You need to stop believing that right-wing description of liberals and try actually having a conversation with them.
More generally, it is a bad idea to gain an opinion of a group based largely upon the description provided by their opponents. (This is a fault that is not particular to any one viewpoint.)
I never understood that. Whatever else Donald Trump may be, he definitely is establishment.
This.
It is certainly true that rural America has serious issues related to the dwindling manufacturing, centralization of agriculture, etc. At the same time, it boggles the mind that the solution is put in charge a millionaire who lives at the top of a tower on an island that is the biggest city in the U.S.
To be more clear, I now consider Democrats to be the equivalent of the "other side" in a war - they will still oppose every and any thing your side does, they can lose a battle and still wage war, incessant and total non-compliance, they will fight to the last man, and any victory - even pyrrhic - is still a victory. Any means are justified in the pursuit of their ends.
So... in other words, the Democrats are now going to do what the Republicans have been doing for the past 8 years.
No idea what that was, but all I could think of is a glitch in the system.
That was ALL you could think of? Try:
Momentary change in wind. (like the clouds *were* moving, just in a direction aligned with your viewpoint)
Your imagination
I could probably come up with more if I tried, but I think these two require less of a mental leap than jumping to a glich in the simulation of the universe...
Yeah, except that I've actually seen UFO's about 30 to 50 feet above me that were totally silent, except for a deep vibration that occurred when directly over me, and military jets and a black helicopter slowly following them from about a mile behind. I don't have to have faith in something I haven't seen.
I'd be happy to believe you, if there was a shred of evidence provided. As is, this statement has as much weight as my claim of the invisible pink unicorn living in my garage.
And your point? CO2 was at 1950 ppm, and the temperature was only 3 deg Celsius hotter. Full stop. Period. That is a fact. Not a "factoid"... a motherfucking fact.
So, from this one data point, we can fully conclude that having CO2 at 1950 ppm will *always* result in a planet that is 3C warmer than today? I think that the parent was making the point that a whole fuckton of variables have changed in and around the planet in the intervening 200 million years, so it is making an apples to oranges comparison.
Here, I'll give you an example of this reasoning. Last winter, while standing outside with my coat on, I was cold. Therefore, if I want to cool off on a hot summer day, I should go outside and put my coat on. After all, I had my coat on before and felt cold, which is a *fact*, a motherfucking fact.
Lots of US infrastructure is wide open and vulnerable to terrorist attack
This. All the nonsense of "keeping us safe" fails to recognize that bridges, dams, power lines, etc. all exist in areas that are essentially impossible to secure.
There is this huge assumption that alien civilizations will be emitting large amounts of waste heat. What happens if they are just more efficient than us?
Of course, that didn't work out [nypost.com] too well [cbslocal.com]
It is still ongoing story and too early for any conclusions.
If you read a more detailed description, you'll see that it is a mixed bag, with a mix of both good and bad consequences. Also, note that some of the biggest current hardships (legal issues) are totally independent of the $70K wage.
I work with a guy who drives a Nissan Leaf in Wisconsin winters.
Asking him these same questions, it is true that the leaf takes a hit on range during winter, but it still works enough for him to commute to/from work without a problem.
No he isn't. The summary is correct, and he is wrong. Americans are one inch taller than in 1960, not two inches. In 1960 the average man was 5'8", today he is 5'9". The average women went from 5'3" to 5'4".
So... an inch for men and an inch for women. That makes 2 inches.
What is the temperature of the Earth *supposed* to be?
This whole question misses the point. As you correctly observe, there is not temperature that the Earth is *supposed* to be, and in fact there have been wild fluctuations in the Earth's temperature over the past million+ years.
The trouble with man-made climate change isn't that the Earth is going through changes. The trouble is that the Earth is going through a very rapid temperature change that will have significant impacts on humanity (as well as the rest of the world).
These rapid changes will do things like cause glacial melt, increase the severity and variability of weather, change habitable zones for various species, etc.
Those changes in turn lead to water shortages, sea level rise, death and destruction due to storms, pests and pathogens moving to places where they haven't been before, etc. Those factors will have a huge impact on human habitation and the global economy.
Will the Earth survive? Of course. It has been through much worse. That's not the point.
The point is that there is a huge cost to humans with the pace of the shifting climate, and we can either eat the costs trying to minimize the shift or we can eat the cost in terms of displaced people, drought, famine, etc.
The responses being advocated mainly involve shifting away from fossil fuels (which are a fixed, non-renewable resource) towards an economy of energy production that comes from renewables. Isn't this a good idea anyway?
However, something tells me "This bill might be a trap", an item with no chance of passing
I doubt it, largely because of who is sponsoring this. Specifically, Mark Pocan, who is my representative and who has been a prominent state representative for many years. From what I've seen of his record (and from actually running into him and talking to him at the liquor store), he would be one of the least likely people to perform this kind of trap. .
Now, if others take this as an opportunity to see who might be a good candidate for a "re-education" camp, that's a whole other story...
How about this: The ice truck workers are paid hourly. They would rather get paid for an all-day episode of unloading ice rather than just 2-3 hours.
Wrong. The people doing the actual ice moving/selling are all volunteers. In fact, the overwhelming majority of people doing any of the infrastructure of the event are volunteers. (The one notable exception is cleaning the port-a-potties.)
Slashdot Mirror
You need to stop believing that right-wing description of liberals and try actually having a conversation with them.
More generally, it is a bad idea to gain an opinion of a group based largely upon the description provided by their opponents. (This is a fault that is not particular to any one viewpoint.)
Ask Miami if they'd like to have more sea levels rise.
This.
It is certainly true that rural America has serious issues related to the dwindling manufacturing, centralization of agriculture, etc. At the same time, it boggles the mind that the solution is put in charge a millionaire who lives at the top of a tower on an island that is the biggest city in the U.S.
You can't make this shit up.
What about when Romney insulted 47% of the US?
What about the protests and threats of lynching for Obama's election?
You must have a bad memory.
I'll see your non-sequitur and raise you standing on one leg until you fall over. You're so cute when you do that.
So... in other words, the Democrats are now going to do what the Republicans have been doing for the past 8 years.
That was ALL you could think of? Try:
I could probably come up with more if I tried, but I think these two require less of a mental leap than jumping to a glich in the simulation of the universe...
I'd be happy to believe you, if there was a shred of evidence provided. As is, this statement has as much weight as my claim of the invisible pink unicorn living in my garage.
Don't forgot that *living* is 100% fatal.
So, from this one data point, we can fully conclude that having CO2 at 1950 ppm will *always* result in a planet that is 3C warmer than today? I think that the parent was making the point that a whole fuckton of variables have changed in and around the planet in the intervening 200 million years, so it is making an apples to oranges comparison.
Here, I'll give you an example of this reasoning. Last winter, while standing outside with my coat on, I was cold. Therefore, if I want to cool off on a hot summer day, I should go outside and put my coat on. After all, I had my coat on before and felt cold, which is a *fact*, a motherfucking fact.
Nonsense! Given the amount of rain we see, you can hardly call the sky dome waterproof!
This. All the nonsense of "keeping us safe" fails to recognize that bridges, dams, power lines, etc. all exist in areas that are essentially impossible to secure.
"Well, let's just see what you've posted... I'm sorry sir, but we're going to have to shoot you."
Please don't forget the neglected, obsolete levy systems that weren't updated/repaired. The failures started happening long before the storm.
Tell me again how Democretins are different than Republicidiots?
From a bumper sticker:
"Under Republicans, man exploits man. Under Democrats, its just the opposite."
There is this huge assumption that alien civilizations will be emitting large amounts of waste heat. What happens if they are just more efficient than us?
Whoops. I guess neither my sarcasm detector nor my reading comprehension are working today. It seemed like an awfully falsifiable claim...
Really? Canada has over a million small businesses, which employ 48% of the workforce and contribute 42% of the private GDP.
Nice straw man.
It is still ongoing story and too early for any conclusions.
If you read a more detailed description, you'll see that it is a mixed bag, with a mix of both good and bad consequences. Also, note that some of the biggest current hardships (legal issues) are totally independent of the $70K wage.
I work with a guy who drives a Nissan Leaf in Wisconsin winters.
Asking him these same questions, it is true that the leaf takes a hit on range during winter, but it still works enough for him to commute to/from work without a problem.
No he isn't. The summary is correct, and he is wrong. Americans are one inch taller than in 1960, not two inches. In 1960 the average man was 5'8", today he is 5'9". The average women went from 5'3" to 5'4".
So... an inch for men and an inch for women. That makes 2 inches.
*ducks*
This is an oft-quoted partial truth. Parts of the current Sahara were jungle, but the desert as a whole has existed for millions of years.
This whole question misses the point. As you correctly observe, there is not temperature that the Earth is *supposed* to be, and in fact there have been wild fluctuations in the Earth's temperature over the past million+ years.
The trouble with man-made climate change isn't that the Earth is going through changes. The trouble is that the Earth is going through a very rapid temperature change that will have significant impacts on humanity (as well as the rest of the world).
These rapid changes will do things like cause glacial melt, increase the severity and variability of weather, change habitable zones for various species, etc.
Those changes in turn lead to water shortages, sea level rise, death and destruction due to storms, pests and pathogens moving to places where they haven't been before, etc. Those factors will have a huge impact on human habitation and the global economy.
Will the Earth survive? Of course. It has been through much worse. That's not the point.
The point is that there is a huge cost to humans with the pace of the shifting climate, and we can either eat the costs trying to minimize the shift or we can eat the cost in terms of displaced people, drought, famine, etc.
The responses being advocated mainly involve shifting away from fossil fuels (which are a fixed, non-renewable resource) towards an economy of energy production that comes from renewables. Isn't this a good idea anyway?
Paul Heenan
His "crime" was coming home too drunk to identify his own house.
I doubt it, largely because of who is sponsoring this. Specifically, Mark Pocan, who is my representative and who has been a prominent state representative for many years. From what I've seen of his record (and from actually running into him and talking to him at the liquor store), he would be one of the least likely people to perform this kind of trap. .
Now, if others take this as an opportunity to see who might be a good candidate for a "re-education" camp, that's a whole other story...
Wrong. The people doing the actual ice moving/selling are all volunteers. In fact, the overwhelming majority of people doing any of the infrastructure of the event are volunteers. (The one notable exception is cleaning the port-a-potties.)