patrick.net

FortWayneIndiana says

So in order to reduce carbon emissions Democrats want everyone to build giant farms of solar panels (that they are selling), and cut down forests to build all this, and to replace all fields everywhere with solar panels, increasing cost of energy 10 fold.

And their clueless voters think it's a good idea to do that, count me out!

Actually, we do not have to be that extreme. We have some solar farms in my area that seem to be working out well. They did not have to cut down a forest, they just used an old pumpkin farm in one case. Solar farms are just one aspect, though. Solar, wind, geothermal, conservation, and related endeavors could seriously mitigate pollution and resource depletion, but not if we do not allow the population to stabilize, and instead import millions of third world to "make up for the declining birthrate."

jazz_music says

Always a comeback

Always a dodge. Back to arguing with deniers.

d6rB says

I hope that everyone can agree that replacing oil and coal with a different source of energy would be good, as it would screw over Saudi Barbaria, Russia, and other assorted dictatorships. Admirable goal even if we do not think AGW is real.

Agreed.

Don't you think that if we all agreed about AGW, or at least agreed that the probability that AGW is happening is high enough to stop denying and debating it, it would be much easier easier to make progress on this ?

This is another claim that I wish was funny.

Deniers say liberals don't want solutions, they just want to argue that AGW is real. Consider how our government works, that is the lobbying and campaign money behind fossil fuel interests.

Are you really going to tell me that it should be easy to make progress against these huge interests regardless of whether a majority in congress accepts AGW or not ?

Politicians need a firm leash when it comes to budgets. My best suggestion is that governments be limited to creating a budget that reflects actual receipts of two or three years before. No pie in the sky projections of receipts to justify pie in the sky spending. Basing budgets on previous receipts will create small surpluses in a growing economy. If the economy is contracting, it will tend to run small deficits. Not a perfect solution, but better than letting politicians run amok.

They won’t stop importing illegals because cheap labor and votes is what they want.

They don’t give a shit about declining birth rate.


HeadSet says

FortWayneIndiana says

So in order to reduce carbon emissions Democrats want everyone to build giant farms of solar panels (that they are selling), and cut down forests to build all this, and to replace all fields everywhere with solar panels, increasing cost of energy 10 fold.

And their clueless voters think it's a good idea to do that, count me out!

Actually, we do not have to be that extreme. We have some solar farms in my area that seem to be working out well. They did not have to cut down a forest, they just used an old pumpkin farm in one case. Solar farms are just one aspect, though. Solar, wind, geothermal, conservation, and related endeavors could seriously mitigate pollution and resource depletion, but not if we do not allow the population to stabilize, and instead import millions of third world to "make up for the declining birthrate."

Pretty much admitting you imported a moron class into your country.

Actually, the GOP Party Mangement is fooling itself...

Most Republicans want to bring spending under control

We want to make more than we spend. Its basically the definition of 'winning'

Trumps spending is his biggest weakness in the coming election

Many Republican voters would vote for a Democrat who promised to spend less than was taken in

But with lies from both sides, and Democrats advocating using a stolen checkbook constantly,

Nobody is likely to be trusted on this issue.

"Conservatives"- have conserved what, exactly? Oh yeah! I remember now... money to Israel.

NOOOOOOO! We will lose trillions of dollars brought here by tourists from Venezuela!!!!! Fucking Orangemanbad!

marcus says

Agreed.

Don't you think that if we all agreed about AGW, or at least agreed that the probability that AGW is happening is high enough to stop denying and debating it, it would be much easier easier to make progress on this ?

@marcus
Both sides think that the other side is not negotiating or discussing this in good faith, and both are probably correct. On AGW supporter side, few scientists who claim that AGW either is not significant or does not exist are shouted down and bullied in press (mostly non-scientifically), some AGW supporter scientists have been caught fudging numbers, and solutions that AGW supporters propose will benefit them very much, and will make the rest of population poor. On AGW denier side, many go to extreme of denying the FACT that world gets warmer on average, and it is fairly obvious that most of anti-AGW research is funded by fossil fuel industries, which indirectly helps in this research providing results which funders want.
I am trying to make up my mind about AGW, but it is a really, really complex issue and even knowledge in chemistry and physics does not help much unless you know the field very well, which I do not. We KNOW that world gets warmer. What we do not know is what percent of that is human influence, and out of human influence, what % is CO2 emissions (as opposed to deforestation, city area increase, smog, etc). We do know that oil profits sustain dictatorships, Islamic terrorism, etc, and that oil is not a resource that is renewable on timescale of even few million years.

Are you really going to tell me that it should be easy to make progress against these huge interests regardless of whether a majority in congress accepts AGW or not ?

How about in California, where the majority of State government does accept AGW?

jazz_music says

The overwhelming majority of climate scientists,

Ok Jazz, name your favorite 3 scientists, or admit you are being told what to think.

marcus says

Don't you think that if we all agreed about AGW, or at least agreed that the probability that AGW is happening is high enough to stop denying and debating it, it would be much easier easier to make progress on this ?

The problem is idiocy like the Paris Accord. Stealing public funds for power is far a stretch from agreeing that we should go green.

We don't need to agree for private citizens to invest in green energy research and development?

This means any asylum claim by the citizens of these countries should be automatically denied. It's too dangerous here!

jazz_music says

IS YOUR OPINION RELEVANT TO SAVING LIVES AND PROPERTY?

OR WHAT? INVESTMENT ADVICE?

So you got nothing? Any of your "experts" got predictions of doom?

Reminds me of the conversation I had with a French dude while vacationing on Fiji: at the dinner table after learning that I'm an American he proclaimed that he would never visit US because of the fear of being gunned down at some public event. I said: "You mean something like what happened at Bataclan theatre in Paris? Do you feel the same about going home then?" He bleated something about it being "different" and quickly changed the subject.

marcus says

When the year occurs (possibly 2019) that takes out the 2016 high, onvacation will have to come up with some different nonsensical reason to think whatever his overlords tell him to think.

We got a prediction! 2019 will (might) be warmer than 2016!

This prediction can be checked in 6 months. Michael Mann and Al Gore's predictions of doom have already failed.

Run on this Democrats! We need to keep the Bureaucrats living the high life on our tax dollars in DC!

just have everybody turn off their radios, neutralizing the fallout whereever it falls out...

HEYYOU says

"If either side - or both sides - detonates a nuke, prevailing weather patterns would carry the radioactive fallout to the west coast of the United States and Canada within 7 days.

"Camps for Comrade FaceFuck Pandertards Now!" Just being forced to be together is a fate worse than death.

He's a Republican of course he's prosecutable.

Democrat scofflaws dindu nuffin.

My idea of a "heavy clash" is something more like Kursk. Or maybe these two:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Plataea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leipzig
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Narva_(1944)

If he agrees to change parties, the Clinton's will make certain the justice system forgets all about him and will hire him for the Clinton Foundation.

How is this guy a "campaign icon?"

Your fantasy utopia is Idiocracy....

I bet leftists still don't see why most people will never vote for them.

Not to worry. LibbyFucks, CommieFucks, the Democratic Party and their captors in the intelligence agencies/FBI/Justice Department have plans to round up every crypto-KKK goose stepping Republican/Conservative and eliminate them with extreme prejudice in detainment camps so these social contaminants can no longer pollute the glories and insights of the Great Socialist Paradise.

The LibbyFucks keep packets of MAGA hats to put on every apprehended perp that gets a news shot now.

Is Walmart going to have bullet-pock mark-downs now on merchandise?

Do slip'n'falls on greasy blood get triple indemnity from dirtbag lawyer claims? If 400 pounders slide like bowling balls knocking down rack after rack of merchandise on the blood, do they get to keep all the stuff?

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

Correct!

As the Founding Fathers intended. Everybody loves a bonus discount.

If it can mow the lawn, too, and Alexia screams in pain at every shot, they will be on to something.

LOL what you wrote was the first thing that came to mind when I read the title.

anyone who travels to US will have their social score reduced I assume?

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

Right, people in cars will be hopping curbs or just leaning out of their windows to push them over when they drive by them.

I plan to use a jousting stick.

Just sit on them for free rides.

OccasionalCortex says

Trump-hating Bluetard Hawaii's economy is taking a hit a well!

In fact Trump's economy is taking a hit a well!

If you put one on its back, is it capable of flipping back, or will it stay stuck like a turtle?

All of this is wheeled vehicle stuff is a disappointment. What happened to those delivery drones that were supposed to be commonplace by now? Must have crashed into the self driving cars.

I wonder how long it's going to take for Amazon to figure out not to send these things into Elijah Cummings district and similar places?
And yes they will be too stupid to figure this out in advance.

Plus I'd like to see how poorly they perform on wet and/or snowy roads or high wind.