As the earth dies screaming

[Jade Falcon]

This thread makes me want to take out my 2 mpg truck and travel 1,200 miles and toss burning cigarette butts out the window.

Just get a Lambo. Jeremy Clarkson got 6 miles to the gallon in one once.

That way, you can be rich AND polluting at the same time! Liberals hate both of those things!

 

[Denny Crane]

The vote would have been a trifle different under President Gore. It was in the bag till Bush opposed it.

More important is the lack of quantitative debate ever since, because Republicans made the government studying it illegal. Just like drugs.

Al Gore is a laughing stock.

Here's an ice sculpture made of him:

 

[Jade Falcon]

Al Gore is a laughing stock.

Here's an ice sculpture made of him:

Are you serial?!

 

[jlprk]

Nonsense like this is why these threads die on the vine. "Democrats killed the Kyoto treaty." Whatever you say, dudes. Another thread which lapses into only conservatives posting, congratulating each other.

 

[jlprk]

Let's say you're right. Bush and the Republicans didn't delay the process by killing Kyoto. The Democrats had a majority, so they killed it. Right. Gore would have been no different from Bush, because an ice statue says so. Okay. But that doesn't change something.

After Kyoto died, Republicans made it illegal for the government to study it and find the budget numbers. Even if Kyoto was a bad treaty, which it wasn't, there should have been a process of evolving toward a better treaty. The process stopped dead in its tracks. To now say that it will take several presidencies is a big duh. That was true then, too. But Republicans want to play games till we're practically dying of thirst in the desert, when it will cost 100 times as much to solve it 10 times faster.

Let me guess your next move. "A couple of conservative Democrats voted with Republicans to make studies illegal, so it was bipartisan. So we should continue not finding the numbers."

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

Let's say you're right. Bush and the Republicans didn't delay the process by killing Kyoto. The Democrats had a majority, so they killed it. Right. Gore would have been no different from Bush, because an ice statue says so. Okay. But that doesn't change something.

After Kyoto died, Republicans made it illegal for the government to study it and find the budget numbers. Even if Kyoto was a bad treaty, which it wasn't, there should have been a process of evolving toward a better treaty. The process stopped dead in its tracks. To now say that it will take several presidencies is a big duh. That was true then, too. But Republicans want to play games till we're practically dying of thirst in the desert, when it will cost 100 times as much to solve it 10 times faster.

Let me guess your next move. "A couple of conservative Democrats voted with Republicans to make studies illegal, so it was bipartisan. So we should continue not finding the numbers."

Actually, the next move will be, "Anyone who believes in climate change is a rascist left wing whacko who has been drinking the koolade of lies from the left wing media". The "left wing media" is the default excuse of the Right for everything they don't agree with or can't excuse in any other way......

 

[rasheedfan2005]

Actually, this is one area where a Trump win might actually be a good thing. Apparently, the one year where emissions of harmful gasses slowed dramatically was 2009, because of the financial crisis. So maybe if the economy does tank it will have good side-effects.

very good bebe, now say "my vagina" like amy schumer. women are funny. trump won. get over it.

 

[rasheedfan2005]

This thread makes me want to take out my 2 mpg truck and travel 1,200 miles and toss burning cigarette butts out the window.

where you get your truck? you get twice as many MPGs as me

 

[Rastapopoulos]

"The Great Barrier Reef: A Catastrophe Laid Bare"

 

[Jade Falcon]

Let's say you're right. Bush and the Republicans didn't delay the process by killing Kyoto. The Democrats had a majority, so they killed it. Right. Gore would have been no different from Bush, because an ice statue says so. Okay. But that doesn't change something.

After Kyoto died, Republicans made it illegal for the government to study it and find the budget numbers. Even if Kyoto was a bad treaty, which it wasn't, there should have been a process of evolving toward a better treaty. The process stopped dead in its tracks. To now say that it will take several presidencies is a big duh. That was true then, too. But Republicans want to play games till we're practically dying of thirst in the desert, when it will cost 100 times as much to solve it 10 times faster.

Let me guess your next move. "A couple of conservative Democrats voted with Republicans to make studies illegal, so it was bipartisan. So we should continue not finding the numbers."

Christ, you still aren't GETTING this.

The inaction is a GOVERNMENT problem. The ENTIRE government; from State Governments to the Federal Government. It's a GOVERNMENT problem.

We've known about climate change for almost a fucking century, in some form or another. This has nothing to do with partisan politics (BOTH sides playing it doesn't help). It has EVERYTHING to do with the GOVERNMENT as a whole.

Stop looking at party politics and look at the bigger picture. And the same could be said on a world stage, because other governments aren't doing anything about this either, and there's a LOT more of them than are ones whom are making a difference.

It's easier and FAR cheaper not to do anything than to spend Billions on something that few people understand.

This has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans. It's a GOVERNMENT problem; a government that is cheap, wasteful, and selective.

Get that through your goddamn head.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

"44% of US Honeybee colonies died last year"

 

[MarAzul]

when our pollution gets as bad as theirs

It was! Back in my Navy days, coming back in to port in Long Beach CA from sea was like returning to hell. You could see it really prominent, a big Orange dome of crap in the air over the LA basin.
Then you entered the dome, soon your eyes would start to burn a bit, your olfactory system verified, you're in. A couple day later your eyes quit weeping, but you still couldn't smell a steak.

Then upon returning to sea and clean air... Oh this is marvelous.

 

[Jade Falcon]

It was! Back in my Navy days, coming back in to port in Long Beach CA form sea was like returning to hell. You could see it really prominent, a big Orange dome of crap in the air over the LA basin.
Then you entered the dome, soon your eyes would start to burn a bit, your olfactory system verified, you're in. A couple day later your eyes quite weeping, but you still couldn't smell a steak.

Then upon returning to sea and clean air... Oh this is marvelous.

I had the same problem living in San Jose during the 80s and early 90s as as boy. When my family moved up here in 1995, it was like stepping into another world. But I still had lasting effects from horrible allergies (which was probably more to do with my mother's smoking at the time) and hay fever.

 

[MarAzul]

This thread makes me want to take out my 2 mpg truck and travel 1,200 miles and toss burning cigarette butts out the window.

Ha! We need a new button. I wanted to like this but it just ain't cool, but fuck it, I like it anyway.

 

[H.C.]

This thread looks like the government.
Democrats say, it's the Republicans fault.
Republicans say, it's the Democrats fault.

It's like I'm watching CNN or FNN.

 

[Sedatedfork]

This thread looks like the government.
Democrats say, it's the Republicans fault.
Republicans say, it's the Democrats fault.

It's like I'm watching CNN or FNN.

I'm saying it's Capitol City of Hunger Games fault.

 

[jlprk]

Christ, you still aren't GETTING this.

The inaction is a GOVERNMENT problem. The ENTIRE government; from State Governments to the Federal Government. It's a GOVERNMENT problem.

We've known about climate change for almost a fucking century, in some form or another. This has nothing to do with partisan politics (BOTH sides playing it doesn't help). It has EVERYTHING to do with the GOVERNMENT as a whole.

Stop looking at party politics and look at the bigger picture. And the same could be said on a world stage, because other governments aren't doing anything about this either, and there's a LOT more of them than are ones whom are making a difference.

It's easier and FAR cheaper not to do anything than to spend Billions on something that few people understand.

This has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans. It's a GOVERNMENT problem; a government that is cheap, wasteful, and selective.

Get that through your goddamn head.

Same old shit. The refusal to recognize the source of the problem.

 

[Jade Falcon]

Same old shit. The refusal to recognize the source of the problem.

Snort. Let me guess......BUSH?

 

[jlprk]

I've said it in about 5 posts in this thread. Only a stubborn mule could have missed my whole theme. I'll let you keep guessing.

 

[Jade Falcon]

I've said it in about 5 posts in this thread. Only a stubborn mule could have missed my whole theme. I'll let you keep guessing.

Oh yeah, that's right....REPUBLICANS.

My bad.

 

[Sedatedfork]

Look at all the smog! It even permeates indoors.

 

[jlprk]

Oh yeah, that's right....REPUBLICANS. My bad.

Find COSTS discovered by funding STUDIES so you and I can argue about them. Till then every thread like this is a collection of spacey philosophy speeches.

 

[Jade Falcon]

Find COSTS discovered by funding STUDIES so you and I can argue about them. Till then every thread like this is a collection of spacey philosophy speeches.

And as I said....where do we get the money?

I asked you this, and then you went on into some rant about Republicans. When you can answer THAT, then we can start a reasoned debate.

 

[riverman]

This thread makes me want to take out my 2 mpg truck and travel 1,200 miles and toss burning cigarette butts out the window.

We all celebrate in different ways but I respect your cultural traditions....fortunately Oregon is not that close to Los Angeles and all those pyromaniacs!

 

[jlprk]

And as I said....where do we get the money?

I asked you this, and then you went on into some rant about Republicans. When you can answer THAT, then we can start a reasoned debate.

As I answered, since you want all studying, teaching, learning, and training ended because you claim we can't afford it, we can start at military colleges, to change your mind. You then went on a rant, not me.

You can begin your studying by studying my posts. Me, I'm learning the buttons which set you off.

 

[Denny Crane]

Peer reviewed study from a legit science resource.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886916300472?np=y

Personality and Individual Differences
May 2016, Vol.94:299–302, doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.01.046

Short Communication
Scientific literacy, optimism about science and conservatism

• Noah Carl a,,
• Nathan Cofnas b
• Michael A. Woodley of Meniecd

• aNuffield College, New Road, Oxford OX11NF, United Kingdom
• bDepartment of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, Free School Lane, Cambridge CB23RH, United Kingdom
• cDepartment of Psychology, Technische Universität Chemnitz, Germany
• dCenter Leo Apostel for Interdisciplinary Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium

Received 22 December 2015. Revised 27 January 2016. Accepted 28 January 2016. Available online 6 February 2016.

Highlights

• Some have asserted that conservatives are less well disposed toward science.
• It has been claimed that they are inflexible, dogmatic and intolerant.
• Different sub-dimensions of political orientation can be separated.
• We distinguish between three definitions of ‘conservative’.
• Economic conservatives are as or more literate and optimistic about science.

Abstract
It is frequently asserted that conservatives exhibit a cognitive style that renders them less well disposed toward science than progressives, and that they are correspondingly less trusting of scientific institutions and less knowledgeable about scientific ideas. Here we scrutinize these assertions, using data from the U.S. General Social Survey. We distinguish between three different definitions of ‘conservative’: first, identifying as conservative, rather than as liberal; second, holding socially conservative views, rather than socially progressive views; and third, holding economically conservative views, rather than economically leftist views. We find that self-identified conservatives and social conservatives are less scientifically literate and optimistic about science than, respectively, self-identified liberals and social progressives. However, we find that economic conservatives are as or more scientifically literate and optimistic about science than economic leftists. Our results highlight the importance of separating different sub-dimensions of political orientation when studying the relationships between political beliefs, scientific literacy and optimism about science.

 

[rasheedfan2005]

"44% of US Honeybee colonies died last year"

HAARP http://www.globalresearch.ca/haarp-...er-modification-electromagnetic-warfare/20407

 

[Jade Falcon]

As I answered, since you want all studying, teaching, learning, and training ended because you claim we can't afford it, we can start at military colleges, to change your mind. You then went on a rant, not me.

You can begin your studying by studying my posts. Me, I'm learning the buttons which set you off.

Or...we could start with not funding colleges that encourage their students to run off to safe spaces and riot? That would save us a LOT of money.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Population control is the answer. Elimate 3 billion people and the problem goes away

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Or at least force mass sterilizations