makes you shake your head at how backwards we have it....

  6. 6 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

    That's a HUGE thing people forget


    10 years of Harper

    16 years of business happy Libs in BC

    45+ years of Cons in Alberta


    But how many pipelines got built in the last decade prior to Trudeau?


    Like none...


    Without of course mentioning again the NEP which would have addressed literally all of this

    I dont think it was much of a concern to most people because oil prices were good and business was rolling. Like anything, people only notice when things start to go bad. While I agree JT is getting some wrongful blame he didnt help himself out by giving speeches talking about killing the oil and gas sector in Canada.

  7. On 10/30/2019 at 7:59 PM, Kanukfanatic said:

    No. I am old.  But your post was bad in that you called Edler useless...


    ...I figured only a teenager that doesn't know better would type something so dumb.  Edler useless?  Slap yourself in the face.  :picard:


    On 10/30/2019 at 7:59 PM, Kanukfanatic said:

    No. I am old.  But your post was bad in that you called Edler useless...


    ...I figured only a teenager that doesn't know better would type something so dumb.  Edler useless?  Slap yourself in the face.  :picard:

    For someone who is old, you dont read very well do you ?  I called him useless on the PP !  I then backed it up with how much better our PP has been with Hughes ever since he replaced Edler on the number 1 unit.  If you want to throw a tantrum and insults, atleast argue the actual topic which was Edler on the PP

    • Hydration 1
    • Upvote 1

  8. 9 hours ago, aGENT said:

    And those posters, as always, are wrong.


    He's a #2D. Always has been and continues to be. That doesn't make him a PPQB or even a PMD though.


    He's a minute munching, 2 way, #2D with some physicality. I'll take that on my team any day. Too many people have been in a hurry to throw out the baby with the bath water because he's never been a #1D or PPQB/PMD. Tossing aside perfectly good players just because you lack other better or complimentary ones, is just plain stupid.

    If you read my original post, I was talking about him playing on the PP.  My comment had nothing to do with the rest of his play or how many minutes he plays

  9. 23 hours ago, Kanukfanatic said:

    Alex Edler. One of the best Canuck defensemen ever.  


    And you, the basement dwelling poster, call him useless???  Come on....:picard:

    Actually several posters on here have admitted that Edler would be much better suited as a 3/4 d-man . He was thrown into a top pairing role because we didnt have anyone else.  Canucks were 22nd in the league last year on the PP and it has been a puck moving D-man has been a huge need for this team. Our PP this year started off poorly and the only switch that was made was Hughes for Edler and there has been a noticeable difference. 


    basement dweller poster ?   are you still in high school by any chance ? 

  10. 15 hours ago, -AJ- said:

    Not sure what Edler you were watching, but Edler was fantastic on the PP. Put up tons of points. Hughes looks great too, but Edler was not a problem on the PP.

    Our PP was struggling when Edler was on the point at the start of the season..... Its really turned around ever since Hughes was moved up to the number 1 unit.  Edler , much like Ohlund, was kind of thrown in that situation out of a not really having anyone else. I find there to be a huge difference in puck carrying and not rushing the shot or play with Hughes as opposed to Edler who more times than not would bumble the puck at the blue line or blasting the puck into the defenders shin pads

  11. 14 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

    I thought that was funny also. Airdrie no less haha oh man Blake Richard's phone and Angela Pitt's phone will never stop ringing. I imagine they will tell him to go back to BC haha.

    Blake plays on my hockey team when he's in town so im sure i could set up a meeting :)

  12. 15 minutes ago, aGENT said:

    That's not my idea but until Alberta stops taking it's ball and going home, we're left to play with the kids who stay. Even if they're kinda dicks.


    But this is exactly what I'm talking about (and presumably Jimmy). Alberta seems to want nothing to do with compromise or partnership. Doesn't leave the rest of us with much choice.

    I think this is exactly what Alberta wants though. Partnership of some kind.  For years and years Alberta has been paying billions to other provinces which is fine because its for the greater good of the country, however if other provinces want to reap the benefits of Alberta's money, do you not think they should then be supporting them as well ?  Is it fair that Quebec recieves billions from Alberta but then buys oil from Saudi Arabia ?  Right now, pipelines are probably the most efficient and safest way to export oil yet its a fight to get it done. All this money that could be made, would be a great way of funding greener, and safer environmental projects. So instead of fighting it or not buying from Alberta why dont we work together to figure out a solution that benefits everyone ? 

    • Upvote 2

  13. 1 hour ago, aGENT said:

    Biggest problem I see is any criticism (constructive, warranted or otherwise) or request to compromise, seems to be met with a 'take our ball and go home' mentality.


    As far as I can tell, the rest of Canada largely, simply wants continued progress, modernization, and diversity from oil and gas (smart IMO) and some compromise regarding environmental risk vs profits. 

    So until then, we will just continue to import oil from countries who have no regulations and substandard human rights issues ?

    • Like 1

  14. 27 minutes ago, DonLever said:

    Unless the polls are horribly wrong,  Mr. Trudeau will still be PM on Tuesday simply because of one simple reason:   The LIBs lead the CONS in Ontario and Quebec in almost every single poll.   Its just math:  Ontario and Quebec combined:  128 + 78 seats = 199 seats out 338 seats.  That is almost 60% of the seats in Canada.   Even if Trudeau wins 1/2 of the Ontario/Quebec seats he is on the way to a minority government since Atlantic Canada is solidly Liberal.


    It does not really matter what happens in the West.  The power has always been in the East since Confederation and beyond.


    The only thing holding back Trudeau is the rise in Bloc support that will make him lose some seats in Quebec.  Without the Bloc, the Liberals will get a clear majority.


    As for the Tories, they need a new leader if they can't beat Trudeau with so many scandals.   It is their fault they chose a leader with as much personality as a wet dish cloth.   I am sure any Tory leader besides Scheer will do better at defeating Trudeau.


    Yes, and no......  I do agree that Scheer will need to be replaced but I dont think a different leader would have helped much. If people can still reward JT with a vote for the Liberals after all these scandals then there wouldnt be anything that can sway there mind.


  15. 2 hours ago, Duodenum said:

    The problem is how she got to this point. This isn't new information. You can just google her name and find those comments, they were from back in 2011. They were just trying to pull the wool over people's eyes and hoping nobody would make a big deal over it. Once it got into the news, then it's time to cut ties, that's baloney. 


    They have a similarly moronic MP in Alice Wong in Richmond who's been hot garbage the last 7 years. 


    Canada can't afford a party that only cares about the standards of their MPs when the news makes a big deal out of them. 

    While I dont disagree, it then really makes someone question the morals of the Liberals who allow Trudeau to remain the leader other than they know he gives them the best chance to win.  What is the total up to now ? 4 different pics of JT dressed in black face and when asked why he never came forward and mentioned it he replied that he was embarrassed. He made such a big deal about womens rights and believing women when they come out and claim sexual abuse but then turns around and uses an excuse of " she experienced it differently "  when his own allegations of misconduct come out . Kent Hehr was removed from his cabinet position for the same allegations. 

  16. Treliving came out today saying that one of the reasons it was a shorter deal and for less money than expected was because Tkachuk " could not and would not " allow his contract to be the reason one of his teamates was traded off. There were lots of stories that Brodie or Frolik would have to be moved when Tkachuk signed but he made sure that wouldnt happen.  With stories like that, its easy to see why he was given an A so quickly and is a well respected in the locker room

    • Hydration 1
    • Upvote 2

  17. 3 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

    I don’t think you can play that game. It’s not as simple as if we had tkachuk we would have had more points = better results.


    There’s no saying that if canucks had tkachuk perhaps granlund doesn’t get the same opportunity to score 19 goals. Or baertschi doesn’t get the pp time to put up 35 points. It’s not just a simple addition. That move subtracts else where in realistically balances itself out.


    Canucks didn’t finish that low simply because we were missing a 48 point rookie. Canucks finished that low because our goaltending was poor and we were annihilated with injuries. Tkachuk doesn’t change that. 


    Every move has a ripple effect that is impossible to predict. So trying to add hindsight doesn’t work in this situation. There’s no saying that canucks would have been better. Canucks could have just as easily been worse and ended up drafting Dahlin in 2018. 

    not to mention EP may not have been on anyone's radar. There were some serious concerns about his size. I believe Bob Mckenzie had him ranked 11th overall