Federal Government Confirms Nearing Apocalypse -- it's very hard to dismiss this. - Page 29 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15046771
Pants-of-dog wrote:So you folks are not making factual arguments.

Instead, you are accusing the messengers of being bad people.

Since accusing others of fear mongering is simply an ad hominem, I will ignore it.

You seem to make a habit of ignoring truth when you don't like it.
#15046790
Julian658 wrote:The climate is always changing. It has never been static. The Earth is on its 3rd type of atmosphere and one day it will drastically change again. And do not worry, you will be alive ten years from now. AOC is lying.


This has nothing to do with your previous post or what I said.

If you are just going to randomly post conservative talking points that have nothing to do with the posts of others, please do not quote me any more.
#15046801
Pants-of-dog wrote:This has nothing to do with your previous post or what I said.

If you are just going to randomly post conservative talking points that have nothing to do with the posts of others, please do not quote me any more.

POD you are too SJWish. Lighten up, everything will be OK . Be tolerant, don't hate or be so negative. This is the most prosperous time in world history. The only thing that could take this prosperity into the ground is socialism.
#15046804
This has gotten really academic. think about this really hard now. It is so simple that, especially for the Trump Zombies who are used to having Obese Donald do their thinking for them, it is complicated.

You are running a multi trillion dollar industry …… the fossil fuel industry. The writing on the wall says that the survival of planet earth and the human race requires that continued use of energy that spews shit into the air by billions of tons needs to eventually replaced by "clean" energy such as wind (which according to America's #1 weatherman, Obese Donald, causes cancer :lol: ) and solar which leave, essentially, no filth and pollution behind. What, using human nature as your guide, would you do? Think hard now ………. keep thinking …….

BINGO! CORRECT! You are going whatever needs to be done to keep the party going. Keep the $$ flowing into YOUR pocket. Screw the planet and/or the human race. So ….. what's driving the global warming concern. Science. Shit, that's easy, we'll just go out and purchase our own scientists and, of course, politicians up to and including the POTUS. Of course we will lose in the long run as increasing heat, fires, rising waters and human chaos around the planet become increasingly difficult to ignore. But, who cares, we just purchased trillions with billions. A good business strategy in any book.

That's it kids in a nutshell. Want the truth? Follow the largest chunk of money. If they say it's not about the money ………. it's about the money.
#15046836
jimjam wrote:This has gotten really academic. think about this really hard now. It is so simple that, especially for the Trump Zombies who are used to having Obese Donald do their thinking for them, it is complicated.

You are running a multi trillion dollar industry …… the fossil fuel industry. The writing on the wall says that the survival of planet earth and the human race requires that continued use of energy that spews shit into the air by billions of tons needs to eventually replaced by "clean" energy such as wind (which according to America's #1 weatherman, Obese Donald, causes cancer :lol: ) and solar which leave, essentially, no filth and pollution behind. What, using human nature as your guide, would you do? Think hard now ………. keep thinking …….

BINGO! CORRECT! You are going whatever needs to be done to keep the party going. Keep the $$ flowing into YOUR pocket. Screw the planet and/or the human race. So ….. what's driving the global warming concern. Science. Shit, that's easy, we'll just go out and purchase our own scientists and, of course, politicians up to and including the POTUS. Of course we will lose in the long run as increasing heat, fires, rising waters and human chaos around the planet become increasingly difficult to ignore. But, who cares, we just purchased trillions with billions. A good business strategy in any book.

That's it kids in a nutshell. Want the truth? Follow the largest chunk of money. If they say it's not about the money ………. it's about the money.



You make a good point about fossil fuel and greed. However, be advised that solar and wind cannot produce the energy needed to run the country. The only way to go ZERO carbon emission is go NUCLEAR. And somehow you guys do not like Nuclear.
#15046839
Julian658 wrote:You make a good point about fossil fuel and greed. However, be advised that solar and wind cannot produce the energy needed to run the country. The only way to go ZERO carbon emission is go NUCLEAR. And somehow you guys do not like Nuclear.

I'm not clear on who "you guys" are but i'm ok with nuclear. I'm in no mood to do an hour or so of research right now but last I heard ….. cost of solar and wind is way down, I think it even beats fossil fuel. Perhaps it's a bit soon to state conclusively that solar and wind cannot carry the load but, right now, I feel that is besides the point. Let's continue to ramp up solar and wind and ramp down fossil fuel …… especially coal. Soon after taking office Donald, certainly at the behest of his buddies down at the club, removed government incentives for solar and wind while increasing incentives for fossil fuel.
#15046882
jimjam wrote:I'm not clear on who "you guys" are but i'm ok with nuclear. I'm in no mood to do an hour or so of research right now but last I heard ….. cost of solar and wind is way down, I think it even beats fossil fuel. Perhaps it's a bit soon to state conclusively that solar and wind cannot carry the load but, right now, I feel that is besides the point. Let's continue to ramp up solar and wind and ramp down fossil fuel …… especially coal. Soon after taking office Donald, certainly at the behest of his buddies down at the club, removed government incentives for solar and wind while increasing incentives for fossil fuel.


No one has tried as hard as Germany to go with wind and solar energy. It is not an easy task and they still have to burn coal to get enough power. Meanwhile electricity bills are soaring. They need a few Nuclear plants, but I suspect some people on the left are paranoid about nuclear.
Can Germany revive its stalled transition to clean energy?
#15046917
Julian658 wrote:You make a good point about fossil fuel and greed. However, be advised that solar and wind cannot produce the energy needed to run the country. The only way to go ZERO carbon emission is go NUCLEAR. And somehow you guys do not like Nuclear.


I have no problem with nuclear.

In fact, I think we should support infrastructure and technology for nuclear power in the developing world.

Julian658 wrote:No one has tried as hard as Germany to go with wind and solar energy. It is not an easy task and they still have to burn coal to get enough power. Meanwhile electricity bills are soaring. They need a few Nuclear plants, but I suspect some people on the left are paranoid about nuclear.
Can Germany revive its stalled transition to clean energy?


I can think of at least one other place in the world that has done even more to get off fossil fuels than Germany: Quebec.

It runs mostly off hydro-electricity. And it is doing fine. Quebec residents pay less than their fossil fuel using neighbours.
#15046922
Pants-of-dog wrote:I have no problem with nuclear.

In fact, I think we should support infrastructure and technology for nuclear power in the developing world.



I can think of at least one other place in the world that has done even more to get off fossil fuels than Germany: Quebec.

It runs mostly off hydro-electricity. And it is doing fine. Quebec residents pay less than their fossil fuel using neighbours.


POD:

Congratulations. You have finally written a nice post! 8) 8)
I have nothing to add.
#15046935
Pants-of-dog wrote:So you agree that we should send nuclear technology to developing countries like Iran? Excellent.

And you agree that a modern industrial society can live without fossil fuels. Also cool.


If we send Nucs to Iran we will never know if they use it for a good cause. As of now Iran is an authoritarian theocracy that hates the West. POD, you were doing so well! What happened?

Hold your horses, fossil fuels are not always burned for energy.

Fossil fuels can be consumed, but not combusted, when they are used directly as construction materials, chemical feedstocks, lubricants, solvents, waxes, and other products. Common examples include petroleum products used in plastics, natural gas used in fertilizers, and coal tars used in skin treatment products. In 2017, about 13% of total petroleum products consumed were for non-combustion use.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=35672

You are growing up POD. Your posts are not as bad as they used to be. Well--------------- other than that silly Iran comment, but I am going to assume you were trolling.
#15046972
Julian658 wrote:If we send Nucs to Iran we will never know if they use it for a good cause. As of now Iran is an authoritarian theocracy that hates the West.


So, when you said that progressives are against nuclear, did you mean yourself?

All the people in this thread who think we should do something about climate change support nuclear.

You, apparently, do not. Or perhaps you support nuclear for the developed countries, but not for the developing world. You want them to stay in poverty, perhaps.

Hold your horses, fossil fuels are not always burned for energy.


https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=35672


No one ever said otherwise.

Getting back to the topic:

We agree that in terms of producing electricity, fossil fuels are no longer necessary.

As for uses that do not involve combustion, they are not relevant to a debate about pollution caused by combustion.
#15046973
Julian658 wrote:
No one has tried as hard as Germany to go with wind and solar energy. It is not an easy task and they still have to burn coal to get enough power. Meanwhile electricity bills are soaring. They need a few Nuclear plants, but I suspect some people on the left are paranoid about nuclear.
Can Germany revive its stalled transition to clean energy?
Germany coal use is down 33% since that article and renewables up 5%. That's in just 9 months.

They were wrong to close nuclear early but the transition away from the worst polluting fossil fuels is well underway.

Next step is the North sea power hub.
#15046986
Pants-of-dog wrote:So, when you said that progressives are against nuclear, did you mean yourself?

All the people in this thread who think we should do something about climate change support nuclear.


IS AOC for nuclear? She left it out in her initial plan. BTW, why does saving the planet has to include social justice programs? The latter makes it less attractive to people on the fence.

You, apparently, do not. Or perhaps you support nuclear for the developed countries, but not for the developing world. You want them to stay in poverty, perhaps.

Iran is the sworn enemy of America. Given them nuclear fuel is not an option. And they are not dummies, they are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves. In fact it is wrong of you to call them the 3rd world. They are a very ancient civilization. It is not cool to be a racist of low expectations POD.
#15047212
Julian658 wrote:IS AOC for nuclear? She left it out in her initial plan.


Ask her. It has nothing to do with our conversation.

BTW, why does saving the planet has to include social justice programs? The latter makes it less attractive to people on the fence.


So things like human rights make it less palatable?

Iran is the sworn enemy of America. Given them nuclear fuel is not an option. And they are not dummies, they are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves.


I thought you supported nuclear energy. Guess not.

Amd I thought you supported helping developing countries become stronger. Guess not.

What is your plan for stopping anthropogenic climate change?
  • 1
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 50

No, you can't make that call without seeing the ev[…]

The people in the Synagogue, at Charlottesville, […]

I am sure over time they will improve. You sa[…]

@Deutschmania Not if the 70% are American and[…]