The left just doesn't get it

[Gladiators 1,904]

27 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

Supermike70, who are you yelling at 

The party is over. The Libs have left this hate filled message board. In fact, I just scanned the first 2 pages of the board and counted over twenty (20) political topics started by Conservatives versus one (1) started by a Liberal. 

So yeah, pay attention. You need to go somewhere else to yell at Libs. 

Now that you mention it, Wiff hasn’t been around much...that’s right, he’s been preparing for storming Area 51.

[Reality 2,710]

23 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

Discounting climate change as a fringe issue. The world’s going to be irrevocably destroyed in a few decades bro

Middle of the road guy here folks.

[Mike Honcho 4,028]

The really funny or sad thing is that the geek board righties don't know that they are the fringe.   I look forward to watching these guys try to do an about face and the spin they spew when the GOP party acknowledges reality.

Quote

 

Newsweek

A recent surge in environmental concern among young Americans shows a growing number of Republicans who say they're worried human behavior and man-made pollution are damaging planet Earth.

President Donald Trump declared himself an "environmentalist" to reporters at the G7 summit Monday, but he quickly said he could not afford to sacrifice jobs and the economy in order to fight climate change. A new survey of global attitudes toward the environment released this week shows 67 percent, two-thirds, of young Republican voters are worried about human damage to the environment. The Amsterdam-based Glocalities polling data reveals an 18 percent spike in 18 to 34-year-old GOP supporters who say they fear the effects of climate change.

The survey of 189,996 respondents from 20 countries between 2014 and 2019 found that a majority of U.S. Republican Party voters today, 58 percent, say they are concerned about human-caused damage to the planet.

The 2014 to 2019 rise in concerns about man-made pollution, greenhouse gases and their effect on the environment is most sizable among Republicans. The U.S. overall has seen an 8 percent increase from 61 to 69 percent over the past five years in people expressing climate change worries. The Glocalities survey also showed a 10 percentage increase among U.S. Republicans who reported trying "to live eco-consciously."

About 17 percent of Republicans explicitly said they have no worries about the effects of climate change. That number is reduced to just 11 percent of young Republicans between the ages of 18 and 34 years old.

 

 

[Mike Honcho 4,028]

On 9/20/2019 at 10:24 AM, jerryskids said:

I don't think a group of Republican candidates would have spent 7 hours on climate change, and I'm confident if they did, centrist CNN wouldn't host it.  I think most people acknowledge that the climate changes, it's the amount and the degree to which we influence it.  So let's agree that "anthropomorphic climate alarmism" is a fringe issue. 

I don't know to what extent gender stuff is a formal part of the Democrat platform, but Washington State (Dem governor Jay Inslee) enacted that gender neutral vocabulary law, as an example.

Newsweek

The surge in Republican concern over the environment follows overall U.S. trends, which have seen steady increases in people who say protection of the environment should be given priority -- even at the risk of curbing economic growth. Gallup data shows 65 percent of Americans agree the environment deserves priority over the economy, although the data does not account for jobs and economic growth possible through "green" energy.

 

On 9/20/2019 at 11:13 AM, IGotWorms said:

Hate to be the one to tell you this, but you’re wildly out of touch.

The GC is the safe space for most of these guys, a confirmation echo chamber of ignorance.  

[jerryskids 5,199]

1 hour ago, Mike Honcho said:

Newsweek

The surge in Republican concern over the environment follows overall U.S. trends, which have seen steady increases in people who say protection of the environment should be given priority -- even at the risk of curbing economic growth. Gallup data shows 65 percent of Americans agree the environment deserves priority over the economy, although the data does not account for jobs and economic growth possible through "green" energy.

 

The GC is the safe space for most of these guys, a confirmation echo chamber of ignorance.  

Holy move the goalposts Batman!  I never said I don't think the environment is important.  Water is our most valuable resource in Phoenix and we do what we can to conserve it whenever possible.  We recycle, reuse, etc.  That's not anthropomorphic climate alarmism.  HTH

[Reality 2,710]

44 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Holy move the goalposts Batman!  I never said I don't think the environment is important.  Water is our most valuable resource in Phoenix and we do what we can to conserve it whenever possible.  We recycle, reuse, etc.  That's not anthropomorphic climate alarmism.  HTH

Pretty sad attempt on his part..

[drobeski 3,061]

LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT RIGHT

NONE.

ZIP.

ZERO.

NADA.

BLANK

DONUT HOLE

NIL.

NOTHING.

VOID.

ZILCH.

LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS THE CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT WRONG

Here is the source for numbers 1-27. As you will see, the individual sources are not crackpots, but scientific studies and media reports on “expert” predictions. The sources for numbers 28-41 are linked individually.

1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000
4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
8. 1974: Another Ice Age?
9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
15. 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
18. 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is
19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015
27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s
33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!
37. 2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015
38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
41. 1970s: Killer Bees!

Sorry, Experts… Sorry, Scientific Consensus… Only a fool comes running for the 42nd cry of wolf.

Don’t litter, be kind to animals, recycling’s for suckers (it’s all going to end up in the ground eventually), so stop feeling guilty… Go out there and embrace all the bounty that comes with being a 21st century American — you know, like Obama, who says he believes in Global Warming with his mouth but proves he doesn’t with the $15 million he just spent on oceanfront that we’re told is doomed to flooding

[Hardcore troubadour 12,636]

When the banks stop giving 30 year mortgages for beachfront property let me know. 

[Mike Honcho 4,028]

5 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Holy move the goalposts Batman!  I never said I don't think the environment is important.  Water is our most valuable resource in Phoenix and we do what we can to conserve it whenever possible.  We recycle, reuse, etc.  That's not anthropomorphic climate alarmism.  HTH

First off, you are 100% using 'moving the goalposts' wrong.  

Quote

Moving the goalposts: Moving the goalposts is an informal fallacy in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded'

Second, I was specifically referring to your statement that "anthropomorphic climate alarmism" is a fringe issue."  I made two replies about the issue, highlighting polling data from the same article - showing that man-made global warming isn't a fringe issue, but an accepted scientific fact not only by the majority, but that the real fringe are the righties(About 17 percent of Republicans explicitly said they have no worries about the effects of climate change.) are the fringe of the issue.  I was not making a personal attack or trying to impugn your commitment to environmental issues.   

I see how my reply to your post could have been confusing, I try to be clear in my responses, but clearly don't always communicate my meaning clearly. 

[sderk 1,040]

6 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

First off, you are 100% using 'moving the goalposts' wrong.  

Second, I was specifically referring to your statement that "anthropomorphic climate alarmism" is a fringe issue."  I made two replies about the issue, highlighting polling data from the same article - showing that man-made global warming isn't a fringe issue, but an accepted scientific fact not only by the majority, but that the real fringe are the righties(About 17 percent of Republicans explicitly said they have no worries about the effects of climate change.) are the fringe of the issue.  I was not making a personal attack or trying to impugn your commitment to environmental issues.   

I see how my reply to your post could have been confusing, I try to be clear in my responses, but clearly don't always communicate my meaning clearly. 

Yep, man made global warming is definitely an accepted "scientific fact" which was made up by money grabbing special interest groups and followed by their sheep. Agreed.

But, If you are looking for truth, that is the wrong place to look. Just saying...

[JustinCharge 2,397]

14 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

The really funny or sad thing is that the geek board righties don't know that they are the fringe.   I look forward to watching these guys try to do an about face and the spin they spew when the GOP party acknowledges reality.

 

I think most republicans acknowledge reality, that if climate change is real, the bulk of the damage is being done by China and India, not republicans in America.  Do you agree with the statement that without GREATLY curbing pollution in China and India, any further moves to curb pollution in the US are merely token in nature?  Or are democrats going to continue to scream at us to stop using straws?

I don't hear any solutions coming from the left regarding climate change.  Not one.  Because the answer is to curb China / India pollution, and I have never heard a single democrat say a word about that.  All I hear when it comes to climate change is attack republicans.  That increases my skepticism.

[Reality 2,710]

Thread.

 

[jerryskids 5,199]

1 hour ago, Mike Honcho said:

First off, you are 100% using 'moving the goalposts' wrong.  

Second, I was specifically referring to your statement that "anthropomorphic climate alarmism" is a fringe issue."  I made two replies about the issue, highlighting polling data from the same article - showing that man-made global warming isn't a fringe issue, but an accepted scientific fact not only by the majority, but that the real fringe are the righties(About 17 percent of Republicans explicitly said they have no worries about the effects of climate change.) are the fringe of the issue.  I was not making a personal attack or trying to impugn your commitment to environmental issues.   

I see how my reply to your post could have been confusing, I try to be clear in my responses, but clearly don't always communicate my meaning clearly. 

Your poll focused on millenials not the entire population, and you keep bouncing between "anthropomorphic climate alarmism" and "climate change." 

Also it would not surprise me to see an uptick in concern in younger Republicans, because our youth has been fed doomsday information 24/7/365, and they had more room to go up vs. democrats.

[Mike Honcho 4,028]

On 9/22/2019 at 2:44 AM, riversco said:

I think most republicans acknowledge reality, that if climate change is real, the bulk of the damage is being done by China and India, not republicans in America.  Do you agree with the statement that without GREATLY curbing pollution in China and India, any further moves to curb pollution in the US are merely token in nature?  Or are democrats going to continue to scream at us to stop using straws?

I don't hear any solutions coming from the left regarding climate change.  Not one.  Because the answer is to curb China / India pollution, and I have never heard a single democrat say a word about that.  All I hear when it comes to climate change is attack republicans.  That increases my skepticism.

If you don't hear solutions from the left, then you aren't listening, that's on you...there are scores of proposals.

The answer is not to soley curb China and India, since on a per capita  basis, the US produces more than both those countries combined.  The US produces the 2nd most green house gases in the world-after China.   India is third with less than half of what the US produces.   India is also leading the world in it's efforts to combat MMWG.   

Quote

 

National Geographic Report Card-Top of the class, India

India has emerged as a global leader in renewable energy, and in fact it is investing more in them than it is in fossil fuels. Having established a goal of generating 40 percent of its power through renewables by 2030, its progress has been so rapid that it could easily reach that target a decade early, so there is every opportunity for India to increase that target. CAT calculates that India’s plan is compatible with a 2 degree C increase, but that its National Energy Plan could be 1.5 degrees C compatible if the country abandoned plans to build new coal-fired power plants.

 

 

Quote

 

National Geographic China - Shows some promise

The good news: China is on course to meet its Paris targets. The bad news, according to CAT: Those targets are woefully inadequate, and not ambitious enough to limit warming to below 2 degrees C, let alone to 1.5 C as required under the Paris Agreement, unless other countries make much deeper reductions at comparably greater effort. China’s CO2 emissions—already the largest in the world—grew an estimated 2.3 percent increase in 2018; in fact, with current policies, China’s greenhouse gas emissions are projected to rise until at least 2030, although a recent study concluded they may in fact peak a decade earlier. The Chinese government has heavily subsidized the manufacture of electric cars and has sought to reduce the number of gasoline-powered cars on the road; in 2018, Chinese consumers bought 1.1 million electric vehicles—more than the rest of the world combined. China is the largest manufacturer of solar technology in the world, but it is also the largest consumer of coal, and is financing the construction of coal-fired power stations around the world.

 

I'm not sure why you expect to hear Democrats to say a work about other countries that are doing more than the US, when we are lagging.  We need to be responsible for our own house, before we start pointing fingers at others.

[Mike Honcho 4,028]

22 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Your poll focused on millenials not the entire population, and you keep bouncing between "anthropomorphic climate alarmism" and "climate change." 

Also it would not surprise me to see an uptick in concern in younger Republicans, because our youth has been fed doomsday information 24/7/365, and they had more room to go up vs. democrats.

The poll focused millennials because they were the part of the GOP that has shifted the GOP the most on the issue, but it was all inclusive of the entire population.   

[JustinCharge 2,397]

6 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

If you don't hear solutions from the left, then you aren't listening, that's on you...there are scores of proposals.

The answer is not to soley curb China and India, since on a per capita  basis, the US produces more than both those countries combined.  The US produces the 2nd most green house gases in the world-after China.   India is third with less than half of what the US produces.   India is also leading the world in it's efforts to combat MMWG.  

Per capita is a nonstarter when the US has 350 million people and china has 1.3 billion people. We have ALL heard the false "per capita" argument a million times and its been debunked.  So stop using it. You also failed to deny that not having China and India drastically curb their pollution means all of our efforts are meaningless.  You dodged the claims, and spouted nonsense.  You have instantly lost the climate change debate.  Congrats.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

9 minutes ago, riversco said:

Per capita is a nonstarter when the US has 350 million people and china has 1.3 billion people. We have ALL heard the false "per capita" argument a million times and its been debunked.  So stop using it. You also failed to deny that not having China and India drastically curb their pollution means all of our efforts are meaningless.  You dodged the claims, and spouted nonsense.  You have instantly lost the climate change debate.  Congrats.

Pro climate changers go where the money is.  That is why all the data points to the U.S.  Honestly, what would pointing the finger at poor India, or don't-give-a- China, do to put money in anyone's pocket. Nothing,

[Reality 2,710]

24 minutes ago, riversco said:

Per capita is a nonstarter when the US has 350 million people and china has 1.3 billion people. We have ALL heard the false "per capita" argument a million times and its been debunked.  So stop using it. You also failed to deny that not having China and India drastically curb their pollution means all of our efforts are meaningless.  You dodged the claims, and spouted nonsense.  You have instantly lost the climate change debate.  Congrats.

Yup.

13 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

Pro climate changers go where the money is.  That is why all the data points to the U.S.  Honestly, what would pointing the finger at poor India, or don't-give-a- China, do to put money in anyone's pocket. Nothing,

& Yup.

[Baker Boy 1,485]

1 hour ago, Mike Honcho said:

If you don't hear solutions from the left, then you aren't listening, that's on you...there are scores of proposals.

The answer is not to soley curb China and India, since on a per capita  basis, the US produces more than both those countries combined.  The US produces the 2nd most green house gases in the world-after China.   India is third with less than half of what the US produces.   India is also leading the world in it's efforts to combat MMWG.   

 

I'm not sure why you expect to hear Democrats to say a work about other countries that are doing more than the US, when we are lagging.  We need to be responsible for our own house, before we start pointing fingers at others.

 

The Paris Agreement Is a joke! More Lefty BS! 

The Paris agreement allows China to increase their carbon emissions until 2030. Well it is a good thing they are keeping the terms of this awesome agreement. Meanwhile the United States has lead the world in carbon emission reduction for over a decade.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

From Wikipedia, a list of the states and how much (and how much per capita) CO2 they generate.  It's not who you think that generates the most per capita.  The answer is more complicated than cars and plastic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions