OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on May 14, 2019 13:49:48 GMT -5
Oh My God did you feel that,, It was terrible,,
|
|
kadee79
Senior Associate
S.W. Ga., zone 8b, out in the boonies!
Joined: Mar 30, 2011 15:12:55 GMT -5
Posts: 10,798 
|
Post by kadee79 on May 14, 2019 19:42:44 GMT -5
If DT would shut his mouth, it wouldn't be nearly as bad!
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on May 14, 2019 21:14:51 GMT -5
It is so hot now cause of Global warming,, Hmmm, wasn't all the Arctic ice suppose to be gone ,,like several years ago,, Let me check,on that,,,,,,,,,,, Nope still there! Wonder why the carbon dioxide ,, methane, peaks at the same time they are holding the Chili festival!!
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on May 15, 2019 9:27:12 GMT -5
Oh My God it is getting hard to breath here cause of all that carbon!! I would be so good at producing Climate change video's
Like,,,,, Oh My God,,, We are all going to die next week,,, unless we throw Trillion of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. into the Climate Change coffers,,,
It would be so much fun being the DRAMA KING Climate Change guy,, The sky is falling,, the sky is falling,,, send money,, lot's of money ,, I will save you!!!
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on May 15, 2019 9:28:45 GMT -5
Cause of the fast rising sea levels,,, any one find that Sea Level yet??
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on May 15, 2019 9:56:51 GMT -5
Carbon Dioxide hits 415 ppm, It looked like this,, Didn't you feel it? |
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on May 15, 2019 10:43:13 GMT -5
So Have you found that spot where there is a mark on a wall That was put there 100 years ago, showing where Sea Level was ,,And where it is today?? I notice any time I post if weather as never been this severe before, how about the one hundred ,,, thousand years flood plains are not even coming close to being reached! You keep saying how bad it is,, yet the forecasted melting of all the Arctic ice is ,,,well,, still there! The sky is falling the sky is falling,, Yet I look up it is still there!!
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,371
|
Post by thyme4change on May 15, 2019 13:38:36 GMT -5
Maybe you are wrong and we will all die and be put out of your misery.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 2:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2019 13:49:07 GMT -5
If DT would shut his mouth, it wouldn't be nearly as bad! Applies to everyone.  |
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 2:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2019 13:55:09 GMT -5
Maybe you are wrong and we will all die and be put out of your misery. I'm placing my bets on a virus or fungus. A few degrees/feet of water either way, isn't going to change much of anything on a planetary scale. Unless they were dumb enough to build their homestead at or near a waterway. Then it's their problem. |
|
engineerdoe
Established Member
Joined: May 22, 2013 17:10:26 GMT -5
Posts: 497
|
Post by engineerdoe on May 17, 2019 14:19:24 GMT -5
Maybe you are wrong and we will all die and be put out of your misery. I'm placing my bets on a virus or fungus. A few degrees/feet of water either way, isn't going to change much of anything on a planetary scale. Unless they were dumb enough to build their homestead at or near a waterway. Then it's their problem. Exactly! Why would you ever build a city at an easy to access waterway? Trade? That's just fake news. no such thing.  |
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 2:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2019 11:02:15 GMT -5
I'm placing my bets on a virus or fungus. A few degrees/feet of water either way, isn't going to change much of anything on a planetary scale. Unless they were dumb enough to build their homestead at or near a waterway. Then it's their problem. Exactly! Why would you ever build a city at an easy to access waterway? Trade? That's just fake news. no such thing. If you re-read my post, you might see that I said "homestead", But don't let what I said interfere with the usual posturing.  Any ideas on how to build shipping terminal on the shore, that can withstand a wave or 6 inches of added water level, 200 years from now. Or is two trillion dollars of economic damage responding to the logical fallacy/theory called AGW, the better way to go ? |
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on May 18, 2019 13:13:24 GMT -5
So Have you found that spot where there is a mark on a wall That was put there 100 years ago, showing where Sea Level was ,,And where it is today?? I notice any time I post if weather as never been this severe before, how about the one hundred ,,, thousand years flood plains are not even coming close to being reached! You keep saying how bad it is,, yet the forecasted melting of all the Arctic ice is ,,,well,, still there! The sky is falling the sky is falling,, Yet I look up it is still there!!
This is why Trump loves the ignorant and poorly-educated...they'll swallow every turd that comes out of his lying mouth. What will you do if Trump has an intracranial hemorrhage and reverses his position on climate change, saying he no longer believes it's a hoax by the Chinese? What WILL you do? You'll have to change your position immediately. Are you going to try to justify it with your Transit [sic] Global Amnesia? You don't even know the name of your own condition. So yeah...one of Trump's poorly educated sycophants. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 2:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2019 12:15:38 GMT -5
So Have you found that spot where there is a mark on a wall That was put there 100 years ago, showing where Sea Level was ,,And where it is today?? I notice any time I post if weather as never been this severe before, how about the one hundred ,,, thousand years flood plains are not even coming close to being reached! You keep saying how bad it is,, yet the forecasted melting of all the Arctic ice is ,,,well,, still there! The sky is falling the sky is falling,, Yet I look up it is still there!!
Kind of reminds me of the polar bear nonsense. The only place the polar bears are vanishing from, is the liberal media coverage. As their population continues to hold steady /increase, depending on the area. |
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680 
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on May 24, 2019 8:03:21 GMT -5
What happened to A.S.?
Someone give him a timeout for being so honest here?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 2:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2019 9:50:44 GMT -5
I'm placing my bets on a virus or fungus. A few degrees/feet of water either way, isn't going to change much of anything on a planetary scale. Unless they were dumb enough to build their homestead at or near a waterway. Then it's their problem. LOL! Are we trolling today? Curious to be out on the water with a comment like this, but I guess you are in a boat at least! No, differing opinion. I always thought it was crazy to build next to water. You see these people crying for their flood losses on the news. Then they rebuild in the same spot. Can't feel sorry for them, at all. |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,337
|
Post by Tennesseer on May 24, 2019 10:06:53 GMT -5
What happened to A.S.? Someone give him a timeout for being so honest here? My guess is it might have something to do with this: Couple of weeks ago I had my second episode in four years. My wife has pinned a tag on my shirt If found wandering around, please return,,,, Hmmm, how do we tell the difference between me shopping at Home Depot ,, and wandering around?? Maybe I will trigger a Silver Alert with the next trip!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 2:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2019 10:47:02 GMT -5
No, differing opinion. I always thought it was crazy to build next to water. You see these people crying for their flood losses on the news. Then they rebuild in the same spot. Can't feel sorry for them, at all. Certainly is a differing opinion. I feel exactly the same way as you about some waterfront construction, by the way. People build in places that they never should, and for a while could even get insurance that never should have been written. BUT, the majority of waterfront development is on stable acreage that is not considered at substantial risk- at least not until the oceans rise 3-4 feet, or even more. That will be devastating. And most of mankind lives next to the water, btw. I guess we can agree that there are varying standards of living next to the water ? I didn't word it correctly by saying "next to water". I was thinking more along the lines of low areas and floodplains etc. I should of been more clear by saying 'low areas next to water'. If the oceans rise that much, they have varied by much more than that, it will be slow. I think the key is not rebuilding in the low areas. The 100 year flooding, or 500 year flooding, seems to be coming back to bite us, as they seem to be mostly guesses. |
|
violagirl
Familiar Member
Joined: Aug 17, 2011 11:04:54 GMT -5
Posts: 703
|
Post by violagirl on Jun 8, 2019 15:24:47 GMT -5
Probably ocean acidification will hurt us before the rise in sea level will. We are killing the marine food chain from the bottom up. The most nutrient dense water is the coldest water - what happens if that warms even a little? 40% of insect species are in decline. We already are killing off bees.
That and increased intensity of weather events. After 2 100-year floods in my area in the last 2 years - insurance agencies are refusing insurance in certain areas.
Whether I like it or not, whether I build on a flood plain or not, I'm going to be paying for the fires and the flooding and storm surges either through government bail outs or increased insurance premiums. Probably both.
It is in all of our best interest to curb our reliance on fossil fuels. Oil companies are already pivoting to sustainable energy sources, but they will suck every last bit of subsidy they can. Will we be able to change quickly enough is the question.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 8, 2019 15:40:02 GMT -5
Probably ocean acidification will hurt us before the rise in sea level will. We are killing the marine food chain from the bottom up. The most nutrient dense water is the coldest water - what happens if that warms even a little? 40% of insect species are in decline. We already are killing off bees.
That and increased intensity of weather events. After 2 100-year floods in my area in the last 2 years - insurance agencies are refusing insurance in certain areas. Whether I like it or not, whether I build on a flood plain or not, I'm going to be paying for the fires and the flooding and storm surges either through government bail outs or increased insurance premiums. Probably both. It is in all of our best interest to curb our reliance on fossil fuels. Oil companies are already pivoting to sustainable energy sources, but they will suck every last bit of subsidy they can. Will we be able to change quickly enough is the question. Don't you know that all that is nothing more than fear-mongering by the fake news? You should worry about REAL threats, like the "tyranny of the metric system." www.mediamatters.org/video/2019/06/05/tucker-carlson-almost-every-nation-earth-has-fallen-under-yoke-tyranny-metric-system/223874 |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,337
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jun 8, 2019 18:10:45 GMT -5
White House blocked intelligence agency’s written testimony saying climate change could be ‘possibly catastrophic’White House officials barred a State Department intelligence agency from submitting written testimony this week to the House Intelligence Committee warning that human-caused climate change could be “possibly catastrophic.” The move came after State officials refused to excise the document’s references to federal scientific findings on climate change. The effort to edit, and ultimately suppress, the prepared testimony by the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research comes as the Trump administration is debating how best to challenge the fact that burning fossil fuels is warming the planet and could pose serious risks unless the world makes deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions over the next decade. Senior military and intelligence officials have continued to warn climate change could undermine America’s national security — a position President Trump rejects. Officials from the White House’s Office of Legislative Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, and National Security Council all raised objections to parts of the testimony that Rod Schoonover, who works in the Office of the Geographer and Global Issues, prepared to present on the bureau’s behalf for a hearing Wednesday. Full story here: White House blocked intelligence agency’s written testimony saying climate change could be ‘possibly catastrophic’
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jun 9, 2019 10:14:44 GMT -5
Oh My God did you feel that,, It was terrible,,
Riiight! If there was global warming then why do we still get snow in the winter?🤔  |
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,371
|
Post by thyme4change on Jun 9, 2019 10:32:48 GMT -5
Probably ocean acidification will hurt us before the rise in sea level will. We are killing the marine food chain from the bottom up. The most nutrient dense water is the coldest water - what happens if that warms even a little? 40% of insect species are in decline. We already are killing off bees.
That and increased intensity of weather events. After 2 100-year floods in my area in the last 2 years - insurance agencies are refusing insurance in certain areas. Whether I like it or not, whether I build on a flood plain or not, I'm going to be paying for the fires and the flooding and storm surges either through government bail outs or increased insurance premiums. Probably both. It is in all of our best interest to curb our reliance on fossil fuels. Oil companies are already pivoting to sustainable energy sources, but they will suck every last bit of subsidy they can. Will we be able to change quickly enough is the question. Don't you know that all that is nothing more than fear-mongering by the fake news? You should worry about REAL threats, like the "tyranny of the metric system." www.mediamatters.org/video/2019/06/05/tucker-carlson-almost-every-nation-earth-has-fallen-under-yoke-tyranny-metric-system/223874Or, all the rich, powerful people should push the theory and create new, expensive technologies that everyone will be forced to adopt, and they can make a bunch of money. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 2:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2019 8:24:16 GMT -5
Or, all the rich, powerful people should push the theory and create new, expensive technologies that everyone will be forced to adopt, and they can make a bunch of money. Shhh. Don't let the cat out of the bag. There's big money in mandated purchase. Obama started that train a rolling on this at the federal level, with the medical insurance mandate. Easy to move on to AGW mandates, now that the precedent has been set. California has jumped right on this, with mandated solar panels on all new home construction. Very small step from there, to require all structures to have them. If I wasn't retired, I'd be importing low cost panels from China. While organizing protests against fossil fuel companies, to keep the hysteria at full throttle. I'd be helping to save the world from catastrophic warming. Making money on this would just be a side benefit. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,035
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 10, 2019 13:10:28 GMT -5
since Reagan, we have been paying for the uninsured.
the only difference between Reagan and Obama in this respect is that Obama's universal mandate got skin in the game for the uninsured.
so, you would rather go back to the free ride that Reagan instituted in 1986? what are you? a commie?
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 10, 2019 13:24:54 GMT -5
Or, all the rich, powerful people should push the theory and create new, expensive technologies that everyone will be forced to adopt, and they can make a bunch of money. Shhh. Don't let the cat out of the bag. There's big money in mandated purchase. Obama started that train a rolling on this at the federal level, with the medical insurance mandate. Easy to move on to AGW mandates, now that the precedent has been set. California has jumped right on this, with mandated solar panels on all new home construction. Very small step from there, to require all structures to have them. If I wasn't retired, I'd be importing low cost panels from China.While organizing protests against fossil fuel companies, to keep the hysteria at full throttle. I'd be helping to save the world from catastrophic warming. Making money on this would just be a side benefit. What happened to "Buy American"? I guess it's just empty rhetoric, and nobody really means it. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 2:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 11, 2019 12:58:19 GMT -5
since Reagan, we have been paying for the uninsured.the only difference between Reagan and Obama in this respect is that Obama's universal mandate got skin in the game for the uninsured. so, you would rather go back to the free ride that Reagan instituted in 1986? what are you? a commie? Which has absolutely nothing to do with a mandated purchase, as a law, and used for my reference in regards to thyme's post I was answering. Or carbon dioxide levels for that matter. There's big money in mandated purchase. You just have to be ready for it ! One persons economic damage is another's gravy train. (Nice try on the "commie" thing, you won't find me very deflectable, lol.) |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,035
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 12, 2019 17:48:57 GMT -5
since Reagan, we have been paying for the uninsured.the only difference between Reagan and Obama in this respect is that Obama's universal mandate got skin in the game for the uninsured. so, you would rather go back to the free ride that Reagan instituted in 1986? what are you? a commie? Which has absolutely nothing to do with a mandated purchase, as a law, and used for my reference in regards to thyme's post I was answering. Or carbon dioxide levels for that matter. There's big money in mandated purchase. You just have to be ready for it ! One persons economic damage is another's gravy train. (Nice try on the "commie" thing, you won't find me very deflectable, lol.)me neither. so, getting back to the point, THIS is what you said:
Obama started that train a rolling on this at the federal level, with the medical insurance mandate.
I didn't argue with you. what i was suggesting is that this fixed a problem whereby uninsured people had no skin in the game. apparently you don't think that is a good idea. you would rather have those that have insurance pay for those that don't- which is great for scofflaws, and terrible for everyone else. in this case i was using commie and pro-scofflaw as synonyms. so, i guess you are pro-scofflaw, because that is what being against the universal mandate means, in practical terms.
and no, i don't consider that changing the subject, moving the goalposts, etc. i actually consider it the most important fact in the debate.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,313
|
Post by NastyWoman on Jun 13, 2019 18:33:17 GMT -5
Or, all the rich, powerful people should push the theory and create new, expensive technologies that everyone will be forced to adopt, and they can make a bunch of money. Shhh. Don't let the cat out of the bag. There's big money in mandated purchase. Obama started that train a rolling on this at the federal level, with the medical insurance mandate. Easy to move on to AGW mandates, now that the precedent has been set. California has jumped right on this, with mandated solar panels on all new home construction. Very small step from there, to require all structures to have them. If I wasn't retired, I'd be importing low cost panels from China.While organizing protests against fossil fuel companies, to keep the hysteria at full throttle. I'd be helping to save the world from catastrophic warming. Making money on this would just be a side benefit. In that case if you weren't retired you would be running headlong into the Trump tariffs  |
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 19, 2024 2:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2019 13:21:20 GMT -5
Which has absolutely nothing to do with a mandated purchase, as a law, and used for my reference in regards to thyme's post I was answering. Or carbon dioxide levels for that matter. There's big money in mandated purchase. You just have to be ready for it ! One persons economic damage is another's gravy train. (Nice try on the "commie" thing, you won't find me very deflectable, lol.)me neither. so, getting back to the point, THIS is what you said:
Obama started that train a rolling on this at the federal level, with the medical insurance mandate.
I didn't argue with you. what i was suggesting is that this fixed a problem whereby uninsured people had no skin in the game. apparently you don't think that is a good idea. you would rather have those that have insurance pay for those that don't- which is great for scofflaws, and terrible for everyone else. in this case i was using commie and pro-scofflaw as synonyms. so, i guess you are pro-scofflaw, because that is what being against the universal mandate means, in practical terms.
and no, i don't consider that changing the subject, moving the goalposts, etc. i actually consider it the most important fact in the debate.
No, mandating a purchase, was not the way to do it. It's taxation without representation, since the bill originated in the Senate. |
|
