Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 74 (9014 total)
51 online now:
ICANT, nwr, PaulK (3 members, 48 visitors)
Newest Member: Ashles
Upcoming Birthdays: Raphael
Post Volume: Total: 882,000 Year: 13,748/23,288 Month: 266/412 Week: 53/40 Day: 2/23 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!!
frako
Member
Posts: 2925
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 676 of 713 (873084)
03-09-2020 3:50 PM


Theey are for limited government in the economy, as fare as the people are concerned they want a policeman in every bedroom making sure you have sex the proper way, with the proper people. And anything that does not agree with their conservative morals or beliefs should also be under stringent government control.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.


  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 96 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 677 of 713 (873218)
03-11-2020 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 665 by marc9000
03-08-2020 10:04 PM


Meanwhile Portugal ...
From raw materials to consumers hands, there is nothing on that list that isn't completely dependent on fossil fuels in multiple ways.

There is always hydraulics involved in digging in the ground, in making steel, in paving roads and making tires. Everything there will at some point be transported by truck. A lot of steps involved in making those things involves air travel, there is currently nothing on the horizon to power air travel other than fossil fuels.

Meanwhile Portugal reaches 100% renewables, ends fossil fuel subsidies

quote:
Portugal’s renewable energy sources generated enough power to exceed total grid demand across the month of March, a new report has found, setting a standard that is expected to become the norm for the European nation.

According to Portuguese grid operator, REN, renewable energy output over the month reached 4,812GWh, surpassing the nation’s total electricity needs for March, which only topped 4,647GWh.


Another case where the naysayers should just get out of the way of the people doing it.

btw -- they also elected a Progressive government 5 years ago that got rid of the conservative "austerians" and their economy is booming.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel•American•Zen•Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 665 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 10:04 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 686 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 7:27 PM RAZD has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8445
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


(1)
Message 678 of 713 (873289)
03-12-2020 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 663 by marc9000
03-08-2020 9:38 PM


Re: another big oil pawn
marc9000 writes:

Questioning the placing of blame, and what humans can do to control the weather and ocean levels, is different than claiming something isn't happening.

You just did it again. Humans are to blame. PERIOD!!!

Can you admit that global climate change is due to human activity?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 663 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 9:38 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 687 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 7:39 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8445
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


(1)
Message 679 of 713 (873290)
03-12-2020 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 664 by marc9000
03-08-2020 9:53 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth
marc9000 writes:

I think a better idea would be to let those who love Swedish policies to move there, and leave the U.S. system like it is. You've said that Swedish people are happy, but there are a lot of happy people in the U.S. too.

Seniors in the US are happy because they have Medicare which is universal government funded health care. Why are you against the idea of letting people under 65 use the same system?

No, not if they aren't constitutional.

Can you point to anywhere in the US Constitution where it says that people under 65 can not get Medicare?

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 664 by marc9000, posted 03-08-2020 9:53 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 688 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 7:52 PM Taq has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 680 of 713 (873452)
03-15-2020 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 669 by DrJones*
03-08-2020 10:19 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
if you're going to claim that science is a faction it only makes sense that those that oppose it are a faction of their own.

It does? So if you oppose president Trump, you HAVE to be a president too?

as the saying goes your right to swing your arm ends at the tip of my nose.

Yes it's a liberal saying, one not found in the constitution. Just where the tip of one's nose is can be too broadly defined. You can claim that the tip of your nose is where my free speech is. It is not.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 669 by DrJones*, posted 03-08-2020 10:19 PM DrJones* has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 681 by DrJones*, posted 03-15-2020 6:35 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2155
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 681 of 713 (873454)
03-15-2020 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 680 by marc9000
03-15-2020 6:22 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
So if you oppose president Trump, you HAVE to be a president too?

nope but if you're part of a faction that opposes the golden calf then those that support him can be called a faction as well.

You can claim that the tip of your nose is where my free speech is

Good thing we have the courts to settle such matters.

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 680 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 6:22 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 682 of 713 (873456)
03-15-2020 6:54 PM
Reply to: Message 671 by glowby
03-08-2020 11:56 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
Yes, indeed they have. Take for example pollution of freshwater sources by toxic chemicals. It's often invisible, odorless, and tasteless. Undetectable except by laboratory testing, and the eventual telltale signs of illness and death in the population. The labs' precision instruments don't subscribe to any "faction". Neither does the science giving evidence to the fact of AGW belong to any faction.

But to make political decisions, we need more than laboratory testing, we need to combine that with the eventual telltale signs, to convince a free people that something needs to be done about it. The laboratory testing is an important part of the process, but it can't be the ONLY part. People need to be convinced by more than just the faction, not commanded only by the faction.

They're only political problems for people who are able to ignore 2 extra human senses. Logic and reason.

There is plenty of logic and reason in learning lessons from history, in avoiding trading liberty for safety, as one example.

Those are the facts. No different than the fact that Earth is spinning.

And no different in the threat either poses.

If a majority of people insist the Earth is stationery, as their 5 senses tell them, that doesn't change the fact. In any case, the majority of Americans now accept the fact that global warming is caused by the activities of mankind and must be addressed by our government.

The majority of Americans just might think that global warming is caused by the activities of humans, since the population has multiplied by almost 8 in only the past 200 years, but do you have any evidence that they see it as a threat, or as something the government can fix?

marc9000 writes:

...yup, there it is, toilet seats...

Mine is wooden.

Yes and it requires steel to cut wood.

But I suppose some petroleum distillates were used for the finish, and it's likely that fossil fuels were used in its manufacturing process. But this is a silly straw man argument. No one is proposing to immediately outlaw fossil fuels. Every item on your list can be produced without them anyway, even the toilet seat.

2030 is pretty immediate, considering our current inability to come anywhere near producing and transporting anything on that list without fossil fuels.

Here are a couple of links I found that describe ideas on making tires without fossil fuels;

Sumitomo Plans 100 Percent Fossil Fuel-Free Tire In 2013

This one is dated 2013, 7 years ago. How much progress has been made in 7 years? None? How many green tires are in use today? In the 50's and 60's, there were a lot of accidents and deaths from tire blowouts, because that era's technology in tire making was far less advanced than it is today. It took decades to get tires to the safety level they're at today. How long will it take to work the bugs out of green tires? How many people will be killed?

Researchers invent process to produce renewable car tires from trees, grass

This one's a little newer, from 2017. Still no green tires?

quote:
However, renewable isoprene has proven a difficult molecule to generate from microbes, and efforts to make it by an entirely biological process have not been successful.

There seems to be a big difference in ideas to replace those things in the list I posted, versus the reality of being able to do it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 671 by glowby, posted 03-08-2020 11:56 PM glowby has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 689 by glowby, posted 03-15-2020 10:42 PM marc9000 has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 683 of 713 (873457)
03-15-2020 7:06 PM
Reply to: Message 672 by PaulK
03-09-2020 5:29 AM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
I didn’t imply any such thing. I pointed that the restrictions on wood-burning stoves were about particulate emissions. After you ignorantly rambled about heat emissions and complained that other people didn’t care about the science. I didn’t mention global warming at all.
Obviously you thought that the restrictions on wood burning stoves were supposedly about global warming. And you were ignorant and wrong.

What we've been referring to in much of this thread is government mandates concerning both C02 and pollution. And the scientific community's obvious willingness to constantly combine/separate, combine/separate, combine/separate in any way it can to increase it's own political power.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 672 by PaulK, posted 03-09-2020 5:29 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 690 by PaulK, posted 03-16-2020 1:18 AM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 684 of 713 (873458)
03-15-2020 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 673 by PaulK
03-09-2020 5:38 AM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
The Tenth Amendment, unfortunately for you, is about the rights of the States and limits on the Federal Government. It does not empower the Federal Government to dictate what scientists study, nor the conclusions they reach.

It's actually very fortunate for me. Because it does not allow the conclusions the scientific community reaches to be unlimited in the amount of liberty and money it proposes to strip from the people.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 673 by PaulK, posted 03-09-2020 5:38 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 691 by PaulK, posted 03-16-2020 1:22 AM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


(1)
Message 685 of 713 (873460)
03-15-2020 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 675 by Chiroptera
03-09-2020 8:44 AM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
marc9000 writes:

Science isn't specifically referred to in the constitution, so it's subject to the political process, just like everything else that isn't referred to in the constitution.

Does anybody else remember when conservatives claimed to be in favor of limited government?

So the government is MORE LIMITED if we let the scientific community by-pass the constitution and join with big government advocates and take away as many of our freedoms and as much of our money as it wants? And you get 3 approval dots? I LOVE this place!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 675 by Chiroptera, posted 03-09-2020 8:44 AM Chiroptera has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 692 by PaulK, posted 03-16-2020 1:37 AM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 694 by Chiroptera, posted 03-16-2020 2:44 PM marc9000 has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 686 of 713 (873461)
03-15-2020 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 677 by RAZD
03-11-2020 2:31 PM


Re: Meanwhile Portugal ...
From your link;

quote:
Portugal’s renewable energy sources generated enough power to exceed total grid demand across the month of March, a new report has found, setting a standard that is expected to become the norm for the European nation.

According to Portuguese grid operator, REN, renewable energy output over the month reached 4,812GWh, surpassing the nation’s total electricity needs for March, which only topped 4,647GWh.

In that time, power generated by Portugal’s hydroelectric dams accounted for 55 per cent of monthly consumption – boosted by drought-breaking rainfall of four times the monthly average – and wind power, 42 per cent.


Do you realize that your link concerned only the generation of electricity, and didn't address at all the fossil fuel it takes to make products?

quote:
Portugal imports from United States
Value
Year
Machinery, nuclear reactors, boilers
$343.88M
2018
Mineral fuels, oils, distillation products
$286.65M
2018
Aircraft, spacecraft
$273.21M
2018
Oil seed, oleagic fruits, grain, seed, fruits
$255.21M
2018
Electrical, electronic equipment
$69.94M
2018
Organic chemicals
$54.77M
2018
Optical, photo, technical, medical apparatus
$47.94M
2018
Plastics
$47.93M
2018
Cereals
$45.91M
2018
Wood and articles of wood, wood charcoal
$42.70M

Portugal imports from United States - 1988-2018 Data | 2020 Forecast

These are all things that Portugal imported from the U.S. in 2018, probably no statistics yet on what it imported in 2019, or projections for 2020.

There's a world of difference between fossil fuel use only for electricity, versus fossil fuel use to make and transport products. Is that what you're talking about concerning the claim that Rhode Island will be fossil fuel free by 2030? You should make that clear, it's not honest to claim complete fossil fuel freedom when referring only to electricity generation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 677 by RAZD, posted 03-11-2020 2:31 PM RAZD has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 687 of 713 (873462)
03-15-2020 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 678 by Taq
03-12-2020 5:53 PM


Re: another big oil pawn
You just did it again. Humans are to blame. PERIOD!!!
Can you admit that global climate change is due to human activity?

Yes I can. The human population has gone from 1 billion to almost 8 billion in just a little over 200 years. So even though it's a scientific fact that the global climate has been changing since the earth has been in existence, I'm willing to agree that maybe that drastic of an increase could have something to do with the current change that the scientific community has managed to dig up. But I'm not willing to approve the extermination of 7 billion people, I'm not ready to approve people starving to death and freezing to death to appease a scientific community and all their followers that they've managed to frighten into hysteria. And I'm not willing to allow them to make ANY CHANGES AT ALL to the current way of life in the U.S. without following traditional political procedures, or meddling with traditional unalienable rights.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 678 by Taq, posted 03-12-2020 5:53 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 696 by Taq, posted 03-16-2020 4:05 PM marc9000 has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1151
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 688 of 713 (873464)
03-15-2020 7:52 PM
Reply to: Message 679 by Taq
03-12-2020 5:56 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth
Seniors in the US are happy because they have Medicare which is universal government funded health care. Why are you against the idea of letting people under 65 use the same system?

Because I'm 65, and I know that Medicare isn't free. I've paid into it for 47 years. If suddenly everyone under 65 gets it, it will be free for many of them, and it will cheapen what I get after paying into it all this time.

Can you point to anywhere in the US Constitution where it says that people under 65 can not get Medicare?

I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right of Congress of expending, on objects of healthcare, the money of their constituents. Just because the Constitution doesn't mention something doesn't mean it's fair game. The 10th amendment makes it clear that if the constitution doesn't mention something, then it's subject to some pretty involved political processes.

The cry of the left is that healthcare is a human right. Since healthcare is a product of human labor, then that means that SOME humans (the ones who not only have to provide their own healthcare, but also healthcare for others) are BORN INTO BONDAGE. That's not who we are.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 679 by Taq, posted 03-12-2020 5:56 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 693 by NosyNed, posted 03-16-2020 11:02 AM marc9000 has responded
 Message 695 by Chiroptera, posted 03-16-2020 3:59 PM marc9000 has responded
 Message 697 by Taq, posted 03-16-2020 4:10 PM marc9000 has responded

  
glowby
Member
Posts: 64
From: Fox River Grove, IL
Joined: 05-29-2010


Message 689 of 713 (873471)
03-15-2020 10:42 PM
Reply to: Message 682 by marc9000
03-15-2020 6:54 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
But to make political decisions, we need more than laboratory testing, we need to combine that with the eventual telltale signs ..."

NO WE DON'T! Lab testing doesn't just determine the level of toxins, it can also help us calculate the eventual death and suffering that will result. There's no need to wait for people to start dropping dead! You're suggesting we kill people for your "liberty"? What freedoms do you have to sacrifice, for people to be forbidden to poison one another?

...to convince a free people that something needs to be done about it."

No one needs to be convinced that murder is bad. You wouldn't hesitate to condemn terrorists for poisoning a municipal water supply. But if a corporation does it, maybe it's OK because ... liberties?

Yes, polls say most Americans see global warming as a threat. No, there's no reason to think governments can "fix" it. The time for fixing it is long past, largely because of twisted ideologies like yours. We can only mitigate the cost, in dollars and human suffering, by reducing the severity of the problem.

And if polls said most Americans were OK with poison water supplies, it would still be the responsibility of governments to stop it.

The average American is oblivious to the toxicity level of various poisons, and all the reasons we got ourselves into this mess with the climate. We rely on science and responsible government to deal with such things. If your "faction" wants to debate approaches to these problems, fine. But a do-nothing approach only protects the "liberties" of the do-nothing faction, at the expense of everyone else's.

You can stop marching your straw man around. I agree it would be silly to stop using all fossil fuel products. But as a primary source of energy, we got burned. It ended up screwing up the whole planet. We have to face that now and do something about it.

The scientist "faction" saw it coming and warned us. But anti-fact factions fabricated fictions to obfuscate what's factual, for the immediate benefits of industry but to the long-term detriment of the people of Earth.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 682 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 6:54 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 698 by marc9000, posted 03-18-2020 7:20 PM glowby has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16628
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 690 of 713 (873474)
03-16-2020 1:18 AM
Reply to: Message 683 by marc9000
03-15-2020 7:06 PM


Re: An Inconvenient Truth -- still true
quote:
What we've been referring to in much of this thread is government mandates concerning both C02 and pollution.

So? It doesn’t change the fact that you hadn’t bothered to find out the relevant science - and accused others of not caring about the science based on your own ignorance.

quote:
And the scientific community's obvious willingness to constantly combine/separate, combine/separate, combine/separate in any way it can to increase it's own political power.

Your ignorance isn’t anybody else’s fault. Inventing ridiculous conspiracy theories is hardly going to help cover up your hypocrisy.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 683 by marc9000, posted 03-15-2020 7:06 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020