DonLever

Donald J. Trump, 45th US President of the United States

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Aguila said:

Yeah, I guess you're  right. I'm just a lowly deplorable trying  to scratch out a living. Who am I to interfere with your dreams of turning over our lives to those ever so deserving unelected global authorities. It is pretty hopeless. But maybe you could humor me and read this one last little article.

 

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/10/the-snow-job-in-poland/

 

The snow job in Poland

IPCC climate confab seeks to stampede the world into adopting destructive energy policies

Craig Rucker

Any blizzards that blanket Poland this winter can’t compare to the massive snow job climate campaigners are trying to pull off.

Some 30,000 politicians, activists, computer modelers, bureaucrats, lawyers, journalists, renewable energy sellers and a few scientists are in Katowice, Poland December 2-14, for another Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change conference. Four issues will dominate the agenda.

* Proclaim that humanity and planet face existential cataclysms, unless fossil fuel use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are slashed to zero by 2050 – to “prevent” average planetary temperatures from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 F) above what they were in 1820, when the Little Ice Age ended and the modern industrial era began.

* Finalize 300 pages of “guidelines,” to implement the Paris climate agreement – by driving the switch from coal, oil and natural gas to wind, solar and biofuel energy.

* Reach a binding agreement that wealthy countries (excluding China and other newly rich nations) must transfer at least $100 billion annually to poor countries.

* Ensure “transparency” on discussions, disclosures and treaty compliance.

This entire agenda deserves skepticism and ridicule.

Earth’s climate is always changing somewhere, due to powerful natural forces over which humans have no control. To say we can now perpetuate current conditions by controlling emissions of plant-fertilizing carbon dioxide is sheer fantasy.

Average global temperatures have already (thankfully) risen nearly a degree since 1820. To suggest that another half degree would be catastrophic is absurd. Indeed, average temperatures were higher during the Medieval Warm Period – and except during recent El Niño events have barely risen since 1998, even as CO2 levels climbed significantly, spurring plant growth worldwide.

Constant references to the “hottest ever” day or month involve hundredths of a degree, less than the margin of measurement error, often by activist scientists who have a history of doctoring data. They also ignore record cold snaps, like this Thanksgiving weekend in the U.S. Northeast.

Human activities certainly affect climate and weather to some degree, at least locally. But there is no real-world evidence that they have major (much less cataclysmic) impacts. Computer models say otherwise, but their record for accuracy is abysmal to zero.

Regarding guidelines to implement Paris, they would put the United Nations and IPCC in charge of our energy use, economies, lives and living standards – which would be disastrous. Fossil fuels still provide 80% of all U.S. and global energy; wind and solar provide less than 5% and only intermittently.

Forcing us to convert to wind and solar would increase electricity prices ten times over – and blanket areas many times the size of California with turbines, panels, batteries, and huge mines to dig out the raw materials needed for these “eco-friendly, climate-safe, sustainable” replacements.

Expensive, unreliable “renewable” energy would destroy jobs and economies, depress living standards, keep poor nations impoverished – and cause conflicts, famines and refugee migrations, as countries fight over increasingly scarce energy, food and resources.

Developing countries say they were promised $100 billion a year, for starters, plus free energy technology transfers. That’s the primary reason they signed the Paris climate treaty.

They’re angry that barely $3.5 billion has been put on the table, and rich countries say they cannot afford to pay more, especially if they’re also supposed to slash their fossil fuel use and thus economic prosperity.

The biggest snow job is any claimed devotion to transparency. Secrecy and deception are fundamental to the IPCC process. Anyone who questions the “fossil fuels cause climate chaos” thesis is silenced. So is anyone who suggests that data and evidence should determine policy – instead of computer models.

Katowice organizers are furious that a Trump Administration exhibit will highlight the remarkable benefits of fossil fuels. They vilify scientists who emphasize the sun’s vital role in climate change, or point out the many ways that temperature, storm, drought and other climate data are cherrypicked, “homogenized,” manipulated or even fabricated to drive alarmist narratives. They ignore the Medieval Warm Period, Little Ice Age and 1970-1976 global cooling scare.

The real IPCC and Paris treaty agenda is simple. Blame humans and fossil fuels for virtually all climate and weather events. Control energy use, economic growth and living standards – lowering them in industrialized countries and limiting them in developing nations. Redistribute the world’s wealth and resources. And replace the capitalist economic model with a global green socialist system, controlled by the UN, IPCC and green activists.

Lack of energy, jobs, safe water and decent living standards is a far more pressing issue for poor countries than climate change. No wonder Asia alone already has some 2,000 gigawatts of coal-fired power plants operating or under construction. That’s nearly twice as much as total US summertime generating capacity.

Meanwhile, every Irish household faces new carbon taxes of $3,000 to $5,000 a year (!) unless their government imposes equally costly measures to reduce “greenhouse gas” emissions and avoid paying punitive EU fines. To gauge likely Irish reaction to that, look to France – where tens of thousands have been rioting over President Macron’s plans to implement higher carbon taxes.

Climate insanity needs to be reined in. CFACT’s delegation to Katowice is working hard to get that process underway.

Craig Rucker is president of CFACT, the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, a free market think tank devoted to sound science for both people and planet.

 

And so we go on with our lives

We know the truth but prefer lies

Lies are simple,simple is bliss 

Why go against tradition when we can 

Admit defeat live in decline 

Be the victim of our own design 

 

Mike Burkett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aguila said:

Yeah, I guess you're  right. I'm just a lowly deplorable trying  to scratch out a living. Who am I to interfere with your dreams of turning over our lives to those ever so deserving unelected global authorities. It is pretty hopeless. But maybe you could humor me and read this one last little article.

 

The real IPCC and Paris treaty agenda is simple. Blame humans and fossil fuels for virtually all climate and weather events. Control energy use, economic growth and living standards – lowering them in industrialized countries and limiting them in developing nations. Redistribute the world’s wealth and resources. And replace the capitalist economic model with a global green socialist system, controlled by the UN, IPCC and green activists.
 

Craig Rucker is president of CFACT, the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, a free market think tank devoted to sound science for both people and planet.

There are basically two things you need to know about the "article" posted above. First would be the tinfoil conspiracy theory expounded by it's author, who is a "guest blogger" on that site and has no scientific background.

 

The other thing (the second paragraph) shows the site that the blogger usually hangs out at: CFACT.

 

Guess who supports CFACT?

Quote

The Committee For a Constructive Tomorrow has received funding from ExxonMobil, Chevron, as well as hundreds of thousands of dollars from foundations associated with Richard Mellon Scaife. In 2011, Craig Rucker received $103,895 from CFACT for his role as executive director, according to 2011 IRS Forms (PDF). [9]

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dbl

 

 

Edited by RUPERTKBD
Dbl post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

There are basically two things you need to know about the "article" posted above. First would be the tinfoil conspiracy theory expounded by it's author, who is a "guest blogger" on that site and has no scientific background.

It's great that you can identify that it's a tinfoil hat conspiracy. Which part is incorrect? I'd like to know. Really. That would be worth posting. Beyond that, the article is mostly about the politics behind the issue. But I guess he's not a politician so...

 

Quote

 

The other thing (the second paragraph) shows the site that the blogger usually hangs out at: CFACT.

 

Guess who supports CFACT?

:rolleyes:

Is this supposed to be a character assasination? You know, the thing people do when they can't argue the facts. Anyways, if he hangs out a CFACT that's great, who cares. I guess you'll never bother visiting Skeptical Science anymore. For instance, I don't care if a guy once worked for a tobacco company.  I don't care. Neither should you.  Care about the facts. 

 

You must love the site the article came from. Funded only by private donations. A budget of $100,000.

Edited by Aguila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aguila said:

Care about the facts. 

 

 

You don't.

Like trump you make up your own facts or post links to other people who do the same thing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Ilunga said:

You don't.

Like trump you make up your own facts or post links to other people who do the same thing.

Choose a point to dispute then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aguila said:

Choose a point to dispute then.

Point

 

Humans are in fact causing man made shifts to the climate.  As proven by literally thousands of credible studies done over periods spanning decades, weighed against natural causes and empirical data over tens of thousands of years of natural climate change.  Using both atmospheric data as well as biological.  

 

Your counter point is what?  That we are not?

 

Solution.  Allow me to put you in a sizeable glass dome with 3 dozen small air holes for a period of 60 days with a full medical evaluation done before hand.  I will then slowly close off half of the existing air holes over a period of 15 days, over the next 15 days I will then pump small amounts of Co2, methane, carbon and airborne sulfides comparable to the last 10,000 years of atmospheric climate change over the following 15 days.  At day 30 I shall close off half of the remaining air holes and slowly increase the amount of airborne pollutants while raising the temperature incrementally for 15 days.  Over the final 15 days I shall increase the amount of atmospheric pollutants created by man by 1/7 per day while slowly polluting your food and water.

 

At the end of day 60 we shall release you and complete the study by comparing the pre experiment medical reports to the post experiment medical reports, as well as totaling the volume of to scale pollutants introduced to your dome.

 

If all signs (as they will) indicate that you are or were being poisoned by the man made and introduced conditions to your living habitat and then subsequently your food and water than we will know unequivocally that man made climate change IS in fact real.  If there is no change than we can say that the data is inconclusive and as such not totally credible.

 

But if you refuse to submit to the experiment than we can strongly point to an unwillingness to subject ones self to the potential truth of climate change or to risk your safety to it which would strongly point to your being afraid of the results.

 

Which will it be?  Glass bubble, or echo chamber?

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Orrin Hatch saying he doesn't care if Trump broke the law. I would to see him tried and executed for treason but he'll be dead of natural causes before that happens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tortorella's Rant said:

Orrin Hatch saying he doesn't care if Trump broke the law. I would to see him tried and executed for treason but he'll be dead of natural causes before that happens. 

Sadly a number of Republicans will be walking back on statements of open support regardless of criminal activities and their bases will still support tham while saying "but this Dem said or did this"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tortorella's Rant said:

Orrin Hatch saying he doesn't care if Trump broke the law. I would to see him tried and executed for treason but he'll be dead of natural causes before that happens. 

My guess is the 2020 election will be do or die for Trump, win and stay President or lose and face prosecution with little chance of a pardon with a Democrat in office. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Point

 

Humans are in fact causing man made shifts to the climate.  As proven by literally thousands of credible studies done over periods spanning decades, weighed against natural causes and empirical data over tens of thousands of years of natural climate change.  Using both atmospheric data as well as biological.  

 

Your counter point is what?  That we are not?

 

Solution.  Allow me to put you in a sizeable glass dome with 3 dozen small air holes for a period of 60 days with a full medical evaluation done before hand.  I will then slowly close off half of the existing air holes over a period of 15 days, over the next 15 days I will then pump small amounts of Co2, methane, carbon and airborne sulfides comparable to the last 10,000 years of atmospheric climate change over the following 15 days.  At day 30 I shall close off half of the remaining air holes and slowly increase the amount of airborne pollutants while raising the temperature incrementally for 15 days.  Over the final 15 days I shall increase the amount of atmospheric pollutants created by man by 1/7 per day while slowly polluting your food and water.

 

At the end of day 60 we shall release you and complete the study by comparing the pre experiment medical reports to the post experiment medical reports, as well as totaling the volume of to scale pollutants introduced to your dome.

 

If all signs (as they will) indicate that you are or were being poisoned by the man made and introduced conditions to your living habitat and then subsequently your food and water than we will know unequivocally that man made climate change IS in fact real.  If there is no change than we can say that the data is inconclusive and as such not totally credible.

 

But if you refuse to submit to the experiment than we can strongly point to an unwillingness to subject ones self to the potential truth of climate change or to risk your safety to it which would strongly point to your being afraid of the results.

 

Which will it be?  Glass bubble, or echo chamber?

Great post but you're putting way too much effort into a guy who will just say something racist in a few days and be banned again.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HerrDrFunk said:

Great post but you're putting way too much effort into a guy who will just say something racist in a few days and be banned again.

This is my statement and request to anyone who denies man made climate change.  They always say they don't have the time to waste.  Then I suggest allowing me to pump carbon monoxide in to their bedrooms while they sleep, they always say that would kill me.

 

I give them a long slow blink after that and nod in agreement.

 

They still don't get the point

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

This is my statement and request to anyone who denies man made climate change.  They always say they don't have the time to waste.  Then I suggest allowing me to pump carbon monoxide in to their bedrooms while they sleep, they always say that would kill me.

 

I give them a long slow blink after that and nod in agreement.

 

They still don't get the point

Touche. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Point

 

Humans are in fact causing man made shifts to the climate.  As proven by literally thousands of credible studies done over periods spanning decades, weighed against natural causes and empirical data over tens of thousands of years of natural climate change.  Using both atmospheric data as well as biological.  

 

Your counter point is what?  That we are not?

Most climate scientists are less than 100% sure of this assertion. 

 

I'm sure man has affected the climate. Look at how we have changed the landscape. Why did temps increase so much before CO2 levels did? Why were the 30s the hottest decade?

 

40 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Solution.  Allow me to put you in a sizeable glass dome with 3 dozen small air holes for a period of 60 days with a full medical evaluation done before hand.  I will then slowly close off half of the existing air holes over a period of 15 days, over the next 15 days I will then pump small amounts of Co2, methane, carbon and airborne sulfides comparable to the last 10,000 years of atmospheric climate change over the following 15 days.  At day 30 I shall close off half of the remaining air holes and slowly increase the amount of airborne pollutants while raising the temperature incrementally for 15 days.  Over the final 15 days I shall increase the amount of atmospheric pollutants created by man by 1/7 per day while slowly polluting your food and water.

 

At the end of day 60 we shall release you and complete the study by comparing the pre experiment medical reports to the post experiment medical reports, as well as totaling the volume of to scale pollutants introduced to your dome.

 

If all signs (as they will) indicate that you are or were being poisoned by the man made and introduced conditions to your living habitat and then subsequently your food and water than we will know unequivocally that man made climate change IS in fact real.  If there is no change than we can say that the data is inconclusive and as such not totally credible.

 

But if you refuse to submit to the experiment than we can strongly point to an unwillingness to subject ones self to the potential truth of climate change or to risk your safety to it which would strongly point to your being afraid of the results.

 

Which will it be?  Glass bubble, or echo chamber?

I notice you had to turn up the heat. Experiment failure.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Toews said:

My guess is the 2020 election will be do or die for Trump, win and stay President or lose and face prosecution with little chance of a pardon with a Democrat in office. 

Hopefully America hasn't fallen so far that it would allow a man to go to jail for paying off an extortionist. This is a pipe dream.

Edited by Aguila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HerrDrFunk said:

Great post but you're putting way too much effort into a guy who will just say something racist in a few days and be banned again.

i just don't get all the need to feed it

i use the iggy button

but that is useless

when the quoting and feeding is incessant

why ? why ? why ?

 

i guess the need in some

to just debate is paramount

i get tired of the silliness though

and find this thread wears me out

 

people, you are not going to change his views

do you really think you can ?
explain why please

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aguila said:

Choose a point to dispute then.

There is no point with you.

97 percent of the worlds scientists are wrong and you and a few coal and oil shills are right.

 

Rupert has well and truly debunked you and your sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tortorella's Rant said:

Orrin Hatch saying he doesn't care if Trump broke the law. I would to see him tried and executed for treason but he'll be dead of natural causes before that happens. 

He also said the following about Clinton:

 

Committing crimes of moral turpitude such as perjury and obstruction of justice go to the heart of qualification for public office. These offenses were committed by the chief executive of our country, the individual who swore to faithfully execute the laws of the United States.
This great nation can tolerate a President who makes mistakes. But it cannot tolerate one who makes a mistake and then breaks the law to cover it up. Any other citizen would be prosecuted for these crimes.

 

Wonder what made him change his mind.

Party over country forever lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The GOP has already shown that they aren't above anything when it comes to gaining and retaining power.

 

From the grassroot starts, Fox News, christianity, and a heavy disinformation system (ramped up even more recently with the help of Russia and Saudi Arabia), they've created a system where they can rule without the need for truth or democracy.

 

They gerrymandered the states to $&!# and packed the lower courts with Conservatives.

 

They run platforms of fear mongering and impending doom.

 

They have hoards of people like aguila/crab convinced that the super rich oil barons and banking tycoons have your best interest at heart. Not the thousands of regular folk learning, studying, and putting their life's work towards a 60,000-80,000 dollars per year job. Let's use oil tycoon backed "papers" if you can even call them that as they don't even meet the minimum standards of the scientific method, repeatability, and peer review.

 

They'll lie, they'll cheat, they'll outright commit crimes. Just look at the number of indictments they've had starting with the Nixon administration. What are the Dems at, like 1? Yet who does fox News constantly villify.

 

They project project project constantly. Not because the "other side" is doing something wrong, but to lessen the impact when, yet again, they're caught doing something else nefarious.

 

They come into power, the same people get even richer and more powerful, then they hand off power to the Dems with a destroyed economy for them to try and pick up the pieces again. Villify them for having to cut back programs or spending to stimulate the economy and start the cycle again.

 

Well they are trying hard to stop the cycle and become an authoritarian regime. Will they succeed? Don't know but man would America have been much better off without them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.