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.
He'll be along later to claim that's not what he meant, and you need to provide valid peer-reviewed research that proves you're not stu-pid.And there we have it, taxation is the cure. This would be on a global scale, a redistribution of wealth that the UN wants. The use of manipulated science to obtain a desired outcome.
THIS IS the issue at hand. A tip of the hat to you, Trakar.
Yeah, he is a condenscending twit.
He'll be along later to claim that's not what he meant, and you need to provide valid peer-reviewed research that proves you're not stu-pid.
Yeah, he is a condenscending twit.
There goes that mirror thing again! "projection," used to be the psych term but I believe that "transference" is all the vogue currently.
What exactly is your understanding of climate change and the science indicating and supporting such?
I'm far, far from an expert (or even mildly educated). I am a chemical engineer, so at least I understand some of the words.
...Finally, my friends who live in Alaska (and/or have visited Alaska) are totally convinced about GW, without exception. Admittedly, it's hearsay, but these are by no means dyed-in-the-wool, liberal, tree-hugging idiots. In fact, most of them are ardent republicans!
Sorry, none of this is hard data, but it's the best I've got...
Again, my position is to act as though Global Warming might be true.
Thank you very much for asking!
Chris
I agree that there is global warming, also. But, I think that's it's been happening all along since the peak of the last iceage. Global warming isn't an inherent issue with just our planet, like some on the left would want us to believe.
i'm sure you don't. And your "findings" have proven nothing except the climate is changing -- something it's always done.The problem is apparent and well evidenced to the professional community and the quasi-scientific/political international investigative body that President Reagan instituted to survey the professional community and study the science of climate change and regularly report upon their current findings and understandings. That you seem to dislike the current political implications of these findings and understandings, does nothing to impact their veracity. I care little about your personal misperceptions or unsupported denialisms.
What's to twist? You want to use government to force people to modify their behavior. You admitted it yourself.daveman said:Once again, you advocate threat of government force to modify behavior.
That's all you've got.
Twist as you like, its all in the wind and without any apparent support.
AGW is a scam designed to bring about greater government control over individual lives.
Screw that.
Yes, my projection is wrong. I never thought you'd freely admit you support government control over individual lives, the utter destruction of the American energy industry, and global socialism.He'll be along later to claim that's not what he meant, and you need to provide valid peer-reviewed research that proves you're not stu-pid.And there we have it, taxation is the cure. This would be on a global scale, a redistribution of wealth that the UN wants. The use of manipulated science to obtain a desired outcome.
THIS IS the issue at hand. A tip of the hat to you, Trakar.
No wonder you think so little of projections made from scientific understandings, as your own projections are so often so badly wrong!
And the IPCC has no credibility.Reagan's IPCC and the science they are mandated to review, says differently.
https://www.ipcc-wg1.unibe.ch/publications/wg1-ar4/ar4-wg1-spm.pdf
Your blind unwillingness to see it does not make it unsupported -- because I have indeed supported it.This is the unsupported conspiracy theory you keep promoting.
Trakar;3701343 A cure? not even close! But a carbon tax is one of the most appropriate means of recompensing the public commons for the true societal costs of open cycle fossil fuel combustion. Truth be told I would prefer an outright ban on the open-cycle combustion of fuels made from previously sequestered carbon products. Perhaps incrementally engaged said:Scratch a leftist, find a totalitarian.
Okay, so you want an outright ban on the open-cycle combustion of fuels. Do you use electricity? Drive a car? Fly somewhere on vacation? Mow your lawn? Grill a steak?
Then you need to give all that up. Right now.
But you won't, because you're a flaming hypocrite.
My electricity is produced with a combination of solar, wind and a bio-diesel fuelled back-up generator. Both my car and my plane run on biodiesel mixes (with both, there is some cold weather conditioning necessary to keep the diesel from waxing up), the riding mower is lithium battery powered, and I use chunk charcoal and personally cut hardwood chips to do my outdoor grilling.
Again, probably best not to assume that everyone else does as you do, advocating one thing, while using different rules for yourself.
And there we have it, taxation is the cure. This would be on a global scale, a redistribution of wealth that the UN wants. The use of manipulated science to obtain a desired outcome.
THIS IS the issue at hand. A tip of the hat to you, Trakar.
A cure? not even close!
But a carbon tax is one of the most appropriate means of recompensing the public commons for the true societal costs of open cycle fossil fuel combustion. Truth be told I would prefer an outright ban on the open-cycle combustion of fuels made from previously sequestered carbon products. Perhaps incrementally engaged, but firm bans with strictly enforced penalties would be my preference. As it is direct and directly attacks the source of the problem. "Taxes" are a concession to those who prefer to push for market pressure solutions.
Of course it is, this is the desired outcome from the global left, Trakar.
Just remember...in the end, it will be the consumer that pays those taxes....not the polluter. The poor will be the least able to afford, but I'm sure they will be thought of as collateral damage.
Yes, my projection is wrong. I never thought you'd freely admit you support government control over individual lives, the utter destruction of the American energy industry, and global socialism.He'll be along later to claim that's not what he meant, and you need to provide valid peer-reviewed research that proves you're not stu-pid.
No wonder you think so little of projections made from scientific understandings, as your own projections are so often so badly wrong!
I mean, you rarely see someone come out and admit they're stupid. I stand corrected.
My electricity is produced with a combination of solar, wind and a bio-diesel fuelled back-up generator. Both my car and my plane run on biodiesel mixes (with both, there is some cold weather conditioning necessary to keep the diesel from waxing up), the riding mower is lithium battery powered, and I use chunk charcoal and personally cut hardwood chips to do my outdoor grilling.
Again, probably best not to assume that everyone else does as you do, advocating one thing, while using different rules for yourself.
What is it with you leftists and your refusal to use dictionary meanings of words?Funny, I've watched you proudly declare your ignorance and idiocy repeatedly over the last 6 months.
You can continue to twist and lie as you are wont to do, it doesn't change my actual words or the realities around us and accurately reflected in the science.
And the IPCC has no credibility.Reagan's IPCC and the science they are mandated to review, says differently.
https://www.ipcc-wg1.unibe.ch/publications/wg1-ar4/ar4-wg1-spm.pdf
Do you call that science?
And your continued invocation of Reagan, as if I'd suddenly support the IPCC's actions because he started it, reveals far more about you than it does about me.
I agree that there is global warming, also. But, I think that's it's been happening all along since the peak of the last iceage. Global warming isn't an inherent issue with just our planet, like some on the left would want us to believe.
Got verifiable, empiric evidences that support the belief (that global warming is a sustained, global trend in extension of the process that instigated the current interglacial epoch) or the assertion (that other planets are undergoing similar and concurrent climate change)?
A cure? not even close!
But a carbon tax is one of the most appropriate means of recompensing the public commons for the true societal costs of open cycle fossil fuel combustion. Truth be told I would prefer an outright ban on the open-cycle combustion of fuels made from previously sequestered carbon products. Perhaps incrementally engaged, but firm bans with strictly enforced penalties would be my preference. As it is direct and directly attacks the source of the problem. "Taxes" are a concession to those who prefer to push for market pressure solutions.
Of course it is, this is the desired outcome from the global left, Trakar.
Just remember...in the end, it will be the consumer that pays those taxes....not the polluter. The poor will be the least able to afford, but I'm sure they will be thought of as collateral damage.
That is your mantra, thus far you have not offered any compelling evidences to support your delusions.
My electricity is produced with a combination of solar, wind and a bio-diesel fuelled back-up generator. Both my car and my plane run on biodiesel mixes (with both, there is some cold weather conditioning necessary to keep the diesel from waxing up), the riding mower is lithium battery powered, and I use chunk charcoal and personally cut hardwood chips to do my outdoor grilling.
Again, probably best not to assume that everyone else does as you do, advocating one thing, while using different rules for yourself.
I'm impressed, bearing in mind that anyone can say anything on the internet.
Yet I can't help but notice you're connected to the internet. Do you know how much carbon that adds to the atmosphere?
My electricity is produced with a combination of solar, wind and a bio-diesel fuelled back-up generator. Both my car and my plane run on biodiesel mixes (with both, there is some cold weather conditioning necessary to keep the diesel from waxing up), the riding mower is lithium battery powered, and I use chunk charcoal and personally cut hardwood chips to do my outdoor grilling.
Again, probably best not to assume that everyone else does as you do, advocating one thing, while using different rules for yourself.
I'm impressed, bearing in mind that anyone can say anything on the internet.
Is denial a habit you use for every aspect of life you find inconvenient?
Yet I can't help but notice you're connected to the internet. Do you know how much carbon that adds to the atmosphere?
Who's internet? The section I'm linked to is sustainably powered, if yours isn't that's a problem you should be concerned about, all I can do is advocate for people to pay more attention to their planet and their pocketbook and choose sustainable practices to advantage both.
AGW "Science", pointing somewhere and going, "Oh looky! Global Warming!!"
