Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Look you Gods damn asshole. Read the fucking article.Now it's 10 degrees in 75 years? Care to explain how you came to that conclusion?With climate change, what will your city's weather feel like in 60 years? - CNN
If we do nothing like the Trumpettes, here is an idea of what to expect 50-75 years from now.
You talk about the NGD's building renovations to curb AGW but if we do nothing, they will need done anyhow. Buildings in Colorado aren't built to take the warmer temps. Take NYC & make it 10 degrees warmer.
Look you Gods damn asshole. Read the fucking article.Now it's 10 degrees in 75 years? Care to explain how you came to that conclusion?With climate change, what will your city's weather feel like in 60 years? - CNN
If we do nothing like the Trumpettes, here is an idea of what to expect 50-75 years from now.
You talk about the NGD's building renovations to curb AGW but if we do nothing, they will need done anyhow. Buildings in Colorado aren't built to take the warmer temps. Take NYC & make it 10 degrees warmer.
AVERAGE - you really need to learn what the fuck that means.
If the average global temps go up 4 degrees C (7.2 degrees F), some areas will increase more than others. Hence the word A V E R A G E
You people are dumber than shit & you prove it with every stupid post you make.
He is with the Cato Institute. Where all the right wing puppets hang out. He is known as a fraud who does sloppy work.What horse puckey. He was paid for testifying once by a coal company and his take on tobacco was pointing out poor statistical analyses.Same guy who said tobacco doesn't cause cancer & testified for tobacco companies.That's currently. Before that he was a professor at Harvard and MIT. You should try listening to him some time. You'll hear more science on the subject of climate than you will anywhere else.He focuses on the interaction between science and policymakers. He studies whether the move from largely private funding to public support has introduced biases into science and the public policies. Which has nothing to do with the data being collected nor the results of climate change which we are just starting to see.Do you mean people like this...The deniers are not scientist
https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrDQqMkJWJcPSoAgF9jmolQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByOHZyb21tBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1549964709/RO=10/RU=https://www.cato.org/people/richard-lindzen/RK=2/RS=e9oN7BI77LV2cK5gTOCNFLnqpNE-
Something tells me he knows more about the subject than all of us on this forum.
The same guy who is funded by coal companies.
The same guy in Cato institute.
Bull shit. Rising fuel costs ups the pricing. Higher health insurance raises cost. Market conditions makes the price go up. Did you expect workers not to get any increases & just suffer these rising costs?That will never happen. The poor will stay poor because the cost of living will rise to the new level. In 1976 I started my first job at $1.85 an hour. Minimum wage. I can buy the equivalent amount of stuff for the minimum wage today.yes; or, we can raise the minimum wage until the Poor can afford to pay their share.The point is, Climate Change happens, Regardless. Why not develop better technologies at lower cost to better cope with it.
"at lower cost"
LOL
With $50 trillion price tag. Who's going to do it, the government?
price inflation happens even without wages increasing.
Without wages increasing, there would be virtually no price inflation. A fact you know but live in denial about daily.
Democrat candidates really have to be more specific on this cow killing thing. Are ranchers supposed to kill their own cows .. or will there be an event Open to the public like the Rattlesnake and python hunts?
Yet another dumbass TrumpetteDemocrats did what the past two years? How did they throw the BRAKES on our economy? Trying to stop borrowing 1.5 trillion ifor an unfunded tax cut?
There is no such thing as "FUNDING A TAX CUT". IT IS MY MONEY!
How many Republicans will vote to condemn future generations to the effects of unfettered global warming.Update: Mitch McConnell has said he is DEFINITELY putting the Green New Deal up for a vote, just so that Americans can see which Democrats support it.
Note to Occasional Cortex: when the opposition party is gleefully looking forward to bringing your legislation up for a public vote, you're probably in trouble.
It will be interesting on how many Dem Senators up for reelection next year will vote for this whack job resolution. My crystal ball says very few; only ones in states where a Republican has no shot at winning.
Ethanol use has zero to do with climate change abatement. It was done to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.Only a stupid fuck thinks we need to collect all of it.There is enough energy rained down on the Earth in the noon time hour to power the planet for a year.
I guess we should ignore it., Silly me.
Free energy. Who would bitch about free energy? Fossil fuel people? Do ya think? They dupe ignorant fucks like you & here you people are lying & having a freaking fit about the NGD.
How stupid are you people?
LOL, most of that so-called rained down energy falls on the oceans, do you want to float solar panels on the surface of all the oceans?
the stupid person here is you.
Ok, so you only want to cover the land with solar panels and windmills. There is continuous wind off the coast of the Kennedy compound why are there no windmills there? and what does it cost to build all those solar panels and windmills? are they free? Solar panels need liquid silicon and it takes a lot of heat to melt silicon, what fuel does that?
I wish you libs would actually think about the practical side of your foolish fantasy world.
My understanding is that "environmental" electric cars they want require batteries that are hell on the environment to produce. Leftists never think things through.
Correct. Just like ethanol is.
One is weather on a particular day & the other is a trendWith climate change, what will your city's weather feel like in 60 years? - CNN
If we do nothing like the Trumpettes, here is an idea of what to expect 50-75 years from now.
You talk about the NGD's building renovations to curb AGW but if we do nothing, they will need done anyhow. Buildings in Colorado aren't built to take the warmer temps. Take NYC & make it 10 degrees warmer.
How can you say somebody can predict what the weather will be like in 60 years from today when we can't even get an accurate seven day forecast in most cases?
I couldn't care less if it's an average, care to explain how this how this prediction came to be? Or do you just accept it out sheer blind dogmatic allegiance?Look you Gods damn asshole. Read the fucking article.Now it's 10 degrees in 75 years? Care to explain how you came to that conclusion?With climate change, what will your city's weather feel like in 60 years? - CNN
If we do nothing like the Trumpettes, here is an idea of what to expect 50-75 years from now.
You talk about the NGD's building renovations to curb AGW but if we do nothing, they will need done anyhow. Buildings in Colorado aren't built to take the warmer temps. Take NYC & make it 10 degrees warmer.
AVERAGE - you really need to learn what the fuck that means.
If the average global temps go up 4 degrees C (7.2 degrees F), some areas will increase more than others. Hence the word A V E R A G E
You people are dumber than shit & you prove it with every stupid post you make.
Ethanol use has zero to do with climate change abatement. It was done to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.Only a stupid fuck thinks we need to collect all of it.LOL, most of that so-called rained down energy falls on the oceans, do you want to float solar panels on the surface of all the oceans?
the stupid person here is you.
Ok, so you only want to cover the land with solar panels and windmills. There is continuous wind off the coast of the Kennedy compound why are there no windmills there? and what does it cost to build all those solar panels and windmills? are they free? Solar panels need liquid silicon and it takes a lot of heat to melt silicon, what fuel does that?
I wish you libs would actually think about the practical side of your foolish fantasy world.
My understanding is that "environmental" electric cars they want require batteries that are hell on the environment to produce. Leftists never think things through.
Correct. Just like ethanol is.
By all means please cite some of sloppy work. If he's a fraud I guess Harvard and MIT have lost all credibility. By the way can you point to any emails from Lindzen talking about "using Mike's trick to hide the decline" or "getting rid of the medieval warm period"?He is with the Cato Institute. Where all the right wing puppets hang out. He is known as a fraud who does sloppy work.What horse puckey. He was paid for testifying once by a coal company and his take on tobacco was pointing out poor statistical analyses.Same guy who said tobacco doesn't cause cancer & testified for tobacco companies.That's currently. Before that he was a professor at Harvard and MIT. You should try listening to him some time. You'll hear more science on the subject of climate than you will anywhere else.He focuses on the interaction between science and policymakers. He studies whether the move from largely private funding to public support has introduced biases into science and the public policies. Which has nothing to do with the data being collected nor the results of climate change which we are just starting to see.Do you mean people like this...
https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrDQqMkJWJcPSoAgF9jmolQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByOHZyb21tBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1549964709/RO=10/RU=https://www.cato.org/people/richard-lindzen/RK=2/RS=e9oN7BI77LV2cK5gTOCNFLnqpNE-
Something tells me he knows more about the subject than all of us on this forum.
The same guy who is funded by coal companies.
The same guy in Cato institute.
How many Republicans will vote to condemn future generations to the effects of unfettered global warming.Update: Mitch McConnell has said he is DEFINITELY putting the Green New Deal up for a vote, just so that Americans can see which Democrats support it.
Note to Occasional Cortex: when the opposition party is gleefully looking forward to bringing your legislation up for a public vote, you're probably in trouble.
It will be interesting on how many Dem Senators up for reelection next year will vote for this whack job resolution. My crystal ball says very few; only ones in states where a Republican has no shot at winning.
Update: Mitch McConnell has said he is DEFINITELY putting the Green New Deal up for a vote, just so that Americans can see which Democrats support it.
Note to Occasional Cortex: when the opposition party is gleefully looking forward to bringing your legislation up for a public vote, you're probably in trouble.
It will be interesting on how many Dem Senators up for reelection next year will vote for this whack job resolution. My crystal ball says very few; only ones in states where a Republican has no shot at winning.
I, like McConnell, am most curious how those running for President will vote, given that they all rushed out and endorsed this heinous piece of puerile crap before they read it.
By all means please cite some of sloppy work. If he's a fraud I guess Harvard and MIT have lost all credibility. By the way can you point to any emails from Lindzen talking about "using Mike's trick to hide the decline" or "getting rid of the medieval warm period"?He is with the Cato Institute. Where all the right wing puppets hang out. He is known as a fraud who does sloppy work.What horse puckey. He was paid for testifying once by a coal company and his take on tobacco was pointing out poor statistical analyses.Same guy who said tobacco doesn't cause cancer & testified for tobacco companies.That's currently. Before that he was a professor at Harvard and MIT. You should try listening to him some time. You'll hear more science on the subject of climate than you will anywhere else.He focuses on the interaction between science and policymakers. He studies whether the move from largely private funding to public support has introduced biases into science and the public policies. Which has nothing to do with the data being collected nor the results of climate change which we are just starting to see.
The same guy who is funded by coal companies.
The same guy in Cato institute.
I give credit to Lindzen for one simple fact, he's one of the few scientists willing to occasionally say "we don't know".
Take for example sea level rise. Climatologists will say that they absolutely know sea level rise is accelerating. Meanwhile the people that use tide gauges to measure sea level are ripping the satellite data to shreds and the satellite people are laughing at the tide gauge people. None of them have the honesty to say that at this time our ability to measure sea level rise sucks. And that's now, how do compare today's data to that of 100 years ago?
You can say the same about global temperature. Look into how this is calculated, all the "adjustments" and "homogenizing"
going on. The changing of historical data to make the past appear cooler and latter times look warmer. The GW folks are talking about 95% certainty in regards to future predictions, they can't show 95% certainty on their own raw data.
One is weather on a particular day & the other is a trendWith climate change, what will your city's weather feel like in 60 years? - CNN
If we do nothing like the Trumpettes, here is an idea of what to expect 50-75 years from now.
You talk about the NGD's building renovations to curb AGW but if we do nothing, they will need done anyhow. Buildings in Colorado aren't built to take the warmer temps. Take NYC & make it 10 degrees warmer.
How can you say somebody can predict what the weather will be like in 60 years from today when we can't even get an accurate seven day forecast in most cases?
Well, it was 63.8 degrees.One is weather on a particular day & the other is a trendWith climate change, what will your city's weather feel like in 60 years? - CNN
If we do nothing like the Trumpettes, here is an idea of what to expect 50-75 years from now.
You talk about the NGD's building renovations to curb AGW but if we do nothing, they will need done anyhow. Buildings in Colorado aren't built to take the warmer temps. Take NYC & make it 10 degrees warmer.
How can you say somebody can predict what the weather will be like in 60 years from today when we can't even get an accurate seven day forecast in most cases?
To believe that, you have to believe that in 1800, the average temperature in Miami Beech was 64 degrees. It was 64 degrees a hundred years earlier, a thousand years earlier, and 64 degrees ten thousand years earlier. It didn't start changing until the mid 1800's.
Now don't tell my you actually believe that.
A group of progressive-minded activists and industry experts have proposed that the federal and state governments, together with the railroad industry, invest in a long-term project to electrify U.S. railroads. In a book published in October 2016, Solutionary Rail, a people-powered campaign to electrify America’s railroads to a clean energy future,
why do you not know how it's done?wanna bet?
Electric locomotives are used on freight routes with consistently high traffic volumes, or in areas with advanced rail networks
Give us a link champ.
You have never seen electric subway systems?
Diesels engines are going away like the dinosaur because electric locomotives and more energy efficient and cost less to maintain. You personally can't stop progress because you believe fossil fuels are the darling of humans..
Electric Trains vs. Diesel Trains
Though trains are more efficient than trucks, not all trains are equally efficient. Diesel-powered trains transfer about 30-35 percent of the energy generated by combustion to the wheels, while supplying electricity directly from an overhead powerline transfers about 95 percent of the energy to the wheels. Powering trains with electricity rather than diesel has several other benefits, according to the authors of Solutionary Rail:
.Electrification of U.S. Railways: Pie in the Sky, or Realistic Goal? | Article | EESI
You know what's realistic? The fact that people are not going to trade traveling cross-country in a matter of hours for doing it over several days.
The left doesn't intend to give people a choice.
Democrats don't like choice. Choice means freedom.
Based on what.Control can also mean regulation, dumbass dupe. Like every intelligent rich country in the world that doesn't have greedy idiot GOP dupes running things... Everywhere outside your bubble of stupid ignorance and garbage propaganda, socialism is defined as well regulated capitalism with a good safety net. "We are all socialists now!" --Finland prime minister when ObamaCare passed... Guess what shithead dupe? Everyone in the world but you brainwashed jackasses who deny global warming and progressive taxation know what socialism is since people found out the USSR was a totalitarian scam. Most successful modern countries have socialist parties and none of them thinks socialism is communism. Wake up and smell the coffee. Only the brainwashed GOP morons...
No you ignorant and uneducated sot, socialism is not capitalism of any form.
Capitalism is based on a free market. Prices are determined by supply and demand. Now you're in my backyard. Arguing economics with me is very dumb, as you have found on dozens of occasions.
The issue we have is that you lack a grasp of the most basic and fundamental concepts. I speak of the market, but you have no idea what that means. Simply put, a market is an exchange of value for value. The seller will relinquish goods if the value of money offered is greater TO HIM than the value of his good. The buyer will offer cash if the goods are of greater value TO HIM than the cash. No one save the buyer and seller have input into what the value of the goods are. Price then follows the judgement of buyers and sellers.
I teach freshmen who grasp these concepts, but YOU fucking don't, regardless of how many times and how basic I explain it to you. Under socialism, the GOVERNMENT is the only entity that decides value. The market is perverted. Under Communism the market is eradicated. Any system where an entity other than the buyer or seller set the price of goods is NOT capitalism.
Would it be socialism if we taxed millionaires and billionaires at 70%?
No, just insanely stupid.
I get it, a thriving economy ensures Trump wins reelection in 2020. You leftists are desperate to throw the breaks on the economy. America suffering is democrats winning.
