The Right Side of the News

I agree with the Senator Chow. In fact, it is her job in that position to represent a set of views. I think her abstainence was just the right balance.

Looks like a wall to me. 10 or 8 feet it looks to me that Trump didn't lie.OMG! Trump didn't lie!!!!!! Is there room for a mark on that side of the ledger?So the pictures showing the home without a wall were fake news? Taken sometime long in the past?

A. You do NOT "stumble" into an operating room.B. You are not told anything if you manage you are ushered out.That is obvious crap. As usual, you fall for anything.

He also forgot to mention what happens if you try to bring the jobs from asia back to the US. How many people want to pay 50% or 100 % more for items at Walmart?
Or if the jobs will pay the same here as in China so the Walmart prices don't go way up who will be able to live on them in the US?As I understand the facts, a large fraction of the jobs didn't go to China anyway. They stayed in the US but robots do them now.

You used NUMBERS! 2 and 4!!! You gave facts!!!
This is all much to complicated for your audience to grasp.You have heard the old saying:
"Arguing with a fool only proves there are two."

You seem to have a bee in your pants about the climate issues. I asked you weeks ago two simple questions which you haven't answered:Do you think it is ok to pore toxins into the air we breathe?Do you not accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Somehow you went on for 100's of words without answering two reasonably simple questions.Introduction:
The introduction went exactly as it should (though too slowly). Scientists are not and should not be unelected policy makers. They supply the information that is used to make policy.
Al Gore did not introduce the subject he was just someone with enough recognition to attract some attention.
That was, though not the question I asked: Is CO2 a greenhouse gas?Name Change:
People were, (and obviously still are very confused) by the tern global warming since they (with some reason) were made to think that things should uniformally and universally be warming. In fact, as the global average temperature increases a lot of different things occur. So climate change is a much better term. That you would get in a knot about that change shows that you don’t get the basic issue at all.The name isn’t the question I asked about either.Who should fix it?
Well, obviously we are all in this together so we all need to. Settling who does is a big issue to be discussed. It’s not what I was asking about though. Is CO 2 a greenhouse gas?Actions:
You’re not discussing actions at all. You’re just suggesting hypocrisy. Of course, there is hypocrisy everywhere. That has nothing to do with the question either though. You need to focus a bit.Toxins:
So, it appears, you do think that poring toxins into the air is a bad thing. However, you seem to hope that technology will fix it all. Well, I’m a hypocrite who still burns gas in his car. A year from now that won’t be true since there is much better technology and that’s what I will use.The danger with your approach is that the technology may not arrive in time and what we already have may not be adopted nearly quickly enough.What should we do now is the question.My view does somewhat agree with you: the more we can make the right individual decisions easy and obvious (like electric cars are for half the market now) the better. If we leave things too long then we will have to mandate actions and remove individuals' freedom of choice.So what can we do to get actions implemented before we have to remove individual freedoms.Also: Since this part is on the toxins question; do you agree that removing individual liberties to burn gas anyway they wanted in their cars in California decades ago was a good decision?Edited by NosyNed, : No reason given.

Dammit! It's not a typo! The Americas includes us for one. We're here, we're dirty too. But only on a per capita basis.The whole childish nonsense of "He's worse than I am." is going to kill us all.

As I understand it, yes it is. Worse than that, the current administration has elected to run the debt up at an even higher rate than it was being run up. You say "warmth". At some level of CO2 in the atmosphere it is no longer "warmth" it is catastrophe. It is pretty clear now that Florida is a gonner. The whole state. Gone! The is the simple, sure consequence of continuing to add CO2. The timing is still far from sure but it has already started. There are answers suggested all over the place. Why aren't you reading about them. As I noted one answer is to rush the conversion to electric cars. I will stretch my budget to do that as my part.
The governments of the world can do their part by, for one thing, stopping trillions is subsidies for the fossil fuel industry. The first emissions tests for cars came in because the air was becoming more and more poisonous. Are you saying you want those rules removed? As we've learned more we see more is needed. If I am poisoning my neighbors then yes, cars that are the worst offenders have to go. That has been true here for some decades now and cars are taken off the road if they are too dirty. Though the rules are not, yet, taking CO2 into account. I will either use cleaner technology or, if I can't afford it then I can't drive. It would be immoral to do otherwise and, as I said, I am aware that I am immoral every time I start the engine. What, exactly, does any of that have to do with the air being cleaner in LA than it was decades ago? It can't be that you are advocating poisoning people over money. No one would do that.

So let's see what you have here:
The people doing measurements are stupid or dishonest seems to be point 1.
Point 2 is they lie to scare people.
The models have been almost always wrong is your point 3.
Point 4 is historical climate changes are ignored.Fine. So what?
(Of course, you've got a lot of crap there but let's not worry about that).Are the record high temperatures in the arctic (20 degrees above normal) reported last year also lies? The highs are occurring in both winter and summer.Is the melting of glaciers as shown at tourist sites in the US and Canadian rockies a bunch of fake pictures?Are the fires in Australia not happening?This is what we were told decades ago would happen. And they are. We don't need mislocated thermometers and what you claim are faulty models we just have to read the news.Separately from that. You and I already have our own climate model, don't we?
We agree that CO2 is a green house gas. I am assuming (maybe that is silly of me) that you know when I took my car out this morning I added to the excess CO2 in the atmosphere.So we agree that the climate is being affected.What our, rather unsophisticated (very, very) model doesn't tell us is how much we can add before the lose Florida and certainly can't tell us when we will remove a state.Do you want to make a guess?What is unarguably true from the model you and I have so far is that we will lose it if we continue.

But you agreed that this is the case. CO2 is being pumped into the air at ever increasing rates. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. We both agree, right?Enough CO2 melts Greenland. You obviously agree that ice melts when warmed enough.What we don't agree on is the timing. What is your estimate?

I'm waiting (and feeling guilty) for 2 reasons. One is to depreciate my low millage car further and also because at my advanced age I expect my next car is my last and I want a higher seating position for getting in and out of so the Model Y is what I am waiting for.I've driven all 3 Tesla's so far and 2 other EVs. Several friends and people I know have S's or 3's. They are fabulous to drive!! So while saving the planet is in the list of reasons I'll confess to being influenced by the sportiness. (I have an Audi S4 right now).Since we have about 20 cm of snow on the ground right now I'll be aiming at the 4WD LR Y next year.So far there are no reasonable competitors to Tesla (disclosure I have some shares) and besides that I like to support a company whose reason for existing isn't just to "do no evil" but actually to try to help save the planet (unlike VW that I have now ).Have you driven a 3 yet?

As in all cases (winter or not) what works depends on your range requirements. A LR Tesla M3 will give you something like 280 miles of a range under good conditions. You'll lose about 100 miles in really cold weather.I'm sure there is a small percentage of people who need more than 150 miles of range in a day but it isn't a large number. Of course, you're only going to keep the car warm not heat it up with the car heater since you'll tell it to be warm for you before you use it.

The battery is much, much less effected by high temperatures when well regulated (unlike a Nissan Leaf). Good EVs control the battery temperature well. However, use of A/C will obviously have an impact but I don't know how much. More if you use dog mode for a long time obviously.
I did a little looking around and it seems A/C has much less effect than heating. And again you'd cool the car before you unplugged and headed out.The big problem with EVs is that many people don't live in circumstances where it is easy to plug in. Fortunately we put in building codes here a few years ago that all new buildings (home, condos) have to have charging places. Another hit to our freedoms according to Marc I guess. We should be forcing and subsidizing retrofits now also.

Do you not have access to an outlet near where you'd park? I'm lucky I have 220 - 30 amp in the garage so no problem at all.
With my driving habits (not much) I'd be fine with a 110V outlet anyway.