I would love to read this, because I’d probably agree with half of it, but I hit a brick wall where you claimed Donald Trump authored legal paperwork which was submitted to a court system.
Then we should stop purchasing oil from Central America immediately!
Turn their ships away at the ports right now!
That will show those central americans! They can’t be polluting our environment and benefiting from it the way that they have.
Bravo! It took me a while to read your post, but you took on all of it. Good job…
I take it you drive an electric car then?
I need oil. I have 420 ponies that need those hydrocarbons to do their job well.
Eh, maybe not. The test burner and R&D lab is about 800 yds. from my house and has been mothballed since gas dropped below $4.00/gal. There is also a coal->liquids program, but it was also mothballed. Until the price per barrel crosses a certain thresh hold, those techs. aren’t really worth it.
They’re mainly good to march out every so often for a big grant.
My dad was previously a nuclear power plant operator that started out as a grunt after being laid off from electrician work and welding within the nuclear power plant. At one point he was in the HAZMAT suits, entering the reactors, removing the spent fuel rods and then going through the decontamination process. Fortunately he always tested negative and as a standard, you wore a small tag on your chest that would change colors if you were exposed or contaminated accidentally.
After doing this for several years, he applied for a job with another division of the illuminating company, CEI at the time, and became an operator at the coal plant. Between all the education both jobs required and gave, coal is much cleaner. Because of the high pressure firing systems burning off what would otherwise be emissions in say, a giant furnace, the gas scrubbers and other pollution control and reduction systems, coal is in fact very clean fuel. Much cleaner than burying spent reactor rods under mountains and such!
People are willfully ignorant and go by blind trust in the news, politicians that blindly trust scientists who IMO are often deceitful and on someone’s payroll and blind idiots that constantly look for a conflict to champion so they can feel heroic, special and like a snowflake.
BTW the CO2 levels pushed today are absolutely deceptive.
400ppm 100 years ago, 400ppm today, 280ppm 20 years ago through cherry picked measurements.
You can research Svante Arrhenius the father of the CO2 theory. His measurements were taken long before there was any industry to blame.
Apparently the oceans and mantle are doing just fine at absorbing it 100 years later. Going back on coal is critical for our economy and in fact, now is a good time to start buying coal stock. Obama bankrupt one of the biggest coal operators in the world and millions if low information thinkers still celebrate this.
Between them and catastrophe. And they – all of them – know it.
This isn’t quite the right way to put this, but it was addressed above, in the post you’re quoting. There is no parallel here with Putin – not even the hint of one.
Where are you getting these figures?
Notice where it says adjusted for global mean in each tabulation?
I wouldn’t trust NASA as far as I could throw the space shuttle.
Depending where they cherry pick their global numbers to generate the mean, they can plot the PPM anywhere they want to fit the Svante Arrhenius theory. Based on static data from then till now?
The measurements would have been approximately 400ppm when Svante Arrhenius first published his articles and theory, the true father of the greenhouse affect.
Alternative facts ok?
Thoughts on Betsy Devos?
Doesn’t adjusting a global number for a global mean and looking at the trending take out an insane amount of variance from the final number? Taking a measurement from a single point in regards to CO2 emissions would make you subject to an insane number of variables.
Also don’t you think you’re putting a lot of stock in the scientific capabilities of a 100 yr old society? Seems like you’re trying to quote science by cherry picking numbers you personally believe while claiming any numbers that don’t support yours are cherry picking.
Alternative Facts will soon become more mainstream than they already have and most likely lead to the inevitable breakdown of mainstream media. All politicians (read, Left, Right, Center, Trump, Hillary, etc) love an uneducated population.
Betsy Devos will most likely be harmless as cabinet picks don’t have REAL power, they siphon from the power of the president. And ultimately if Trump decides with option A and his cabinet member wants option B, we know which option the country gets.
Stealing this quote from an article I read recently:
“One of the very basic things a society needs in order to function and/or qualify as a society is a broadly agreed-upon set of facts about what’s going on in the world, even if it may host a wide variety of ideas about what those facts mean or what should be done about them.”
I understand that some Trump supporters enjoy his aggressive tone with the media - calling out CNN for being “fake news” surely plays very well with his base - but this quote brings up something that really concerns me about the Trump administration.
In fairness, as @Powerpuff has reminded me before, he didn’t exactly invent alternative facts, but he’s certainly the most outwardly brazen about creating and using them (and that’s an understatement). The erosion of public confidence in even the most basic facts reported by the media concerns me, though.
[quote=“BOTSLAYER, post:151, topic:225882, full:true”]
Alternative facts ok?[/quote]
Nope. Alternative facts are not OK. Kelly Anne Conway and her associates need to tighten up on the precision with which they speak of find a new job.
Not really. She’ll probably be dismissed and replaced with no fanfare what so ever like so many other cabinet members have been in the past.
Which is ultimately the problem. I’m of the opinion (rant Inc) that the past exists to learn from, but beyond that, who the fuck cares. I don’t care in the slightest what the founding fathers wanted for this country, they’re old dead guys. I don’t care in the slightest which political party was the first one to -insert stupid thing here-.
All that matters is what you’re doing and whether or not it’s right or not. What I see is an administration that will openly lie to the public and suffer no consequences. Do I care if Obama has ever done this before? Fuck no. Do I care if GW Bush has done this before? Fuck no. Do I care that Trump and his administration had the option to tell the truth or lie and they chose wrong? Bet your ass I do.
This is exactly one reason I have a problem with a lot of the “but BIG OIL!!11!” stuff. I don’t know of any company in any field that’s a real angel, but there are realities and real incentives to be on the forefront of renewables as a former oil company–these companies don’t want to go under, they’d rather own the next frontier and ensure profits for the next 100 years by doing so.
The other thing is that there are real (and serious) engineering and technological problems with renewables right now. Otherwise Bill Gates wouldn’t be putting together a consortium of company heads and investors to create a $1 billion dollar clean energy fund to try to make renewable sources happen on a broad scale.
Dr. Will Hogan from Harvard: “Reducing the cost of clean technology sets the stage for later large scale deployment. Learning by (re)searching, overcoming the many obstacles that precede large scale deployment, and waiting for costs to fall, are critical elements of the analysis.” I do not believe throwing more subsidy money at technologies that are currently–at best–ineffective on a cost basis is the way to go. Subsidies certainly have a place, but they’re taking much too much of the center stage right now. Address the technological and engineering issues first, and renewables will fire up just fine on a mass market.
Exactly. I am on board with the idea of renewables, but one of my problems with this current landscape is the idea that we can’t do anything BUT renewables RIGHT NOW. Any transition–any at all that doesn’t completely fuck our infrastructure and economy up–needs to go through patchwork and transition phases. Let’s say “clean coal” or gassified coal can put out effective Kilowatt-hours at 60% of the emissions of current petro based plants. What a lot of advocates in the country at large are saying is effectively, “No you can’t do clean coal because it’s not COMPLETELY clean! You’re still polluting!”
Well fine–maybe so, but polluting 40% less than currently. And with a mere fraction of the technological or logistical difficulties associated with current renewable sources powering the majority of our country. So instead of thinking “well, some reduction in a relatively short term is better than nothing” many of the activists are completely against the idea.
The problem is of course that to get to powering our whole country through green energy there must be transition sources by definition. It simply won’t work without them and green sources aren’t ready to power the country.
The only thing that concerns me with Trump relentlessly attacking media that isn’t “nice” to him is it reminds me strongly of V for Vendetta.
He gets upset about things like this…which have been protected in our society re: the 1st amendment since 1789
And eventually that guy gets black bagged:
I have yet to find an example of another president shouting down a reporter by saying their news organization isn’t legitimate. I mean imagine if Obama had shouted down Fox news pushing their Birther narrative. He would have been called a dictator immediately. “He wants to silence the media!”
I was pleased that Bill O’Reilly said “hey man…Putin is a killer,” but Trump responded with “Whadabout da US?” I mean this guy is serious.
How long until reporters are allowed to attend press conferences under the presumption that they will cover him favorably? If they don’t, they will not attend the next conference.
Lol these morons that scream “BUT BIG OIL!!!” are the same ones that are anti-capitalist. They are for no one being rich…we must all be poor together…i.e the ACA bringing the middle class down.
The rest of your post is spot on.