There's a word called "hyperbole". Learn it. Understand it. When somebody says, "That dude's got all the money in the world", they don't mean the dude literally has every dollar, ruble, rial and pound all the mints in the world ever printed or stamped.
And by the way, your claim that " 'climate change' was originally popularly sold as 'you are all going to fry like eggs if you don't join our political positions! "' is pure, unadulterated bullshit.
It should be possible to offer training and accreditation to unpaid readers who would receive a cash reward for directing comments violating a site's fake news or hate speech rules to the company's editors.
Pay the reader for each comment that is actually against the site's rules, don't pay them for comments that are acceptable, and remove their accreditation if they cry wolf too many times.
If a tiered approach were used, where readers could move up in a hierarchy based on accuracy and quantity, sites like Facebook and Twitter could easily police their comments sections while still maintaining a level of freedom acceptable to reasonable people. In fact, the situation might improve because it would be unnecessary to blindly enforce blanket policies designed to avoid giving offense to anybody, no matter how thin-skinned and prissy they may be.
The effects of Big Oil's interference in the world economy go even further. Hemp would be a lower-impact substitute for a lot of plastic, but industry lobbying has kept it illegal to grow in the US and elsewhere. The "War On Drugs" has focussed on marijuana thanks to its close relationship with hemp.
This website is admittedly a cheerleader for hemp, but there's a lot of information on it that's accurate and eye-opening:
Why are you commenting about gasoline subsidies, then throwing around words like "ignorant"? We're talking about electricity. Have you ever heard the term "comparing apples and oranges"?
The US, unfortunately, isn't a leader when one considers the amount of energy it uses versus the amount it generates in one renewable way or another.
I agree with pretty much everything you said, but I think we have to accept that a country with very high energy use will post pretty large raw numbers even if just a small percentage of its generating capacity is "green". On the other hand Denmark, which is tiny, generated 42% of its electricity from wind in 2016.
Here's a link to a list of countries doing well with renewable energy. Yes, the US is on it.
Having gone exactly counter to the clearly-expressed wishes of about three out of four Americans, Republicans understand it is now time to muddy the waters.
This farce of a bill will no doubt have more holes in it than a fat boy's belt.
I was going to remark that we could expect Russian apologists to swarm to this story in three, two...but I was too late. They're already on it like flies on a fresh turd.
Presumably this information, which the Trump administration is claiming to be accurate, came from the same sources as the information proving Russia meddled in the election, which the Trump administration denies.
More Democrats voted than Republicans. Trump lost the popular vote by millions of votes.
The fact that your country has an electoral system skewed to give advantage to right wing scam artists and liars is unfortunate, but your self-righteous "you should have voted" nonsense is both foolish and inaccurate.
I truly hope you're right, my friend. I suspect, though, that the laws written to kill this off will be more akin to those state laws crafted to keep Tesla out of the market, or drug laws allowing the police incredibly wide discretion to stomp on Americans' freedom in the name of "save the children and kittens".
There's rarely been a time when I wanted so much to be wrong.
We already have enough conservative trolls devaluing this site. Wouldn't you be happier over at Breitbart, where your nonsense is accepted uncritically?
Slashdot Mirror
Also a current...who's a sweetie!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm
There's a word called "hyperbole". Learn it. Understand it. When somebody says, "That dude's got all the money in the world", they don't mean the dude literally has every dollar, ruble, rial and pound all the mints in the world ever printed or stamped.
So who do I believe, just about all the scientists in the world, or some assclown who doesn't know the difference between a model and a theory?
Hmmm...tough choice.
Holy crappe!!!
It's been done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Shark
It should have won at least one Oscar. Maybe two
Clearly, I'd better keep this very, very simple.
Question 1: Why do you put ice in a drink?
Question 2: What happens to the ice?
Question 3: What happens to the drink?
Question 4: If you put your drink under a heat lamp, will the ice melt slower or faster?
No, I won't be providing anything more comprehensive. You can find that out here: https://skepticalscience.com/
And by the way, your claim that " 'climate change' was originally popularly sold as 'you are all going to fry like eggs if you don't join our political positions! "' is pure, unadulterated bullshit.
I've been happy with PIA's service during the short time I've been a customer. Hearing this, there's no way I'll be looking anywhere else for a VPN.
Thanks, guys, for being a good corporate citizen.
The German government isn't doing that either. What's your point?
Thank you for that! Your entire comment was a learning experience for me.
You'd rather trust Zuckerberg?
LOL.
It should be possible to offer training and accreditation to unpaid readers who would receive a cash reward for directing comments violating a site's fake news or hate speech rules to the company's editors.
Pay the reader for each comment that is actually against the site's rules, don't pay them for comments that are acceptable, and remove their accreditation if they cry wolf too many times.
If a tiered approach were used, where readers could move up in a hierarchy based on accuracy and quantity, sites like Facebook and Twitter could easily police their comments sections while still maintaining a level of freedom acceptable to reasonable people. In fact, the situation might improve because it would be unnecessary to blindly enforce blanket policies designed to avoid giving offense to anybody, no matter how thin-skinned and prissy they may be.
The effects of Big Oil's interference in the world economy go even further. Hemp would be a lower-impact substitute for a lot of plastic, but industry lobbying has kept it illegal to grow in the US and elsewhere. The "War On Drugs" has focussed on marijuana thanks to its close relationship with hemp.
This website is admittedly a cheerleader for hemp, but there's a lot of information on it that's accurate and eye-opening:
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2012/04/01/5-ways-hemp-will-change-our-world/
Why are you commenting about gasoline subsidies, then throwing around words like "ignorant"? We're talking about electricity. Have you ever heard the term "comparing apples and oranges"?
The US, unfortunately, isn't a leader when one considers the amount of energy it uses versus the amount it generates in one renewable way or another.
I agree with pretty much everything you said, but I think we have to accept that a country with very high energy use will post pretty large raw numbers even if just a small percentage of its generating capacity is "green". On the other hand Denmark, which is tiny, generated 42% of its electricity from wind in 2016.
Here's a link to a list of countries doing well with renewable energy. Yes, the US is on it.
https://cleantechnica.com/2016/02/04/how-11-countries-are-leading-the-shift-to-renewable-energy/
Conservatives, by definition, "toe the party line". To oppose it would be iconoclastic, and conservatives are anything but that.
According to the Who's rock opera, the deaf, dumb and blind kid actually did have a mental disorder.
And the Pinball Wizard was another character entirely.
This is excellent news. It means California's economic might is forcing states that want to sell power to them to clean up their act, too.
Having gone exactly counter to the clearly-expressed wishes of about three out of four Americans, Republicans understand it is now time to muddy the waters.
This farce of a bill will no doubt have more holes in it than a fat boy's belt.
I was going to remark that we could expect Russian apologists to swarm to this story in three, two...but I was too late. They're already on it like flies on a fresh turd.
Presumably this information, which the Trump administration is claiming to be accurate, came from the same sources as the information proving Russia meddled in the election, which the Trump administration denies.
More Democrats voted than Republicans. Trump lost the popular vote by millions of votes.
The fact that your country has an electoral system skewed to give advantage to right wing scam artists and liars is unfortunate, but your self-righteous "you should have voted" nonsense is both foolish and inaccurate.
Just another word on the Republicans' Shit List.
And right below the dent in the mattress being made by your daughter. (snicker)
I truly hope you're right, my friend. I suspect, though, that the laws written to kill this off will be more akin to those state laws crafted to keep Tesla out of the market, or drug laws allowing the police incredibly wide discretion to stomp on Americans' freedom in the name of "save the children and kittens".
There's rarely been a time when I wanted so much to be wrong.
We already have enough conservative trolls devaluing this site. Wouldn't you be happier over at Breitbart, where your nonsense is accepted uncritically?