toad

Ocasio

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, jzk said:

I am advocating human flourishing, especially for the poor.  Currently fossil fuel is needed for poor people to flourish.  If you can develop a more affordable source of energy, you will be a hero to mankind.  Meanwhile, don't be taking energy away from poor people.  

Wind and solar now cost less than fossil fuel on a joule per joule basis.  We haven't even gotten into geothermal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, jzk said:

Trump sure does say quite a few stupid things.  Not as many as you, but still plenty.  But I have never heard him talk about actually wrecking our society like AOC does.

He doesn't talk about it, but he is the one driving the bus towards the cliff.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Laker said:

Wind and solar now cost less than fossil fuel on a joule per joule basis.  We haven't even gotten into geothermal.

If that is true, no need for any green new deal.  Capitalists will embrace your new cheap energy source to provide needed energy to the masses.

Too bad it is a bunch of bullshit.  And, I wish it weren't.  No one wants even cheaper energy than I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Laker said:

He doesn't talk about it, but he is the one driving the bus towards the cliff.

How so?  I could point to several poor policy choices, but nothing catastrophic so far.  

Make a case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jzk said:
12 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

There is a world of difference between being naive and misinformed (AOC) and pathological lying (President Trump).

That you see them as roughly equivalent demonstrates the partisan shit you claim to abhor.

That concept is true.  So let's not look to a naive misinformed person for our national energy policy.  

One of them is in a far more consequential position.  That the person of whom I speak appears to be in it for only himself and his family, with a documented history of lies, broken promises, and amorality gives me greater pause than it does you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

One of them is in a far more consequential position.  That the person of whom I speak appears to be in it for only himself and his family, with a documented history of lies, broken promises, and amorality gives me greater pause than it does you.

We are well aware of your moral superiority but which one is this thread about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Migrants are being driven north by climate change...……… has nothing to do with piss poor economies that are driving folks trying to find their version of The American Dream.

According to AOC, if we make our economy more like that in Central and South America, they will not come to the US. See this is the brilliance of AOC that you people on the right just do not understand and cannot possibly comprehend.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

One of them is in a far more consequential position.  That the person of whom I speak appears to be in it for only himself and his family, with a documented history of lies, broken promises, and amorality gives me greater pause than it does you.

Yes, I think it is clear that you have a bigger issue with trump than do I, and I have quite a bit.  So what is your point?  All threads about anything else besides Trump must now be converted to Trump threads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jzk said:
37 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

One of them is in a far more consequential position.  That the person of whom I speak appears to be in it for only himself and his family, with a documented history of lies, broken promises, and amorality gives me greater pause than it does you.

Yes, I think it is clear that you have a bigger issue with trump than do I, and I have quite a bit.  So what is your point?  All threads about anything else besides Trump must now be converted to Trump threads?

I am simply amazed at the energy and passion people are giving to expressing their outrage at a first term Congresswoman, who has no seniority or power (other than her use of Twitter and your willingness to grant her time in your head), all while ignoring the actions and words of the person doing damage with the power of the Oval Office.

It is clear you, Dog, and others are laser focused on the inconsequential - be they silly statements or an elected official with no real power.  I find that noteworthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I am simply amazed at the energy and passion people are giving to expressing their outrage at a first term Congresswoman, who has no seniority or power (other than her use of Twitter and your willingness to grant her time in your head), all while ignoring the actions and words of the person doing damage with the power of the Oval Office.

It is clear you, Dog, and others are laser focused on the inconsequential - be they silly statements or an elected official with no real power.  I find that noteworthy.

She has the same 'shooting her mouth off on twitter' problem as Trump.

Perhaps the energy and passion put into the "This is our future" meme of her supporters is a little premature.  Certainly, Nancy thinks so.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

She has the same 'shooting her mouth off on twitter' problem as Trump.

Perhaps the energy and passion put into the "This is our future" meme of her supporters is a little premature.  Certainly, Nancy thinks so.

 

They do have the same problem with using Twitter as their primary source of communication.  And, they both say stuff that makes you facepalm.

One has more influence and lies.  All the time.  Even when the truth would be better.

On which one should we focus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

They do have the same problem with using Twitter as their primary source of communication.  And, they both say stuff that makes you facepalm.

One has more influence and lies.  All the time.  Even when the truth would be better.

On which one should we focus?

The one with the dyed hair, and big tits!

Share this post


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

They do have the same problem with using Twitter as their primary source of communication.  And, they both say stuff that makes you facepalm.

One has more influence and lies.  All the time.  Even when the truth would be better.

On which one should we focus?

What is wrong with Twitter?   There is something refreshing about the connection they have with the masses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

The one with the dyed hair, and big tits!

He needs a Mansierre.  Or, a Bro.

The_bro.jpg

Share this post


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

What is wrong with Twitter?   There is something refreshing about the connection they have with the masses.

I, personally, would prefer the President use other formats for communicating with the masses.  You know, stuff like Press Conferences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I, personally, would prefer the President use other formats for communicating with the masses.  You know, stuff like Press Conferences.

Press conferences are fine, but twitter is instantaneous and is far more effective at connecting with people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the girl-wonder blaming the migrant crisis on "climate change:"

 

12093702-6906917-The_freshman_Democrat_claimed_the_far_right_never_talk_about_wha-a-60_1554894710454.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JZK loves the “the GND will eliminate fossil fuels” trope because it makes him think he’s smart. Ignoring the “as much as feasible” language and the “non-binding legislation” verbiage is required, of course. 

And the argument that “if it’s economically advantageous it’ll happen spontaneously” ignores a few basic premises. 

The first is that the coal, oil & gas lobbyists have no influence on a national energy policy.

The second is that subsidies cannot be used to further national goals, which may require investment in one area reaping benefits in many others.

And the third is that industrial momentum requires effort to shift historic solutions and processes to adopt new technology and choices.

IF you are willing to ignore all the glaring flaws in his arguments, JZK appears to be intelligent. It’s pretty obvious to me, though, that the last thing he wants to do is think about problems and consider solutions.

Share this post


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

JZK loves the “eliminate fossil fuels” trope because it makes him think he’s smart. Ignoring the “as much as feasible” language and the “non-binding legislation” verbiage is required, of course. 

And the argument that “if it’s economically advantageous it’ll happen anyways ignores a few basic premises. 

The first is that the coal, oil & gas lobbyists have no influence on a national energy policy.

The second is that subsidies cannot be used to further national goals, which may require investment in one area reaping benefits in many others.

And the third is that industrial momentum requires effort to shift historic solutions and processes to adopt new technology and choices.

IF you are willing to ignore all the glaring flaws in his arguments, JZK appears to be intelligent. It’s pretty obvious to me, though, that the last thing he wants to do is think about problems and consider solutions.

So make a case for something, if you can. 

Be specific about something.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That her plan to wreck civilization to solve 2 nonexistent problems is "non-binding" is certainly better than if it were binding, I will give you that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, jzk said:

Press conferences are fine, but twitter is instantaneous and is far more effective at connecting with people.

My personal opinion is using Twitter as the official method of communication demeans the Office of POTUS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

JZK loves the “the GND will eliminate fossil fuels” trope because it makes him think he’s smart. Ignoring the “as much as feasible” language and the “non-binding legislation” verbiage is required, of course. 

And the argument that “if it’s economically advantageous it’ll happen spontaneously” ignores a few basic premises. 

The first is that the coal, oil & gas lobbyists have no influence on a national energy policy.

The second is that subsidies cannot be used to further national goals, which may require investment in one area reaping benefits in many others.

And the third is that industrial momentum requires effort to shift historic solutions and processes to adopt new technology and choices.

IF you are willing to ignore all the glaring flaws in his arguments, JZK appears to be intelligent. It’s pretty obvious to me, though, that the last thing he wants to do is think about problems and consider solutions.

AOC claims millennials (and she ought to know - she is one) believe the world will end in 12 years.  The GND is the socialists plan to save the world and their prescription to do so is for the end of the use of fossil fuels.  If the danger is that great, then we need to get busy right now.  Even though we face this cataclysmic threat, no senators voted for the GND.  NONE.    Completely restructuring the US economy to eliminate fossil fuels and nukes would be the most monumental task this nation would ever contemplate.  The clock is ticking - there is no time to wait.  So what's the solution @phillysailor?

Share this post


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

My personal opinion is using Twitter as the official method of communication demeans the Office of POTUS.

Fair enough to have that opinion.  But I think we do agree that the manner in which Trump uses twitter is what is really demeaning.  But is the platform itself demeaning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's examine the impact of "climate change" on human well being:  

1.  The Earth is getting greener.  More plants.  Many more.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth/

2.  Agricultural yields are improving.

https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-agriculture-and-food-supply_.html

3.  Human climate related deaths have declined by 98% in the last 80 years.

The actual real world data has proven that "climate change" is a big nothing burger.  In fact, it has been a net benefit to mankind.

https___blogs-images.forbes.com_alexepstein_files_2014_11_cna2ifjirlmv3ldr975xcuhbee6rorxdmoqjgh5ciw4mswu2_buocbpnfw-9pq6iiiqspbrbbvbf8h_klrjhjx3j9-hgi5mcgkmjjflkruhwfi_nozuak_z4urylil3cta.jpg

uscornyields-large.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jzk said:

Fair enough to have that opinion.  But I think we do agree that the manner in which Trump uses twitter is what is really demeaning.  But is the platform itself demeaning?

Perhaps Twitter, in and of itself, is not demeaning.  But, I believe using it as the official channel of communication is beneath the office.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t care for a lot of the crap Trump posts.  A significant number of Americans broadly support his agenda but dislike him personally because he is a rude and sometimes crude New Yorker.  I think his poll #s would go up 10% if he laid off Twitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, jzk said:

Let's examine the impact of "climate change" on human well being:  

1.  The Earth is getting greener.  More plants.  Many more.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth/

2.  Agricultural yields are improving.

https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-agriculture-and-food-supply_.html

3.  Human climate related deaths have declined by 98% in the last 80 years.

The actual real world data has proven that "climate change" is a big nothing burger.  In fact, it has been a net benefit to mankind.

https___blogs-images.forbes.com_alexepstein_files_2014_11_cna2ifjirlmv3ldr975xcuhbee6rorxdmoqjgh5ciw4mswu2_buocbpnfw-9pq6iiiqspbrbbvbf8h_klrjhjx3j9-hgi5mcgkmjjflkruhwfi_nozuak_z4urylil3cta.jpg

uscornyields-large.jpg

Yea - but there is power - the real motivator for leftists - in fear-mongering “climate change”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

They do have the same problem with using Twitter as their primary source of communication. 

It's not her primary, or sole, means of communication. Feel free to read her stuff, watch her streams. She's not nearly as "shoot off the mouth" as Trump, but every rightwinger here thinks so because they get their "news" from the outrage industry. That industry is really good at selling the packaged narrative, and the rightwingers here want to buy it. Like everything else - they won't change their mind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

It's not her primary, or sole, means of communication. Feel free to read her stuff, watch her streams. She's not nearly as "shoot off the mouth" as Trump, but every rightwinger here thinks so because they get their "news" from the outrage industry. That industry is really good at selling the packaged narrative, and the rightwingers here want to buy it. Like everything else - they won't change their mind. 

I see the shades of gray between the two.  Still, I wish both, and others, would stop with Twitter feuds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jzk said:

If that is true, no need for any green new deal.  Capitalists will embrace your new cheap energy source to provide needed energy to the masses.

Too bad it is a bunch of bullshit.  And, I wish it weren't.  No one wants even cheaper energy than I do.

That is just it, capital is going towards the greater returns of alternate energy at the moment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J28 said:

Yea - but there is power - the real motivator for leftists - in fear-mongering “climate change”.

Meanwhile the Sahara keeps expanding. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Laker said:

Meanwhile the Sahara keeps expanding. 

Throw that one, if true, in the negative column with your ocean ph issue.  We should absolutely consider all of the positives and negatives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Laker said:

Meanwhile the Sahara keeps expanding. 

What is the “correct” size of the Sahara?

Share this post


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

Let's examine the impact of "climate change" on human well being:  

1.  The Earth is getting greener.  More plants.  Many more.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth/

2.  Agricultural yields are improving.

https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-agriculture-and-food-supply_.html

3.  Human climate related deaths have declined by 98% in the last 80 years.

The actual real world data has proven that "climate change" is a big nothing burger.  In fact, it has been a net benefit to mankind.

https___blogs-images.forbes.com_alexepstein_files_2014_11_cna2ifjirlmv3ldr975xcuhbee6rorxdmoqjgh5ciw4mswu2_buocbpnfw-9pq6iiiqspbrbbvbf8h_klrjhjx3j9-hgi5mcgkmjjflkruhwfi_nozuak_z4urylil3cta.jpg

uscornyields-large.jpg

Hey!  I've got a couple of cherry trees in my back yard.  You seem really good at picking them.  Or, more likely, the troll-masters just hand out this crap and you get a nickel a post. 

So you probably would actually suck at cherry picking.  Probably would hire the first undocumented casual laborer you could find to do it for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nanny Goat Sucks was much better at presenting big full color graphs to obfuscate.  just sayin..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I see the shades of gray between the two. 

I see a 40+ year chasm. Twitter is Trump's only social media of communication and on it he rambles like an aging boomer; Twitter is not AOCs sole social media of communication to the public and IMO she generally acts - and processes the online world - like a 20-something who's used the internet for decades. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, J28 said:

What is the “correct” size of the Sahara?

My Goodness, but that is a really dumb question.  Desert regions are expanding.  This means it is difficult for people to live in it.  Eventually people with guns as good as ours are going to start living in areas that are becoming deserts.  google "Lifeboat Britain" for a good, but lengthy, explanation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Laker said:

My Goodness, but that is a really dumb question.  Desert regions are expanding.  This means it is difficult for people to live in it.  Eventually people with guns as good as ours are going to start living in areas that are becoming deserts.  google "Lifeboat Britain" for a good, but lengthy, explanation.

Present some actual real world data showing this problem.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, jzk said:

Present some actual real world data showing this problem.  

What? That the desert regions of the world are expanding? You are not that ignorant are you? Perhaps the immigrant problem in Europe is an illusion.

Share this post


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

What? That the desert regions of the world are expanding? You are not that ignorant are you? Perhaps the immigrant problem in Europe is an illusion.

You think that the immigrant problem in Europe is due to expanding deserts?  

Is that really your position.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AOC continues to impress during congressional hearings.  Today at the Financial Services committee she asked good questions was well prepared and heaped praise on Jamie Dixon for cutting off funding to companies that run private prisons which is an idea that left or right we can all agree with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jzk keeps asking posters to define things, doesn't recognize climate change as an issue, thinks unregulated capitalism is a fine idea so......

jzk:  Define the physical universe. Please be precise and concise. Provide at least 2 examples.  TIA.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

You think that the immigrant problem in Europe is due to expanding deserts?  

Is that really your position.

Yes, at least the UN considers it a major source of political instability.

Share this post


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

You think that the immigrant problem in Europe is due to expanding deserts?  

Is that really your position.

Yes.

Years ago, he was only -near- the desert. Then, while he was standing still, the desert approached and finally surrounded him

Ask for his lat and long

-DSK

Share this post


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

Yes, at least the UN considers it a major source of political instability.

We can discuss the problem of expanding deserts if you like, but you have to do more than just general broad strokes.  

If we know that plants on earth are increasing, and climate related deaths are plummeting, then it is hard to see this desert thing as much of a big picture issue.  But, again, discuss if you like.  Specifically discuss how AOC's plan is going to fix the desert problem.

Share this post


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

Yes, at least the UN considers it a major source of political instability.

So does the Department of War.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, jzk said:

It seems as if the Sahel is greening, so that is good, right?

https://www.thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/mueller-sahel.pdf

 

Sounds like evidence of a measurable shift in climate.  On a human time-scale.

Hopefully, those areas on which we depend for our food supply will not see a shift.  If they do.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Sounds like evidence of a measurable shift in climate.  On a human time-scale.

Hopefully, those areas on which we depend for our food supply will not see a shift.  If they do.....

The good news is that the Earth is greening and agricultural yields have more than doubled since the 1960s.  So much winning.

Share this post


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

Yes, at least the UN considers it a major source of political instability.

Guess what?  The UN got it wrong about the Sahel:

https://www.refworld.org/docid/4847bb8f0.html

"What does climate change mean for the region? 

Scientists have differing opinions on whether the Sahel is going to get wetter or drier because of climate change, but either way the outlook is bleak."

I wouldn't put too much stock in UN predictions.  Go with actual real world data instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.N. is about as usefaul as tits on a log and as trustworthy as Bill Clinton in a women’s dorm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, J28 said:

The U.N. is about as usefaul as tits on a log and as trustworthy as Bill Clinton in a women’s dorm.

Shosholoza. I am strong, but we are stronger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J28 said:

The U.N. is about as usefaul as tits on a log and as trustworthy as Bill Clinton in a women’s dorm.

Iz nize yuu larn de lankwich! Nex larn de spellink, Eh!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J28 said:

The U.N. is about as usefaul as tits on a log and as trustworthy as Bill Clinton in a women’s dorm.

Or Trump anywhere at all...teenage girl's dressing rooms, making mushroom cream pie with porn stars, or hob-nobbing with Epstein and some young ladies...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SailBlueH2O said:

 

Global warm 2.jpg

Yeah, about that image.  Lots of folks dismiss predictions of Climate Change when the reality doesn't match the model. 

Take a look at that black line from 1998 forward.  Does that match what we have observed? 

Pick your source - https://www.google.com/search?q=hottest+years+on+record&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS721US721&oq=hottest+years+&aqs=chrome.0.35i39j69i57j0l4.5602j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Regarding those "experts", I just love their bios - 

"Climatologist Cliff Harris has been often rated as one of the top ten climatologists in the world for nearly 4 decades." (As rated by whom?)

"Since age 11, he has compiled nearly 100 weather scrapbooks that detail major events throughout the U.S. and the world on a daily basis." (Oh boy.  He scrapbooks.)

"He has been quoted in CNN and "Not by FIRE, but by ICE" by Robert W. Felix." (Isn't CNN "Fake News"?)

and - 

"Meteorologist Randy Mann has been recognized by the American Meteorological Society since 1988." (Recognized as what?)

"In the past decade, Randy has also designed other weather-related publications that include two North Idaho weather calendars, the International Traveler's Weather Guide, Tom Loffman's Sacramento Weather Guide, the Vermont Town and Weather Almanac (7 Editions), the award-winning 1997 Frederick County Weather Almanac and the 1998, 1999, Year 2000 and the 2001 Frederick County Weather Almanacs." (I'd take those over peer-reviewed publications, any day.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Laker said:

What? That the desert regions of the world are expanding? You are not that ignorant are you? Perhaps the immigrant problem in Europe is an illusion.

You haven't made a case that this is a problem worth wrecking human civilization to solve.   Given that vegetated areas on the planet are expanding, there is plenty of room for everyone.

That being said, I am probably the most pro-immigration person on the forum.  I am happy to stop preventing unproductive people from moving to where they can be more productive.  

Poor people need affordable energy.  Otherwise they die, and before they die, their life sucks.  If you want to kill a bunch of poor people, you are going to have to do better than just tossing out buzz words like "ocean acidification" and "expanding deserts" as justification.  

Or you can just continue the circle jerk on this forum.  No problem. 

Meanwhile, human C02 emissions will grow steadily well past 2050.  Coal will continue to be a major source of energy for the masses.  

And all the while, plant life on the planet will continue to thrive, agricultural output will increase, and human deaths as a result of the environment will continue to decline.  The few people still chanting that the world will end will become even more marginalized than they are now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, justsomeguy! said:

Wish I could be as optimistic as jzk...

Throw off lefty groupthink and it’ll happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, J28 said:

Throw off lefty groupthink and it’ll happen. 

Yes, denial works for awhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, justsomeguy! said:

Yes, denial works for awhile.

Save the "denial" bullshit.  Look at the facts.  Which facts have I stated incorrectly?

More green, more food, less human deaths, less poverty, longer lifespans.  All is good my friend.  Don't go fucking it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jzk said:

All is good my friend. 

You don't get out much, huh?

Share this post


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

You don't get out much, huh?

That is a great PA circle jerk response.  But how about something actually relevant?   What do you see when you go out?

roser_poverty_shares.0.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2019 at 5:59 PM, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

If that's the least of your concerns why are you reading what the party wants you to think?

What ever led you to that mistaken notion? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jzk said:

What do you see when you go out?

Trash. Plastic bits everywhere, flying and floating.

Share this post


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

Trash. Plastic bits everywhere, flying and floating.

Where do you live?  You know that trash is not a real problem unless you just dump it in the river which goes to the Ocean like some countries do.

Share this post


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

Where do you live?

Shithole countries, just like yourself.

Share this post


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

Shithole countries, just like yourself.

Yeah, we have landfills.  We take care of our trash.  Some obnoxious people are rude and just throw their shit anywhere.  Not much you can do about them.  It isn't going to destroy the planet, but I agree that it is rude.

This is why socialism will never work.  People don't give a fuck about other people's shit.  Why do you suppose people throw their gum into urinals?  Some poor guy is going to have to reach into the urinal with his hand and clean that, but a certain percentage of people just don't give a shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jzk said:

We take care of our trash. 

No, you don't.

Share this post


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

No, you don't.

Yes, we do.  You are making up a problem where none exists.  Like the facebook meme's that claim nestle is trashing the planet by selling bottled water.  Just nonsense.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jzk said:

That is a great PA circle jerk response.  But how about something actually relevant?   What do you see when you go out?

roser_poverty_shares.0.jpg

Capitalism....gotta love it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jzk said:

You are making up a problem where none exists. 

If you don't see plastic in the planet's food chain as a problem, you're the one in denial.

Share this post


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

If you don't see plastic in the planet's food chain as a problem, you're the one in denial.

I am all for throwing trash into a landfill.  Other countries dump it into the river.  Not cool at all.  We are both against it.

But let's have some perspective.  How much is it really hurting the "planet?"  Yeah, that straw up the turtle's nose had to hurt, but at least we pulled it out for him.

I bet you have killed some bugs with your car before.  Lots of bugs being killed.  A small price to pay for bringing the masses out of poverty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I crossed the gulfstream a couple of weeks ago, I saw a party balloon and a white bottle.  Not cool.  But not exactly destroying the planet either.  Just plain not cool.  Don't do that shit.  I notice that Bahamians often toss their trash anywhere.  Really not cool.  They should stop that.  I also went fishing in Manitoba last year, and I noticed that the Native American guides there also just toss their garbage into the pristine lake.  I don't understand why they don't give a shit.  They should.  But, they are still not putting the planet in any danger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jzk said:

But let's have some perspective. 

You don't understand the web of life, the "interconnectedness" of species, do you?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is how we can "save the planet."  We can use paper straws wrapped in plastic.  I feel so much better about myself now.  I am really making a difference in the world.

yQ3dYqg.jpg

Share this post


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

You don't understand the web of life, the "interconnectedness" of species, do you?

 

From this conversation, it is looking like you are the one that lacks the understanding.

But, please, do tell.  But try to make a complete case rather than just throwing out a buzz phrase like "ocean acidification" and the like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

What ever led you to that mistaken notion? 

because you convey the impression that AOC is somehow unique in making gaffes or being idealistic or being occasionally clueless. I submit she is not compared to her peers. I also submit there's a partisan bias where saying something like, "I want  to abolish the Department of Energy" (Rick Perry) or "you can't get a BA degree in a real science" (Massie, yesterday) is somehow... fine. And that's BS.

Share this post


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

Here is how we can "save the planet."

You cannot "save the planet".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

because you convey the impression that AOC is somehow unique in making gaffes or being idealistic or being occasionally clueless. I submit she is not compared to her peers. I also submit there's a partisan bias where saying something like, "I want  to abolish the Department of Energy" (Rick Perry) or "you can't get a BA degree in a real science" (Massie, yesterday) is somehow... fine. And that's BS.

Can we abolish the departments of education and agriculture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

lol "I pulled plastic from one turtle, plastic pollution doesn't matter".

what a fucking assclown.

Why are you such a fucking liar?  Can't you make a case with the truth?  I know you could if you really put your mind to it. 

Why don't you try again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

that's an angry little jerk-z bot.

I had such faith in you.  Oh well, just another PA circle jerk post of no consequence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jzk said:

From this conversation, it is looking like you are the one that lacks the understanding.

But, please, do tell.  But try to make a complete case rather than just throwing out a buzz phrase like "ocean acidification" and the like.

Suppose the population of bees were to take a nosedive. What would happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, justsomeguy! said:

Suppose the population of bees were to take a nosedive. What would happen?

the market would magically make replacements appear!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, justsomeguy! said:

Suppose the population of bees were to take a nosedive. What would happen?

Suppose AOC implements her green new deal?  What would happen?

I am against both AOC's gnd and killing all the bees.

Good thing we aren't killing all the bees.  It is a further good thing that plastic isn't killing them either.

Share this post


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

Good thing we aren't killing all the bees. 

What would happen if 50% died off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, justsomeguy! said:

Suppose the population of bees were to take a nosedive. What would happen?

It is happening!

Share this post


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

What would happen if 50% died off?

I am not even for killing 50% of them.  

How is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites