toad

Ocasio

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, J28 said:

OK - I did that.  I saw a tall, handsome man with glasses and a full head of gorgeous gray hair.  

What’s next?

you saw a callous clown with no grease paint. 'cause dat what you is.. jus sayin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Where have I ignored what she said?

She is the lefty media.  I pointed out that she didn't say the world would end in 12 years but that  there are those who believe that.  Those folks are her audience.

Since Fox is right wing I would expect them to be pointing out the fallacies of her position and statements.  I would also expect MSNBC to overlook them or tell us 'what she really meant'.

She's not given nearly as much air time by MSNBC as by Fox. Generally when you (and the other righties) are busy insulting AOC, you tend to imagine she really said what Fox/Rush/etc -said- she said, rather than what she really said. You might want to check.

I would expect right wing media to point out fallacies but instead they just call names and cast asparagus. I think they've forgotten there's such a thing as facts and logic, or perhaps they believe their audience doesn't care about that.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, 3to1 said:

you saw a callous clown with no grease paint. 'cause dat what you is.. jus sayin

Unless you are African-American - and I’m pretty sure you aren’t - you just appropriated American Black cultural speech patterns.

Racist!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

She's not given nearly as much air time by MSNBC as by Fox. Generally when you (and the other righties) are busy insulting AOC, you tend to imagine she really said what Fox/Rush/etc -said- she said, rather than what she really said. You might want to check.

I would expect right wing media to point out fallacies but instead they just call names and cast asparagus. I think they've forgotten there's such a thing as facts and logic, or perhaps they believe their audience doesn't care about that.

-DSK

She would be an embarrassment to MSNBC.  They think she's an idiot too.

As to triggering, anyone who says anything about her uneducated views sets you guys off on a burst of obscenities like a Chinese firecracker.

 

Share this post


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

She would be an embarrassment to MSNBC.  They think she's an idiot too.

As to triggering, anyone who says anything about her uneducated views sets you guys off on a burst of obscenities like a Chinese firecracker.

 

???

You asked, I answered. I don't think the coverage given AOC by MSNBC is governed by their thinking she's an embarassment. She's just not that important to anybody except bitter righties

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

???

You asked, I answered. I don't think the coverage given AOC by MSNBC is governed by their thinking she's an embarassment. She's just not that important to anybody except bitter righties

-DSK

I think they are afraid of being embarassed again.

 

Share this post


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

I think they are afraid of being embarassed again.

 

That was bullshit. I know how you enjoy your little "ha ha WE WON!!" moment.

THe fact is that most serious polls were giving Hillary less and less margin as the 2016 election got closer, the last two or three days I saw a bunch that predicted a Trump win. The ones that didn't were giving Hillary a 2% edge which is not outside the margin of error anyway.

That may be a little too technical for you to understand. Never mind, carry on.

Bottom line: Liberals and Democrats aren't putting much importance on AOC. Some like much of what she says, others don't.

You think she's some kind of libby-rull goddess, possibly because of her tits. Fine. But the rest is just projection and wishful thinking

-DSK

Share this post


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

That was bullshit. I know how you enjoy your little "ha ha WE WON!!" moment.

THe fact is that most serious polls were giving Hillary less and less margin as the 2016 election got closer, the last two or three days I saw a bunch that predicted a Trump win. The ones that didn't were giving Hillary a 2% edge which is not outside the margin of error anyway.

That may be a little too technical for you to understand. Never mind, carry on.

Bottom line: Liberals and Democrats aren't putting much importance on AOC. Some like much of what she says, others don't.

You think she's some kind of libby-rull goddess, possibly because of her tits. Fine. But the rest is just projection and wishful thinking

-DSK

I do like her tits.

Dumb gurls who thrive on attention and have nice tits are some of my favorites.

Share this post


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

She is relevant enough that she gets a whole thread here at PA.  Yet you seem to think it is somehow inappropriate to talk about her bizarre rantings.  

With almost 4100 post no less!

How many are bullshit posts and repeated lies from you two clowns?

Fake pictures, bullshit quotes, and silly memes.

You folks are really desperate.

She owns you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pelosi compares AOC to a glass of water.  But hey it’s the right that keeps bringing her up 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rightwing sock puppet bumps AOC thread to claim it's not the rightwing obsessed with AOC. Uses as evidence shitnews widely reported in rightwing outrage media. Hopes for another page of useless pingpong.

Share this post


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

Rightwing sock puppet bumps AOC thread to claim it's not the rightwing obsessed with AOC. Uses as evidence shitnews widely reported in rightwing outrage media. Hopes for another page of useless pingpong.

Poor snowflake is obsessed with calling me a sock.  So I’ll ask again did your mother name you mismoyled or perhaps Jiblet. 

If not, you too are a sock.  

Pelosi made those comments in London  they were covered by most of the media 

https://www.newsweek.com/pelosi-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-glass-water-win-district-1397640

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/17/2019 at 12:04 AM, The Joker said:

Pelosi compares AOC to a glass of water.  But hey it’s the right that keeps bringing her up 

Correct on both fronts. A new first for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fresh off skewering Dan Crenshaw AOC has set her sights on Kentucky Republicans who hate clean air and water.  Said republicans invited her to come meet them and their constituents to see why the Green New Deal is a bad idea (the aforementioned clean air and water and less coal).  The charming and Hot AOC immediately accepted the offer and now the Kentucky old men are frightened and looking for a way to disinvite her. Unfortunately for them Kentucky has open borders and AOC is likely going to come anyway.

https://www.gq.com/story/ky-republicans-aoc-coal-miners/amp?__twitter_impression=true

 

 

Share this post


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

(jzk post reminding others of his AOC fixation deleted)

She is living, rent free, in your head.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

She sure triggers the snowflakes. 

Like a frigid air mass encountering a warm moist low system..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maga-haters.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

She is living, rent free, in your head.

I'm livin' in @Gouvernail's head 24/7/365 (and that of all his many socks).  Conditions aren't great in here though - there's a LOT of damage.

Share this post


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

I'm livin' in @Gouvernail's head 24/7/365 (and that of all his many socks).  Conditions aren't great in here though - there's a LOT of damage.

Why bother? What's the payoff for you? I think you've stated you are a savvy oldster, but this isn't how grownups act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 4:36 PM, jzk said:

 

 

That needs comment just so it show up again:ph34r:

She kills it.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Trumpaloons are baying at the moon tonight. Damn, you people have some hate going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ishmael said:

The Trumpaloons are baying at the moon tonight. Damn, you people have some hate going.

It's a copycat

 

At least this one is a decent parody, nails ol' Bill (before he got kicked off the air).

I don't know who the cute little girl is copying but it doesn't seem much like what I've seen of AOC.

-DSK

Share this post


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

It's a copycat

 

At least this one is a decent parody, nails ol' Bill (before he got kicked off the air).

I don't know who the cute little girl is copying but it doesn't seem much like what I've seen of AOC.

-DSK

Given that your video has 729 views, how could she possibly not have copied it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you imagine the conversations and eye-rolling about AOC that are going on in the offices of the House leadership, the DNC, and Democrat power brokers?  

 

 

Share this post


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

Can you imagine the conversations and eye-rolling about AOC that are going on in the offices of the House leadership, the DNC, and Democrat power brokers?  

 

 

They probably don't hold a candle to the eye rolls here every time you post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ishmael said:

The Trumpaloons are baying at the moon tonight. Damn, you people have some hate going.

The AOCDS is strong. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AOCDS = Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is Delightful Syndrome 

Share this post


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

The AOCDS is strong. 

AOCDS.  That's awesome.  She certainly triggers the snowflakes. 

Share this post


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

AOCDS = Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is Delightful Syndrome 

I'd like to like that but ... the numbers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

Good essay here by my main man Leonard Pitts on the AOC phenomena . .  

And I'm gonna sit right down and write a check to the Democratic Socialists of America. 

https://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/leonard-pitts-jr/article229480349.html

You can add getting Trump re-elected to her list of future accomplishments.

Share this post


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

You can add getting Trump re-elected to her list of future accomplishments.

You can abrogate responsibility for GOP mistakes all you want, but at some point the party has to face consequences for all their recent wrongs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole point is to dishonestly frame the narrative as a binary choice. Why won't it continue? They'll find someone else after AOC, it's what they do. Asking jerk-z to not be a walking confirmation bias is like asking J28 not to be a walking colostomy bag; it'll never happen. They'll be dumbshits until they die.

Share this post


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

You can abrogate responsibility for GOP mistakes all you want, but at some point the party has to face consequences for all their recent wrongs.

You want me to take responsibility for GOP mistakes?  Ok, it is all my fault.

Meanwhile, AOC is doing much more to re-elect Trump than anything else.  And, despite my being responsible for all of the GOP's mistakes, she actually does have power to re-elect Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Trump is under water by 12 points(conservatively).  If AOC is going to get Trump reelected she needs to get with it.  Her efforts to date suck. 

Share this post


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

You can abrogate responsibility for GOP mistakes all you want, but at some point the party has to face consequences for all their recent wrongs.

It's that damn primary system.  Who would have thought that anyone would have voted for someone not of the ruling class?

Why, I hear tell that some democrats thought it would be absolutely hilarious to crossover and vote for him.

We should demand superdelegates who can get things right no matter how the vote went.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mister Minister is on his superdelegates thing again, as if Republicans don't have them and as if they mattered in the Democratic primary anyways. Now what's really interesting is Republicans cancelling their state primaries. It's like their own party version of repealing the 17th amendment. You can't get more superdelegate than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

So, Trump is under water by 12 points(conservatively).  If AOC is going to get Trump reelected she needs to get with it.  Her efforts to date suck. 

Give her some time.  I suspect she is just getting warmed up.

Share this post


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

You can abrogate responsibility for GOP mistakes all you want, but at some point the party has to face consequences for all their recent wrongs.

You want me to take responsibility for GOP mistakes?  Ok, it is all my fault.

You have serious delusions of grandeur, my friend. Your influence on the GOP is less than my dead grandmother’s. 

Share this post


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

You have serious delusions of grandeur, my friend. Your influence on the GOP is less than my dead grandmother’s. 

Make up your mind.  You wanted me to take responsibility, so I did.  Do you have more than one personality?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sigh.

My point is that the right blames Trump’s electoral success on the left. They blame the left for the Mueller investigation and Trump’s problems with the press. They blame “faulty intelligence” for invading Iraq and they refuse to take responsibility for trickle down economics and the ballooning deficit, and don’t even acknowledge the myriad problems climate change is causing, even though the DOD has recognized it as a seriously destabilizing force in the coming decades.

You, jzk, can try to pin the blame of Trump being re-elected on anything or anyone from apples to Zippy the Pinhead, but the GOP eventually has to start recognizing its fuckups, and return to the hard work of good governance.

This means being a willing a cooperative partner in a democracy, not A hodgepodge of conservative wimps, rent-seeking plutocrats, Trump sycophants and “religious” racists. It means taking responsibility, collectively, for their decisions and not kicking the can down the road or blaming their electoral SNAFUs on the junior representatives from NYC & Minnesota.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Sigh.

My point is that the right blames Trump’s electoral success on the left. They blame the left for the Mueller investigation and Trump’s problems with the press. They blame “faulty intelligence” for invading Iraq and they refuse to take responsibility for trickle down economics and the ballooning deficit, and don’t even acknowledge the myriad problems climate change is causing, even though the DOD has recognized it as a seriously destabilizing force in the coming decades.

You, jzk, can try to pin the blame of Trump being re-elected on anything or anyone from apples to Zippy the Pinhead, but the GOP eventually has to start recognizing its fuckups, and return to the hard work of good governance.

This means being a willing a cooperative partner in a democracy, not A hodgepodge of conservative wimps, rent-seeking plutocrats, Trump sycophants and “religious” racists. It means taking responsibility, collectively, for their decisions and not kicking the can down the road or blaming their electoral SNAFUs on the junior representatives from NYC & Minnesota.

I see that your political views are about as bizarre as your view that Sheriff Joe is worse than the Sri Lanka suicide bomber.   I guess that is why you are on the irrelevant fringe. 

Share this post


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

I see that your political views are about as bizarre as your view that Sheriff Joe is worse than the Sri Lanka suicide bomber.   I guess that is why you are on the irrelevant fringe. 

You are, perhaps, correct.

Expecting Republicans to take ownership for the problems they’ve created is pretty foolish.

But, I’m an idealist, to some degree.

And yes, state sponsored racist persecutions which result in the deaths of prisoners is worse to our society, more corrosive to our values, than having to consider the terrorist acts of fringe groups, especially those on the other side of the planet. 

People like you accept the unnecessary deaths of people in the custody of the state as statistical anomalies, or justified because they are “animals”.

Sheriff Joe represents Americans who want to dehumanize minorities and conduct evil racist agendas on the disenfranchised. He used the power of our country to supervise the death of scores of people. 

The fact that we are now having this discussion in a thread revealing the difficulty folks on the right have with confronting the unapologetic, charismatic and forceful opinions of a woman of color is no accident.

Our society is more imperiled, on a moral basis, by a failure to confront racism and tolerate racism among our leaders, than it is by Islamic terrorism half a world away.

Therefore, I view Joe Arpaio as representing a greater offense to our morals than religious whack jobs in Sri Lanka.

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

The AOCDS is strong. 

I loves me some sexy smell of AOC in the morning. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2019 at 3:56 PM, jzk said:

I see that your political views are about as bizarre as your view that Sheriff Joe is worse than the Sri Lanka suicide bomber.   I guess that is why you are on the irrelevant fringe. 

But Sheriff Joe is worse that the Sri Lanka suicide bomber.

Share this post


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

Renewables generated more electricity than coal for the first time in US history

https://qz.com/1610977/solar-wind-plus-other-renewables-beat-coal-for-first-time-in-us/

 

My first thought was the time of year.  It was confirmed in your story. 

The seasonal nature of the business means electricity generation from coal will again exceed that of hydro, biomass, wind, solar, and geothermal sources later this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The Joker said:

My first thought was the time of year.  It was confirmed in your story. 

The seasonal nature of the business means electricity generation from coal will again exceed that of hydro, biomass, wind, solar, and geothermal sources later this year.

Of course it will. 

You seem to have a problem with the fact that renewables are accounting for more energy generation than they have in the past. I see that as a good thing. 

You seem to take it as a threat. Strange. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Of course it will. 

You seem to have a problem with the fact that renewables are accounting for more energy generation than they have in the past. I see that as a good thing. 

You seem to take it as a threat. Strange. 

Of course it will, this year, and perhaps next.  But in a few years, as that graph shows and as the investments are made and coal plants go off line, there will be a year where coal never seasonally surges above renewables again.  And then becomes an anachronism and will be seen as an evident technological dead end. 

I grew up in a house with a coal bin in the 1950s, and a we had converted coal furnace, coal men still clomped down our street in their wagons making deliveries and the South Side of Chicago was grey with soot.  Coal, essentially, is the horse and buggy of fuels, and the coal-lovers are the metaphorical carriage makers and the buggy whip makers are crying in their beers and voting their memories.  

Share this post


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

Of course it will. 

You seem to have a problem with the fact that renewables are accounting for more energy generation than they have in the past. I see that as a good thing. 

You seem to take it as a threat. Strange. 

Not at all. Just pointing out all the facts.  Rather than a cherry picked one time event. 

I look forward to a day when we do not use coal.  I just want it to be as painless to those in the industry and my pocketbook as possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Coal, essentially, is the horse and buggy of fuels, and the coal-lovers are the metaphorical carriage makers and the buggy whip makers are crying in their beers and voting their memories.  

I admit I love coal-fired pizza. And I've a soft spot for a coal fire in a remote mountain hut. It's got it's own qualities - energy dense, more efficient than wood or dung, but not nearly as clean as gas or electricity. And this makes for a tasty pizza or some nice memorys. But damn why the fuck would anyone fetishize it for modern power? It reached it's peak in 1913 when Britain was the Saudi Arabia of the era exporting energy far and wide. It's been all done hill from then for general purposes. Move on The Joke.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Not at all. Just pointing out all the facts.  Rather than a cherry picked one time event. 

I look forward to a day when we do not use coal horse and buggy. I just want it to be as painless to those in the industry and my pocketbook as possible. 

Minor change only, but I think it illustrates well the complete lack of intellectual rigor in the position stated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

Minor change only, but I think it illustrates well the complete lack of intellectual rigor in the position stated.

The only rigor Joker knows is mortis. Intellectual must be in another state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Left Shift said:

Of course it will, this year, and perhaps next.  But in a few years, as that graph shows and as the investments are made and coal plants go off line, there will be a year where coal never seasonally surges above renewables again.  And then becomes an anachronism and will be seen as an evident technological dead end. 

I grew up in a house with a coal bin in the 1950s, and a we had converted coal furnace, coal men still clomped down our street in their wagons making deliveries and the South Side of Chicago was grey with soot.  Coal, essentially, is the horse and buggy of fuels, and the coal-lovers are the metaphorical carriage makers and the buggy whip makers are crying in their beers and voting their memories.  

Horse and buggies are not illegal.  The better transportation choice won.  Let's let the better energy choice win.  Poor people world wide are depending on it.

Share this post


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

Horse and buggies are not illegal.  The better transportation choice won.  Let's let the better energy choice win.  Poor people world wide are depending on it.

Define better.  I hope it includes a pricing for the negative externalities, its so-called Pigouvian cost.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Define better.  I hope it includes a pricing for the negative externalities, its so-called Pigouvian cost.

You mean like the cost of greening the planet?

China is adding, this year, as much coal power plant capacity as exists in the entire US fleet.  China knows that its poor people are depending on efficient energy.

 

 

change_in_leaf_area (1).jpg

Share this post


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

You mean like the cost of greening the planet?

China is adding, this year, as much coal power plant capacity as exists in the entire US fleet.  China knows that its poor people are depending on efficient energy.

 

 

change_in_leaf_area (1).jpg

Interesting map.  Note the expansion of the deserts.

Share this post


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

You should read your article.  Agricultural output increased, but maybe only a little.  Is a little bad?

Nutrients by % of weight might be less.  But more weight.  So more nutrients.

Greening is good.  More plants is good.  We have more plants than 30 years ago.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fail. Try again. (And you should try reading the article next time. Either that, or you need to work on your reading comprehension.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

Fail. Try again. (And you should try reading the article next time. Either that, or you need to work on your reading comprehension.)

No thank you.  I read it.  You are full of shit.

Not that it matters.  China doesn't give a crap what you think.  Nor does India and about a billion others right behind them.  Yeah, some countries will fuck themselves by tripling their cost of energy like Germany.  Good for them. 

But poor people cant afford your nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You read it, therefore you need to work on your reading comprehension. Thanks for clarifying. It seems that you are consistent on that point at least.

As to your change of topic: I've always believed that the US should strive to be a leader in the world, not relegated to simply meandering along blithely behind the likes of China nor India (nor the alleged, unidentified billion others). Clearly you believe we should just get in line and follow along behind them. I respectfully disagree.

Future generations can't afford your ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

You read it, therefore you need to work on your reading comprehension. Thanks for clarifying. It seems that you are consistent on that point at least.

As to your change of topic: I've always believed that the US should strive to be a leader in the world, not relegated to simply meandering along blithely behind the likes of China nor India (nor the alleged, unidentified billion others). Clearly you believe we should just get in line and follow along behind them. I respectfully disagree.

Future generations can't afford your ignorance.

Only a clown such as you would try to make the case that a greener Earth is not better.  Good thing that future generations are not in your hands.  

But, you should certainly be a leader and disconnect yourself from the grid as soon as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The climate clowns are horrified that the Earth has gotten greener from human activities.  That is not supposed to be happening.  We are supposed to be destroying the Earth.

Just like Phil Jones:

"Bottom Line: the 'no upward trend' has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried."

Phil was getting worried that global warming might have stopped.  He was hoping with all of his heart that the planet was headed for a dangerous crisis.  

 

 

Share this post


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

You should read your article.  Agricultural output increased, but maybe only a little.  Is a little bad?

Nutrients by % of weight might be less.  But more weight.  So more nutrients.

Greening is good.  More plants is good.  We have more plants than 30 years ago.  

interesting time to start the clock. More marginal farmland? How's the dead zone in the Gulf due to those marginal farmlands being put in production? Don't be so stupid. Oh, sorry, you can't help it.

Share this post


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

Poor people world wide are depending on it.

your played out absurdity here is the equivalent of a full leg prosthesis made of degraded paper mâché, you don't have much more than fuck all, so you use it, again and again. if I was in charge, I'd put a gag on dick heads like you, if only for a laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 3to1 said:

your played out absurdity here is the equivalent of a full leg prosthesis made of degraded paper mâché, you don't have much more than fuck all, so you use it, again and again. if I was in charge, I'd put a gag on shits like you, if only for a laugh.

Well that is the thing.  You are not in charge.  The people in charge are going to use fossil fuel to lift their people out of poverty.

Sounds like you don't have much more than fuck all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 3to1 said:

'lil lying asshole lies again.

Maybe you should get some professional help to deal with your delusions.  

Share this post


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

The climate clowns are horrified that the Earth has gotten greener from human activities.  That is not supposed to be happening.  We are supposed to be destroying the Earth.

Just like Phil Jones:

"Bottom Line: the 'no upward trend' has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried."

Phil was getting worried that global warming might have stopped.  He was hoping with all of his heart that the planet was headed for a dangerous crisis.  

 

 

And what are you going to do when the earth runs out of cheap fertilizer in the next 150 years?  

Share this post


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

And what are you going to do when the earth runs out of cheap fertilizer in the next 150 years?  

What?  We are running out of resources?  Say it isn't true.

England, of course, will run out of coal by 1900.

US oil supplies will be exhausted by 1952.

In the 1970s, hundreds of millions are going to starve to death, and by the 1980s, most of the world's important resources will be depleted.  65 million Americans will die of starvation between 1980 and 1989.  By 1999, the US population will decline to 22.6 million.

With the history of failed predictions, how do you even say such nonsense with a straight face?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we haven't run out of ignorant idiots and no sign of that ever happening. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, d'ranger said:

Well we haven't run out of ignorant idiots and no sign of that ever happening. 

Right.  They keep stepping up to the plate with their new, even more ridiculous predictions.

12 years to save the world, anyone?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

And what are you going to do when the earth runs out of cheap fertilizer in the next 150 years?  

Breed more jizkids to spout bullshit?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking that we'd go all brown and down.....  No need for green.....

 But I think I might be wrong this time....

Share this post


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

What?  We are running out of resources?  Say it isn't true.

England, of course, will run out of coal by 1900.

US oil supplies will be exhausted by 1952.

In the 1970s, hundreds of millions are going to starve to death, and by the 1980s, most of the world's important resources will be depleted.  65 million Americans will die of starvation between 1980 and 1989.  By 1999, the US population will decline to 22.6 million.

With the history of failed predictions, how do you even say such nonsense with a straight face?

No, I am saying conventional fertilizer.  I am sure other things will be found.  The important thing is that there is change.  Some change can be lethal.  Others not.  This is a very real process, because at the moment there don't seem to be more deposits of nitrate, no matter how hard people are looking for them at the moment.  And people are looking hard for them.  Tell me when you have found some.  You will become a rich man.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

No, I am saying conventional fertilizer.  I am sure other things will be found.  The important thing is that there is change.  Some change can be lethal.  Others not.  This is a very real process, because at the moment there don't seem to be more deposits of nitrate, no matter how hard people are looking for them at the moment.  And people are looking hard for them.  Tell me when you have found some.  You will become a rich man.

We will have 7 billion people lifted out of poverty.  Instead of working on subsistence farming, they will be solving problems such as that one.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, according to Dr. Weaver, the greening is part of all the climate model predictions.  But then so is the extension of the deserts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, d'ranger said:

Well we haven't run out of ignorant idiots and no sign of that ever happening. 

Of the 7 billion, of course there will always be a certain percentage of morons no matter what you do, but many others will be solving the world's problems.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

Actually, according to Dr. Weaver, the greening is part of all the climate model predictions.  But then so is the extension of the deserts.

It is certainly not remarkable that CO2 would cause plants to grow better, but might you have a citation from the 1980s or so predicting the greening as part of the "climate models?"

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

We will have 7 billion people lifted out of poverty.  Instead of working on subsistence farming, they will be solving problems such as that one.

There is a group who claims that they can feed the world on blue-green algae. Will you have fries with that?  The A + W Beyond Meat Burgers are not bad.

Share this post


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

It is certainly not remarkable that CO2 would cause plants to grow better, but might you have a citation from the 1980s or so predicting the greening as part of the "climate models?"

IPCC Climate Change document that got the Nobel Prize.  Don't know if you actually read it.  It may not have been covered in the Reader's Digest version.

Share this post


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

IPCC Climate Change document that got the Nobel Prize.  Don't know if you actually read it.  It may not have been covered in the Reader's Digest version.

Not much of a citation from someone claiming to have read the whole thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites