Discussion:
"How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep twisting the truth"
Add Reply
Lynn McGuire
2017-02-12 20:26:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html

"They were duped – and so were we. That was the conclusion of last
week’s damning revelation that world leaders signed the Paris Agreement
on climate change under the sway of unverified and questionable data."

"A landmark scientific paper –the one that caused a sensation by
claiming there has been NO slowdown in global warming since 2000 – was
critically flawed. And thanks to the bravery of a whistleblower, we now
know that for a fact."

Lynn
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
2017-02-12 22:09:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try citing a
publication that actually, you know, knows something about science.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com
h***@gmail.com
2017-02-13 06:26:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try citing a
publication that actually, you know, knows something about science.
But they disagree with him so they're obviously wrong...
Jaimie Vandenbergh
2017-02-13 10:04:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try citing a
publication that actually, you know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily Mail ("The
paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail Online website as a
source. Formally deemed too unreliable.

It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.

Cheers - Jaimie
J. Clarke
2017-02-13 12:34:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try citing a
publication that actually, you know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily Mail ("The
paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail Online website as a
source. Formally deemed too unreliable.
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
Cheers - Jaimie
The thing is, wiki saying something doesn't make
it so. This could be viewed as yet another
attempt by cabal to silence dissent.
h***@gmail.com
2017-02-13 12:43:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try citing a
publication that actually, you know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily Mail ("The
paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail Online website as a
source. Formally deemed too unreliable.
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
The thing is, wiki saying something doesn't make
it so. This could be viewed as yet another
attempt by cabal to silence dissent.
And yet you'll pay attention to any climate change deniers and take anything they say seriously...
Kevrob
2017-02-13 15:02:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try citing a
publication that actually, you know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily Mail ("The
paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail Online website as a
source. Formally deemed too unreliable.
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
The thing is, wiki saying something doesn't make
it so. This could be viewed as yet another
attempt by cabal to silence dissent.
And yet you'll pay attention to any climate change deniers and take anything they say seriously...
The problem with the Daily Mail is, that even if that particular
article is cromulent, they've so blotted their copy book that
people don't believe them.

Ronald Bailey of Reason, who once was very much a AGW skeptic,
but has since moved toward the "scientific consensus" ruminates
on what the Mail found, and what it means, here:

[quote]

All too predictably, this contretemps has most everyone rushing
to find data that confirms what they already think. "No Data
Manipulation in 2015 Climate Study, Researchers Say," headlines
The New York Times. "As planet warms, doubters launch a new attack
on famous climate change study," reports The Washington Post. "House
Committee to 'Push Ahead' With Investigation Into Alleged Climate
Data Manipulation at NOAA," reports The Daily Caller, citing claims
from Committee on Science, Space and Technology aides that other
unnamed NOAA whistleblowers are coming forward. Fox News headlines,
"Federal scientist cooked the climate change books ahead of Obama
presentation, whistle blower charges."

[/quote]

http://reason.com/blog/2017/02/08/noaa-climate-change-data-manipulation-ch

I accept that the globe is warming. People may have something to do with
that, too. Wheter people can stop it is another matter.

Kevin R
(Not a scientist, so do your own research and make up your own mind.)
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-13 19:52:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-g
lobal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try
citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something
about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail
Online website as a source. Formally deemed too unreliable.
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
Cheers - Jaimie
The thing is, wiki saying something doesn't make
it so. This could be viewed as yet another
attempt by cabal to silence dissent.
Or Wikipedia's long published policy of "fact by popular vote."
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-13 19:47:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-glo
bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily
Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try
citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something
about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily Mail
("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail Online
website as a source. Formally deemed too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was calling
someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
I did find this interesting:

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climate-
scientists

I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Lynn McGuire
2017-02-13 21:29:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-glo
bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily
Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try
citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something
about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily Mail
("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail Online
website as a source. Formally deemed too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was calling
someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climate-
scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climate-scientists

Lynn
Robert Bannister
2017-02-14 02:41:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-glo
bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try
citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something
about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily Mail
("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail Online
website as a source. Formally deemed too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was calling
someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climate-
scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climate-scientists
I noticed this little snippet:

robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago

It is even worse than that .....those who think they should control us
ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private jets, and live in
mansions with walls and gates while they scheme for climate rules and
extra taxes for the "little" people.

I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is the
people who live in mansions and own private jets who are denying climate
change because they are worried any change might affect their lifestyle.
It is the little people who are worried about the floods and droughts.
--
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972
J. Clarke
2017-02-14 03:17:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-glo
bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try
citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something
about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily Mail
("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail Online
website as a source. Formally deemed too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was calling
someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climate-
scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climate-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should control us
ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private jets, and live in
mansions with walls and gates while they scheme for climate rules and
extra taxes for the "little" people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is the
people who live in mansions and own private jets who are denying climate
change because they are worried any change might affect their lifestyle.
It is the little people who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore's movie:
<http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0497116/>

Al Gore's book:
<https://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Truth-
Crisis-Global-Warming/dp/0670062723>

Al Gore's house:
<http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/pc/Al+Tipper+Go
re+new+9
+million+ocean+view+villa+Oi9CkT5jyJXl.jpg>

Al Gore's other house:
<http://1.bp.blogspot.com/
_WN8QlJmvGM0/TVFI38b9EdI/AAAAAAAAL8s/Ioln9KPn0tM
/s640/al-gores-home-in-nashville.jpg#al%20gores%
20house%20400x252>

Al Gore's jet:
<http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_J-I-
q7p7WVE/RuFLBkhbfZI/AAAAAAAAAkQ/iP6tzfka4VU/s160
0/gore1.jpg>

Al Gore's boat:
<http://www.tennessean.com/picture-
gallery/entertainment/people/2014/01/25/al-
gores-green-houseboat/4905453/>

Still think global warming advocates don't enage
in conspicuous consumption?
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-14 02:41:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists
if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trus
t-glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cli
mate- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clim
ate-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change
might affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are
worried about the floods and droughts.
<http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0497116/>
<https://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Truth-
Crisis-Global-Warming/dp/0670062723>
<http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/pc/Al+Tipper+Go
re+new+9
+million+ocean+view+villa+Oi9CkT5jyJXl.jpg>
<http://1.bp.blogspot.com/
_WN8QlJmvGM0/TVFI38b9EdI/AAAAAAAAL8s/Ioln9KPn0tM
/s640/al-gores-home-in-nashville.jpg#al%20gores%
20house%20400x252>
<http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_J-I-
q7p7WVE/RuFLBkhbfZI/AAAAAAAAAkQ/iP6tzfka4VU/s160
0/gore1.jpg>
<http://www.tennessean.com/picture-
gallery/entertainment/people/2014/01/25/al-
gores-green-houseboat/4905453/>
Still think global warming advocates don't enage
in conspicuous consumption?
For him to *still* think, he's have to have thought in the first
place. What he does is *believe*. Mostly, whatever he is spoon fed
by people who tell him what he desperately wants to be true.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-14 02:40:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Lynn McGuire
2017-02-14 06:37:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
I hate to say this but, Al Gore has solar panels on his mansion XXXXXXX
mansions. He is disconnected from the grids.

Lynn
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-14 16:39:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists
if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trus
t- glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cli
ma te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clim
at e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change
might affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are
worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make
in half a year.
I hate to say this but, Al Gore has solar panels on his mansion
XXXXXXX mansions. He is disconnected from the grids.
Not until he got called out on $30k/month electric bill.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
J. Clarke
2017-02-15 00:46:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
I hate to say this but, Al Gore has solar panels on his mansion XXXXXXX
mansions. He is disconnected from the grids.
Is he? The building I work in has solar panels
on the roof. It's not disconnected from the
grid.

He's just a rich flake showing off his toys.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 01:12:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On 2/13/2017 1:47 PM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists
if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-tr
ust- glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific
subjects, try citing a publication that actually, you
know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the
Daily Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!")
and the Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed
too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-c
lima te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cl
imat e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it
is the people who live in mansions and own private jets who
are denying climate change because they are worried any
change might affect their lifestyle. It is the little people
who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I
make in half a year.
I hate to say this but, Al Gore has solar panels on his mansion
XXXXXXX mansions. He is disconnected from the grids.
Is he? The building I work in has solar panels
on the roof. It's not disconnected from the
grid.
Note that "disconnected from the grid" can easily include
generators (that produce an order of magnitude more pollution than
that from the grid, per kilowatt).
Post by J. Clarke
He's just a rich flake showing off his toys.
And hoping to get even richer pontificating to the gullible.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Lynn McGuire
2017-02-15 20:04:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
I hate to say this but, Al Gore has solar panels on his mansion XXXXXXX
mansions. He is disconnected from the grids.
Is he? The building I work in has solar panels
on the roof. It's not disconnected from the
grid.
He's just a rich flake showing off his toys.
There are grid connected solar systems and offgrid solar systems. Offgrid systems use batteries and/or hydrogen to store energy for
the bad days.
http://www.hydrogenhouseproject.org/

Lynn
J. Clarke
2017-02-16 02:48:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily
Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
I hate to say this but, Al Gore has solar panels on his mansion XXXXXXX
mansions. He is disconnected from the grids.
Is he? The building I work in has solar panels
on the roof. It's not disconnected from the
grid.
He's just a rich flake showing off his toys.
There are grid connected solar systems and offgrid solar systems. Offgrid systems use batteries and/or hydrogen to store energy for
the bad days.
http://www.hydrogenhouseproject.org/
Lynn
Until I see results from an independent energy
audit of Al Gore's properties and toys, I am not
going to believe that he is running entirely or
even mostly on "green" energy.
Robert Bannister
2017-02-16 04:06:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily
Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
I hate to say this but, Al Gore has solar panels on his mansion XXXXXXX
mansions. He is disconnected from the grids.
Is he? The building I work in has solar panels
on the roof. It's not disconnected from the
grid.
He's just a rich flake showing off his toys.
There are grid connected solar systems and offgrid solar systems. Offgrid systems use batteries and/or hydrogen to store energy for
the bad days.
http://www.hydrogenhouseproject.org/
Lynn
Until I see results from an independent energy
audit of Al Gore's properties and toys, I am not
going to believe that he is running entirely or
even mostly on "green" energy.
Whole countries are getting close to it these days.
--
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 05:48:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On 2/13/2017 1:47 PM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming
scientists if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-
trust- glo
bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific
subjects, try citing a publication that actually, you
know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the
Daily Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!")
and the Mail Online website as a source. Formally
deemed too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia
was calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of
-clima te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-
climat e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they
should control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take
private jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates
while they scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for
the "little" people.
it is the people who live in mansions and own private jets
who are denying climate change because they are worried
any change might affect their lifestyle. It is the little
people who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I
make in half a year.
I hate to say this but, Al Gore has solar panels on his
mansion XXXXXXX mansions. He is disconnected from the
grids.
Is he? The building I work in has solar panels
on the roof. It's not disconnected from the
grid.
He's just a rich flake showing off his toys.
There are grid connected solar systems and offgrid solar
systems. Offgrid systems use batteries and/or hydrogen to
store energy for the bad days.
http://www.hydrogenhouseproject.org/
Lynn
Until I see results from an independent energy
audit of Al Gore's properties and toys, I am not
going to believe that he is running entirely or
even mostly on "green" energy.
Whole countries are getting close to it these days.
The US isn't one of them.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Lynn McGuire
2017-02-16 18:48:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by J. Clarke
Until I see results from an independent energy
audit of Al Gore's properties and toys, I am not
going to believe that he is running entirely or
even mostly on "green" energy.
Whole countries are getting close to it these days.
Name them.

Lynn
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 18:04:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by J. Clarke
Until I see results from an independent energy
audit of Al Gore's properties and toys, I am not
going to believe that he is running entirely or
even mostly on "green" energy.
Whole countries are getting close to it these days.
Name them.
One can quibble over the precise definition of "most" or "green," but
Costa Rica seems to have achieved any sane definition of either at
99% renewable in 2015. Uruguay is at 95%. A number of countries at
hovering in teh 50% range or above these days, and a number of
countries are seriously pursuing their stated goals of being fossil
fuel free within the next decade or two.

https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/follow-leader-how-11-
countries-are-shifting-renewable-energy

http://tinyurl.com/zr89okd
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Robert Bannister
2017-02-16 04:05:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily
Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
I hate to say this but, Al Gore has solar panels on his mansion XXXXXXX
mansions. He is disconnected from the grids.
Is he? The building I work in has solar panels
on the roof. It's not disconnected from the
grid.
He's just a rich flake showing off his toys.
There are grid connected solar systems and offgrid solar systems.
Offgrid systems use batteries and/or hydrogen to store energy for the
bad days.
http://www.hydrogenhouseproject.org/
I never realised our Solar System was connected to the grid. No wonder
we get no alien visitors.
--
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972
h***@gmail.com
2017-02-15 01:13:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
Maybe.
However he's paid additional for his electricity to be sourced from renewables.
He's spent a lot of money upgrading the house to increase energy efficiency (he's got it to the second best rating there is)
Including installing a lot of solar panels.

He hires private jets at times but pays for carbon offsets.
He had pre-ordered a Tesla of some sort and has a personal investment in the company.

So he's done a lot to cut down on his energy usage and reduce the impact of his energy usage.
Kevrob
2017-02-15 01:26:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily
Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
Maybe.
However he's paid additional for his electricity to be sourced from renewables.
He's spent a lot of money upgrading the house to increase energy efficiency (he's got it to the second best rating there is)
Including installing a lot of solar panels.
He hires private jets at times but pays for carbon offsets.
Buying carbon offsets is the "selling of indulgences" of the enviro set.
Great idea, if the offsets are real, but...

http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2010/0420/Buying-carbon-offsets-may-ease-eco-guilt-but-not-global-warming

Note the "rabid, right wing" source.
Post by h***@gmail.com
He had pre-ordered a Tesla of some sort and has a personal investment in the company.
So he's done a lot to cut down on his energy usage and reduce the impact of his energy usage.
If he didn't get scammed on his offsets, maybe.

Kevin R
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 01:19:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 2:40:26 PM UTC+11, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists
if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-tru
st- glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the
Daily Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!")
and the Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed
too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cl
ima te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cli
mat e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it
is the people who live in mansions and own private jets who
are denying climate change because they are worried any
change might affect their lifestyle. It is the little people
who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make
in half a year.
Maybe.
However he's paid additional for his electricity to be sourced
from renewables.
Electricity is fungible. Electrons don't have serial numbers. And
as long as renewable power is more expensive than natural gas (and
it is, so far), the only way he could actually reduce his carbon
footprint (instead of making other rich liberals richer) is to
reduce his power usage. Using more, because it comes from
renewables, has *zero* effect on base load generated with natural
gas.
He's spent a lot of money upgrading the house
to increase energy efficiency (he's got it to the second best
rating there is)
So getting the best rating was too much trouble? If a guy *that*
rich can't afford it, how can anybody else be expected to?

I guess it was just expecting too much that he might, you know,
move into a smaller mansion that requires less power to run.
Including installing a lot of solar panels.
We could go into the environmental effects of the manufacturing
process for solar panels, or, even better, the disposal of them
when they're worn out, but very little research has been done on
other. I suspect, though, that it's like "paper or plastic" with
recycled paper. Anybody who thinks plastic is worse has never been
near a paper mill.
He hires private jets at times but pays for carbon offsets.
So it's OK to pollute, so long as not polluting would be
inconvenient. And you're rich.
He had pre-ordered a Tesla of some sort and has a personal
investment in the company.
Ever seen what the recovery/recycled process for lithium ion
batters looks like? It's at least as ugly as paper recycling.
Probably more so.
So he's done a lot to cut down on his energy usage and reduce
the impact of his energy usage.
And he still lives in a mansion, and he still flys in private jets,
and he still lives a luxurious lifestyle, but it's OK if you
piously mouth the right propaganda, and are rich.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
h***@gmail.com
2017-02-15 02:35:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 2:40:26 PM UTC+11, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists
if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-tru
st- glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the
Daily Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!")
and the Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed
too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cl
ima te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cli
mat e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it
is the people who live in mansions and own private jets who
are denying climate change because they are worried any
change might affect their lifestyle. It is the little people
who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make
in half a year.
Maybe.
However he's paid additional for his electricity to be sourced from renewables.
Electricity is fungible. Electrons don't have serial numbers. And
as long as renewable power is more expensive than natural gas (and
it is, so far), the only way he could actually reduce his carbon
footprint (instead of making other rich liberals richer) is to
reduce his power usage. Using more, because it comes from
renewables, has *zero* effect on base load generated with natural
gas.
The green power loading means that bids from renewable suppliers get picked in preference.
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
He's spent a lot of money upgrading the house
to increase energy efficiency (he's got it to the second best
rating there is)
So getting the best rating was too much trouble? If a guy *that*
rich can't afford it, how can anybody else be expected to?
getting the best rating wasn't possible without demolishing the house and building a new one.
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
I guess it was just expecting too much that he might, you know,
move into a smaller mansion that requires less power to run.
which would leave the current mansion being used by somebody else at a similar power cost.
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Including installing a lot of solar panels.
We could go into the environmental effects of the manufacturing
process for solar panels, or, even better, the disposal of them
when they're worn out, but very little research has been done on
other. I suspect, though, that it's like "paper or plastic" with
recycled paper. Anybody who thinks plastic is worse has never been
near a paper mill.
So an attempt to reduce his carbon imprint is only acceptable if it has absolutely no possible adverse environmental effects?
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
He hires private jets at times but pays for carbon offsets.
So it's OK to pollute, so long as not polluting would be
inconvenient. And you're rich.
The idea of carbon offsets is that there is action taken to reduce carbon generator or remove carbon elsewhere (whether the offsets are actually effectively run is another matter)
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
He had pre-ordered a Tesla of some sort and has a personal
investment in the company.
Ever seen what the recovery/recycled process for lithium ion
batters looks like? It's at least as ugly as paper recycling.
Probably more so.
and yet it's hardly doing nothing about his carbon footprint...
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
So he's done a lot to cut down on his energy usage and reduce
the impact of his energy usage.
And he still lives in a mansion, and he still flys in private jets,
and he still lives a luxurious lifestyle, but it's OK if you
piously mouth the right propaganda, and are rich.
He's gone a long way past "piously mouth the right propaganda", he's taken a lot of action at significant personal cost to reduce the carbon impact of his lifestyle.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 02:22:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 1:19:37 PM UTC+11, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 2:40:26 PM UTC+11, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On 2/13/2017 1:47 PM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming
scientists if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-
tru st- glo
bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific
subjects, try citing a publication that actually, you
know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the
Daily Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!")
and the Mail Online website as a source. Formally
deemed too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia
was calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of
-cl ima te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-
cli mat e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they
should control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take
private jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates
while they scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for
the "little" people.
it is the people who live in mansions and own private jets
who are denying climate change because they are worried
any change might affect their lifestyle. It is the little
people who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I
make in half a year.
Maybe.
However he's paid additional for his electricity to be
sourced from renewables.
Electricity is fungible. Electrons don't have serial numbers.
And as long as renewable power is more expensive than natural
gas (and it is, so far), the only way he could actually reduce
his carbon footprint (instead of making other rich liberals
richer) is to reduce his power usage. Using more, because it
comes from renewables, has *zero* effect on base load generated
with natural gas.
The green power loading means that bids from renewable suppliers get picked in preference.
And using electricity is far better for the environment. Unless
you're rich.
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
He's spent a lot of money upgrading the house
to increase energy efficiency (he's got it to the second best
rating there is)
So getting the best rating was too much trouble? If a guy
*that* rich can't afford it, how can anybody else be expected
to?
getting the best rating wasn't possible without demolishing the
house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so? Without a
second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he? Because he cares more
about his comfort and convenience than he does about the
environment. Obviously. Why should anyone else care more than he
does?
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
I guess it was just expecting too much that he might, you know,
move into a smaller mansion that requires less power to run.
which would leave the current mansion being used by somebody
else at a similar power cost.
Only if he allowed it. It's not like he couldn't afford to leave it
empty, or tear it down and return it to its natural state. That
would actually make the world a little better, from the perspective
of the ideals he espouses. But he hasn't, and won't. He's too
important to live the the rules he wants to impose on others.
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Including installing a lot of solar panels.
We could go into the environmental effects of the manufacturing
process for solar panels, or, even better, the disposal of them
when they're worn out, but very little research has been done
on other. I suspect, though, that it's like "paper or plastic"
with recycled paper. Anybody who thinks plastic is worse has
never been near a paper mill.
So an attempt to reduce his carbon imprint is only acceptable if
it has absolutely no possible adverse environmental effects?
Nice straw man, there, butch.

Best I can tell, by the time we take into account the mess that
these things are to dispose of, they may well be *worse* for the
environment. But we don't really know, because nobody *wants* to
know. There's too many tax subsidized dollars at stake to risk
*that*!
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
He hires private jets at times but pays for carbon offsets.
So it's OK to pollute, so long as not polluting would be
inconvenient. And you're rich.
The idea of carbon offsets is that there is action taken to
reduce carbon generator or remove carbon elsewhere (whether the
offsets are actually effectively run is another matter)
And? How is that better than those efforts *and* Good Old Al taking
a train?
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
He had pre-ordered a Tesla of some sort and has a personal
investment in the company.
Ever seen what the recovery/recycled process for lithium ion
batters looks like? It's at least as ugly as paper recycling.
Probably more so.
and yet it's hardly doing nothing about his carbon footprint...
If it's worse than internal combustion engines, and so far, it
looks like it is, it's the exact opposute of reducing his carbon
footprint. But he's too important telling you and me how to live to
live by this own rules. Plus, of course, Tesla is subsidized by tax
dollars (*billions* of tax dollars), so who wouldn't want to invest
in *that*?
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
So he's done a lot to cut down on his energy usage and reduce
the impact of his energy usage.
And he still lives in a mansion, and he still flys in private
jets, and he still lives a luxurious lifestyle, but it's OK if
you piously mouth the right propaganda, and are rich.
He's gone a long way past "piously mouth the right propaganda",
he's taken a lot of action at significant personal cost to
reduce the carbon impact of his lifestyle.
No, he hasn't. He's spent a lot of money claiming to have, but
honestly, I think it comes from his PR budget, as he's made
millions more telling you and me how to live by rules he doesn't
live by. Al Gore is a raging hypocrite of the worst kind.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
David DeLaney
2017-02-15 06:55:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by h***@gmail.com
getting the best rating wasn't possible without demolishing the
house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so? Without a
second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he? Because he cares more
about his comfort and convenience than he does about the
environment. Obviously. Why should anyone else care more than he does?
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Terry. Plus you're painting it with an
overly broad and simplistic brush; perhaps he cares more about not being
subject to horrid inconveniences, like _not having a house to live in_, while
the mansion is demolished and rebuilt? "Piffle, he can stay in a motel." Well,
sure, he has the money to do so. But if you go around hemhorraging money at
every turn to adhere to perfect ideals of green-ness based on carping from
someone who is NOT himself doing anywhere near as much to be environmental
(I know this because you don't have the money to, and it would be a much bigger
disruption on YOUR life to go to the levels you seem to expect him to adhere to
for some reason), very soon you DON'T have the money to do it any more.

tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly could to be enironmental,
to the vast detriment of his actual life, so OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about
the environment, and lies like a rug when he says he does.".

Meh, you've done better than that.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
gatekeeper.vic.com/~dbd - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
J. Clarke
2017-02-15 10:28:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <cZOdnQ1grfD4Zj7FnZ2dnUU7-
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by h***@gmail.com
getting the best rating wasn't possible without demolishing the
house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so? Without a
second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he? Because he cares more
about his comfort and convenience than he does about the
environment. Obviously. Why should anyone else care more than he does?
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Terry. Plus you're painting it with an
overly broad and simplistic brush; perhaps he cares more about not being
subject to horrid inconveniences, like _not having a house to live in_, while
the mansion is demolished and rebuilt? "Piffle, he can stay in a motel." Well,
sure, he has the money to do so. But if you go around hemhorraging money at
every turn to adhere to perfect ideals of green-ness based on carping from
someone who is NOT himself doing anywhere near as much to be environmental
(I know this because you don't have the money to, and it would be a much bigger
disruption on YOUR life to go to the levels you seem to expect him to adhere to
for some reason), very soon you DON'T have the money to do it any more.
tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly could to be enironmental,
to the vast detriment of his actual life, so OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about
the environment, and lies like a rug when he says he does.".
Meh, you've done better than that.
Why does he have to have a mansion at all, let
alone two of them? As for "not having a house
to live in", while work is being done on one of
his mansions he could live in the other one.

And it would be news to the vast majority of us
who do not live in mansions that not living in a
mansion is vastly detrimental to one's actual
life. Is it vastily deterimental to _your_ life
that you don't live in a mansion, or are you one
of those rich flakes who has never not lived in
a mansion and so assume that the lives of the
"little people" must be unimaginably squalid?
Robert Carnegie
2017-02-16 02:37:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
In article <cZOdnQ1grfD4Zj7FnZ2dnUU7-
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by h***@gmail.com
getting the best rating wasn't possible without demolishing the
house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so? Without a
second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he? Because he cares more
about his comfort and convenience than he does about the
environment. Obviously. Why should anyone else care more than he does?
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Terry. Plus you're painting it with an
overly broad and simplistic brush; perhaps he cares more about not being
subject to horrid inconveniences, like _not having a house to live in_, while
the mansion is demolished and rebuilt? "Piffle, he can stay in a motel." Well,
sure, he has the money to do so. But if you go around hemhorraging money at
every turn to adhere to perfect ideals of green-ness based on carping from
someone who is NOT himself doing anywhere near as much to be environmental
(I know this because you don't have the money to, and it would be a much bigger
disruption on YOUR life to go to the levels you seem to expect him to adhere to
for some reason), very soon you DON'T have the money to do it any more.
tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly could to be enironmental,
to the vast detriment of his actual life, so OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about
the environment, and lies like a rug when he says he does.".
Meh, you've done better than that.
Why does he have to have a mansion at all, let
alone two of them? As for "not having a house
to live in", while work is being done on one of
his mansions he could live in the other one.
And it would be news to the vast majority of us
who do not live in mansions that not living in a
mansion is vastly detrimental to one's actual
life. Is it vastily deterimental to _your_ life
that you don't live in a mansion, or are you one
of those rich flakes who has never not lived in
a mansion and so assume that the lives of the
"little people" must be unimaginably squalid?
But why shouldn't he have mansions if he has the
money? And I presume they're all full of people
who work and live in.

If he had served as president then he'd get
the one better thing, a library. I don't know
if you get to live there, but I would.

Scientifically, a mansion is more efficient to
heat than a smaller property of similar
construction, because of the ratio of exterior
surface area to volume.

However, a mansion of antique construction can
be inconvenient in such terms.
J. Clarke
2017-02-16 03:04:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <bb28ef93-f366-433d-a551-299666449934
@googlegroups.com>, ***@excite.com
says...
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
In article <cZOdnQ1grfD4Zj7FnZ2dnUU7-
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by h***@gmail.com
getting the best rating wasn't possible without demolishing the
house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so? Without a
second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he? Because he cares more
about his comfort and convenience than he does about the
environment. Obviously. Why should anyone else care more than he does?
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Terry. Plus you're painting it with an
overly broad and simplistic brush; perhaps he cares more about not being
subject to horrid inconveniences, like _not having a house to live in_, while
the mansion is demolished and rebuilt? "Piffle, he can stay in a motel." Well,
sure, he has the money to do so. But if you go around hemhorraging money at
every turn to adhere to perfect ideals of green-ness based on carping from
someone who is NOT himself doing anywhere near as much to be environmental
(I know this because you don't have the money to, and it would be a much bigger
disruption on YOUR life to go to the levels you seem to expect him to adhere to
for some reason), very soon you DON'T have the money to do it any more.
tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly could to be enironmental,
to the vast detriment of his actual life, so OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about
the environment, and lies like a rug when he says he does.".
Meh, you've done better than that.
Why does he have to have a mansion at all, let
alone two of them? As for "not having a house
to live in", while work is being done on one of
his mansions he could live in the other one.
And it would be news to the vast majority of us
who do not live in mansions that not living in a
mansion is vastly detrimental to one's actual
life. Is it vastily deterimental to _your_ life
that you don't live in a mansion, or are you one
of those rich flakes who has never not lived in
a mansion and so assume that the lives of the
"little people" must be unimaginably squalid?
But why shouldn't he have mansions if he has the
money? And I presume they're all full of people
who work and live in.
Because he constantly preaches about "saving the
environment" while engaging in conspicuous
consumption himself.
Post by Robert Carnegie
If he had served as president then he'd get
the one better thing, a library. I don't know
if you get to live there, but I would.
He doesn't get a library, a library gets
constructed in his name.
Post by Robert Carnegie
Scientifically, a mansion is more efficient to
heat than a smaller property of similar
construction, because of the ratio of exterior
surface area to volume.
You are conflating a mansion, a huge single-
family dwelling, with an apartment block which
might be the same size but houses many families.
Post by Robert Carnegie
However, a mansion of antique construction can
be inconvenient in such terms.
Look, you want to continue to worship that
idiot, be my guest.
Robert Carnegie
2017-02-16 03:57:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
In article <bb28ef93-f366-433d-a551-299666449934
@googlegroups.com>, ***@excite.com
says...
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
In article <cZOdnQ1grfD4Zj7FnZ2dnUU7-
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by h***@gmail.com
getting the best rating wasn't possible without demolishing the
house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so? Without a
second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he? Because he cares more
about his comfort and convenience than he does about the
environment. Obviously. Why should anyone else care more than he does?
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Terry. Plus you're painting it with an
overly broad and simplistic brush; perhaps he cares more about not being
subject to horrid inconveniences, like _not having a house to live in_, while
the mansion is demolished and rebuilt? "Piffle, he can stay in a motel." Well,
sure, he has the money to do so. But if you go around hemhorraging money at
every turn to adhere to perfect ideals of green-ness based on carping from
someone who is NOT himself doing anywhere near as much to be environmental
(I know this because you don't have the money to, and it would be a much bigger
disruption on YOUR life to go to the levels you seem to expect him to adhere to
for some reason), very soon you DON'T have the money to do it any more.
tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly could to be enironmental,
to the vast detriment of his actual life, so OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about
the environment, and lies like a rug when he says he does.".
Meh, you've done better than that.
Why does he have to have a mansion at all, let
alone two of them? As for "not having a house
to live in", while work is being done on one of
his mansions he could live in the other one.
And it would be news to the vast majority of us
who do not live in mansions that not living in a
mansion is vastly detrimental to one's actual
life. Is it vastily deterimental to _your_ life
that you don't live in a mansion, or are you one
of those rich flakes who has never not lived in
a mansion and so assume that the lives of the
"little people" must be unimaginably squalid?
But why shouldn't he have mansions if he has the
money? And I presume they're all full of people
who work and live in.
Because he constantly preaches about "saving the
environment" while engaging in conspicuous
consumption himself.
Post by Robert Carnegie
If he had served as president then he'd get
the one better thing, a library. I don't know
if you get to live there, but I would.
He doesn't get a library, a library gets
constructed in his name.
Post by Robert Carnegie
Scientifically, a mansion is more efficient to
heat than a smaller property of similar
construction, because of the ratio of exterior
surface area to volume.
You are conflating a mansion, a huge single-
family dwelling, with an apartment block which
might be the same size but houses many families.
I expect he accommodates most of his sex acolytes
in there. So it'll be pretty full.

You know the story about his household power
consumption is from around ten years ago?
He probably has a cool-fusion reactor now.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 05:58:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
In article <bb28ef93-f366-433d-a551-299666449934
@googlegroups.com>, ***@excite.com
says...
On Wednesday, 15 February 2017 10:28:09 UTC, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
In article <cZOdnQ1grfD4Zj7FnZ2dnUU7-
On 2017-02-15, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by h***@gmail.com
getting the best rating wasn't possible without
demolishing the house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so?
Without a second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he?
Because he cares more about his comfort and convenience
than he does about the environment. Obviously. Why
should anyone else care more than he does?
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Terry. Plus you're
painting it with an overly broad and simplistic brush;
perhaps he cares more about not being subject to horrid
inconveniences, like _not having a house to live in_,
while the mansion is demolished and rebuilt? "Piffle, he
can stay in a motel." Well, sure, he has the money to do
so. But if you go around hemhorraging money at every turn
to adhere to perfect ideals of green-ness based on
carping from someone who is NOT himself doing anywhere
near as much to be environmental (I know this because you
don't have the money to, and it would be a much bigger
disruption on YOUR life to go to the levels you seem to
expect him to adhere to for some reason), very soon you
DON'T have the money to do it any more.
tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly
could to be enironmental, to the vast detriment of his
actual life, so OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about
the environment, and lies like a rug when he says he
does.".
Meh, you've done better than that.
Why does he have to have a mansion at all, let
alone two of them? As for "not having a house
to live in", while work is being done on one of
his mansions he could live in the other one.
And it would be news to the vast majority of us
who do not live in mansions that not living in a
mansion is vastly detrimental to one's actual
life. Is it vastily deterimental to _your_ life
that you don't live in a mansion, or are you one
of those rich flakes who has never not lived in
a mansion and so assume that the lives of the
"little people" must be unimaginably squalid?
But why shouldn't he have mansions if he has the
money? And I presume they're all full of people
who work and live in.
Because he constantly preaches about "saving the
environment" while engaging in conspicuous
consumption himself.
If he had served as president then he'd get
the one better thing, a library. I don't know
if you get to live there, but I would.
He doesn't get a library, a library gets
constructed in his name.
Scientifically, a mansion is more efficient to
heat than a smaller property of similar
construction, because of the ratio of exterior
surface area to volume.
You are conflating a mansion, a huge single-
family dwelling, with an apartment block which
might be the same size but houses many families.
I expect he accommodates most of his sex acolytes
in there. So it'll be pretty full.
I believe that you find his overweight ass attractive, but I
suspect women might feel differnetly.
Post by Robert Carnegie
You know the story about his household power
consumption is from around ten years ago?
He probably has a cool-fusion reactor now.
He's not *that* fat.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
h***@gmail.com
2017-02-16 03:06:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
In article <cZOdnQ1grfD4Zj7FnZ2dnUU7-
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by h***@gmail.com
getting the best rating wasn't possible without demolishing the
house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so? Without a
second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he? Because he cares more
about his comfort and convenience than he does about the
environment. Obviously. Why should anyone else care more than he does?
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Terry. Plus you're painting it with an
overly broad and simplistic brush; perhaps he cares more about not being
subject to horrid inconveniences, like _not having a house to live in_, while
the mansion is demolished and rebuilt? "Piffle, he can stay in a motel." Well,
sure, he has the money to do so. But if you go around hemhorraging money at
every turn to adhere to perfect ideals of green-ness based on carping from
someone who is NOT himself doing anywhere near as much to be environmental
(I know this because you don't have the money to, and it would be a much bigger
disruption on YOUR life to go to the levels you seem to expect him to adhere to
for some reason), very soon you DON'T have the money to do it any more.
tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly could to be enironmental,
to the vast detriment of his actual life, so OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about
the environment, and lies like a rug when he says he does.".
Meh, you've done better than that.
Why does he have to have a mansion at all, let
alone two of them? As for "not having a house
to live in", while work is being done on one of
his mansions he could live in the other one.
And it would be news to the vast majority of us
who do not live in mansions that not living in a
mansion is vastly detrimental to one's actual
life. Is it vastily deterimental to _your_ life
that you don't live in a mansion, or are you one
of those rich flakes who has never not lived in
a mansion and so assume that the lives of the
"little people" must be unimaginably squalid?
But why shouldn't he have mansions if he has the
money?
Because Terry and J.Clarke hate him and would rather play the man than look at the arguments.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 06:01:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 1:37:21 PM UTC+11, Robert
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
In article <cZOdnQ1grfD4Zj7FnZ2dnUU7-
On 2017-02-15, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by h***@gmail.com
getting the best rating wasn't possible without
demolishing the house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so?
Without a second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he?
Because he cares more about his comfort and convenience
than he does about the environment. Obviously. Why should
anyone else care more than he does?
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Terry. Plus you're
painting it with an overly broad and simplistic brush;
perhaps he cares more about not being subject to horrid
inconveniences, like _not having a house to live in_, while
the mansion is demolished and rebuilt? "Piffle, he can stay
in a motel." Well, sure, he has the money to do so. But if
you go around hemhorraging money at every turn to adhere to
perfect ideals of green-ness based on carping from someone
who is NOT himself doing anywhere near as much to be
environmental (I know this because you don't have the money
to, and it would be a much bigger disruption on YOUR life
to go to the levels you seem to expect him to adhere to
for some reason), very soon you DON'T have the money to do it any more.
tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly could
to be enironmental, to the vast detriment of his actual
life, so OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about the environment,
and lies like a rug when he says he does.".
Meh, you've done better than that.
Why does he have to have a mansion at all, let
alone two of them? As for "not having a house
to live in", while work is being done on one of
his mansions he could live in the other one.
And it would be news to the vast majority of us
who do not live in mansions that not living in a
mansion is vastly detrimental to one's actual
life. Is it vastily deterimental to _your_ life
that you don't live in a mansion, or are you one
of those rich flakes who has never not lived in
a mansion and so assume that the lives of the
"little people" must be unimaginably squalid?
But why shouldn't he have mansions if he has the
money?
Because Terry and J.Clarke hate him and would rather play the
man than look at the arguments.
Bobbie is the one expressing sexual attraction to Gore. Though you
seem awfully fond of him, too. The guy's a hypocrite, like all the
leadship in the "let's fuck people over so we can feel important"
end of the environmental movement.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 15:49:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 2017-02-15, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by h***@gmail.com
getting the best rating wasn't possible without demolishing
the house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so? Without a
second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he? Because he cares
more about his comfort and convenience than he does about the
environment. Obviously. Why should anyone else care more than
he does?
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Terry.
Nice dodge. Gore is worth an estimate $200 million. He can afford
to do things perfectly. He doesn't. Clearly, he's not *that*
worried about his carbon footprint.
Plus you're
painting it with an overly broad and simplistic brush;
That's my Al Gore impression.
perhaps
he cares more about not being subject to horrid inconveniences,
like _not having a house to live in_,
I suspect he can afford a room at Motel 6 - or a suite at the most
expensive hotel in the world - for the duration, with his $200
million.
while the mansion is
demolished and rebuilt?
You agree, then, that inconvenience is more important to him than
the environment. (Note the lack of a question mark. It's not a
question. It's a statement of fact.)
"Piffle, he can stay in a motel." Well,
sure, he has the money to do so. But if you go around
hemhorraging money at every turn to adhere to perfect ideals of
green-ness based on carping from someone who is NOT himself
doing anywhere near as much to be environmental (I know this
because you don't have the money to, and it would be a much
bigger disruption on YOUR life to go to the levels you seem to
expect him to adhere to for some reason), very soon you DON'T
have the money to do it any more.
He wants to be an international leader in the green movement. The
example he sets is convenience over the environment.
tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly could to
be enironmental, to the vast detriment of his actual life, so
OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about the environment, and lies like a
rug when he says he does.".
Meh, you've done better than that.
But why bother? You *agree* with me. Convenience is more important
to him than the environment, despite being able to easily afford to
do better.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
David DeLaney
2017-02-16 19:35:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
You agree, then, that inconvenience is more important to him than
the environment. (Note the lack of a question mark. It's not a
question. It's a statement of fact.)
Sure. But Terry - inconvenience is more important to YOU than the environment
is, or else we'd be hearing rather different stories about your job and your
activities from you.

Inconvenience is rather more important to almost _everyone in the world_ than
the environment, in fact. Some manage to make changes that they can live with,
or get forced to do so by local law, balancing the inconvenience of getting
fined or arrested against the inconvenience of separating recyclables, for
example.

You don't get to score points off someone by piffling that OBVIOUSY they DON'T
CARE about the environment ONE TINY WHIT or else they'd accept $inconvenience
and change their ways, no; _you_ don't do it, for one. No, you have to get them
to see some sort of equal or larger inconvenience if they don't change, that
affects them personally ... and scorn from you doesn't make the grade, I fear.

Yes, if Things Go On This Way there will be terrible-for-humans consequences.
But we're not at all good at either assessing that sort of risk - some even
prefer to call it "junk science" and deny there'll be ANY consequences - or at
balancing how much inconvenience one should personally suffer, daily and
forevermore, to help stop future-existential-inconvenience from happening.

tl;dr: Mock him if you want. But setting yourself up as all righteous and stuff
because YOU can see how HE'S living his life wrong wrong wrongitty wrong? It is
to laugh. And I mock you for it. MOCK!
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by David DeLaney
tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly could to
be enironmental, to the vast detriment of his actual life, so
OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about the environment, and lies like a
rug when he says he does.".
Meh, you've done better than that.
But why bother? You *agree* with me. Convenience is more important
to him than the environment, despite being able to easily afford to
do better.
I agree up to the second comma. I violently disagree that it means he doesn't
care at ALL about the environment, and violently disagree that he's lying or
hypocritical on the subject. Sorry.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
gatekeeper.vic.com/~dbd - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 18:49:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 2017-02-15, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
You agree, then, that inconvenience is more important to him
than the environment. (Note the lack of a question mark. It's
not a question. It's a statement of fact.)
Sure. But Terry - inconvenience is more important to YOU than
the environment is, or else we'd be hearing rather different
stories about your job and your activities from you.
I'm not the one telling people to shiver in the dark and go hungry.
Gore is the hypocrite.

And you've agreed.
Inconvenience is rather more important to almost _everyone in
the world_ than the environment, in fact. Some manage to make
changes that they can live with, or get forced to do so by local
law, balancing the inconvenience of getting fined or arrested
against the inconvenience of separating recyclables, for
example.
You don't get to score points off someone by piffling that
OBVIOUSY they DON'T CARE about the environment ONE TINY WHIT or
else they'd accept $inconvenience and change their ways, no;
Nice straw man. But since I didn't say that, you just look stupid.
And Gore is still a hypocrite. He demands sacrifices from others
he's unwilling to make himself. And you lap it up. It's like a
cult. Or maybe it *is* a cult.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
h***@gmail.com
2017-02-16 21:47:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On 2017-02-15, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
You agree, then, that inconvenience is more important to him
than the environment. (Note the lack of a question mark. It's
not a question. It's a statement of fact.)
Sure. But Terry - inconvenience is more important to YOU than
the environment is, or else we'd be hearing rather different
stories about your job and your activities from you.
I'm not the one telling people to shiver in the dark and go hungry.
Neither's he.
Quadibloc
2017-02-16 23:17:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
I'm not the one telling people to shiver in the dark and go hungry.
Neither's he.
While Al Gore is welcome to a private jet if he needs it as far as I'm
concerned, although he isn't _literally_ telling people to shiver in the dark
and go hungry, that is where the options he and his followers preferentially
present would lead for the little people. Which is why we're getting nowhere in
stopping global warming.

John Savard
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 22:20:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, February 17, 2017 at 6:49:19 AM UTC+11, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On 2017-02-15, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
You agree, then, that inconvenience is more important to him
than the environment. (Note the lack of a question mark.
It's not a question. It's a statement of fact.)
Sure. But Terry - inconvenience is more important to YOU than
the environment is, or else we'd be hearing rather different
stories about your job and your activities from you.
I'm not the one telling people to shiver in the dark and go
hungry.
Neither's he.
Heh. As long as he expects other people to make sacrifices while

Living in two mansions (and apparently, his electricity usage at
the Tennessee mansion went *up* 10% in the year after he was called
out on the amount he was using).

Flying around the world on chartered jets to promote reducing
carbon emissions.

Riding to those chartered jets in a limousine (while trying to ban
all cars from all cities worldwide) - instead of taking the Metro,
in DC, or even a cab.

Letting the distributor of his films pay for the carbon offsets for
his jet any time he can pretend he's promoting said films.

Promote his films while holding stock in a petroleum company (and
car companies).

Selling a business to oil billionaires, pocketing $100 million in
the proces (while criticizing television networks for being backed
by oil money).

Accepting money from the tobacco industry while comparing any who
dare critize his political agenda to "Big Tobacco" - and bragging
about his hands-on involvement in the family tobacco operation,
which he ran, (at which time, the family business was taking
subsidies from the govenrment in the form of price supports).

Promoting investment in "green" companies that he has a personal
stake in (which is, quite possibly, illegal for him to do, not
being licensed to do so).

Promoting the legal mandating of technology that he has a personal
investment in (see above).

Lamenting the lack of new, safer and cleaner nuclear reactor
designs - that he helped kill as Vice President.

Telling people to have fewer children, while having four of his
own. (Forbes questioned whether he was actually a mole for the
fossile fuel industry over that one.)

he is a hypocrite.

Even PETA thinks he's a hypocrite. After all, a vegan diet is a
*lot* more carbon neutral. And a lot less tasty. And Al didn't get
that rotund eating healthy vegan food! (That bastion of right-wing
politics DailyKOS called him out as a hypocrite, too).

Hell, his entire attitude can be summed up with his misquote of
Ghandi:

"You must become the change that you wish to see in the world."

No, Al, that's notwath Ghandi said. Ghandi didn't say *you*. He
said *we*. But you said exactly what you meant, did you, Al?
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Alan Baker
2017-02-15 17:29:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by h***@gmail.com
getting the best rating wasn't possible without demolishing the
house and building a new one.
And? Do you believe Al Gore couldn't afford to do so? Without a
second thought as to the cost. Why didn't he? Because he cares more
about his comfort and convenience than he does about the
environment. Obviously. Why should anyone else care more than he does?
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Terry. Plus you're painting it with an
overly broad and simplistic brush; perhaps he cares more about not being
subject to horrid inconveniences, like _not having a house to live in_, while
the mansion is demolished and rebuilt? "Piffle, he can stay in a motel." Well,
sure, he has the money to do so. But if you go around hemhorraging money at
every turn to adhere to perfect ideals of green-ness based on carping from
someone who is NOT himself doing anywhere near as much to be environmental
(I know this because you don't have the money to, and it would be a much bigger
disruption on YOUR life to go to the levels you seem to expect him to adhere to
for some reason), very soon you DON'T have the money to do it any more.
tl;dr: "He's not doing every single thing he possibly could to be enironmental,
to the vast detriment of his actual life, so OBVIOUSLY he doesn't care about
the environment, and lies like a rug when he says he does.".
Meh, you've done better than that.
Dave
Thank you!
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 17:05:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Alan Baker:

Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests,
during the protests over Trump's election?

*One* answer, not

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no
/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/n
o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/

like you've been doing.

We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick
with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more
prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters."
And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.

Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
interacting with the world around you any more.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Quadibloc
2017-02-16 02:06:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David DeLaney
Meh, you've done better than that.
I do agree with you that the criticisms of Al Gore and others for their lifestyles
are off-base.

But there is still a kernel of truth to it: reducing energy use drastically, the
preferred remedy to climate change, *will* throw people out of work, and thus
cause serious hardship to the working class. If that isn't addressed, doing
something effective about global warming will continue to be politically
impossible.

It's not what he does or doesn't do, it's what he expects the rest of us to do.

There is another solution.

We know how to split the atom. With breeder reactors, with reprocessing, we can
make our uranium supplies last long enough that fusion power will be achievable.
(That, or over several generations, the world population can decline to a level
that can live comfortably on wind, solar, and hydroelectric.)

Gasoline rationing like in World War II - so that people have to commute to work
on trolley buses, and save their cars for hauling groceries and other special
occasions - would address mobile use of fossil fuels enough to keep things
within limits.

John Savard
h***@gmail.com
2017-02-16 03:04:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Quadibloc
Post by David DeLaney
Meh, you've done better than that.
I do agree with you that the criticisms of Al Gore and others for their lifestyles
are off-base.
But there is still a kernel of truth to it: reducing energy use drastically, the
preferred remedy to climate change,
WTF is selling you that crap?

Are you listening to Lynne, J.Clarke and Terry and taking them seriously?


Nobody says it's the preferred remedy to climate change.
Some reductions in energy usage can be part of solutions
(modern cars are a lot more fuel efficient than they used to be, many modern lighting approaches are a lot more efficient, TVs are getting more energy efficient - although the larger size may mean they still use more than CRTs used to, it's not something I've looked at)

but generally what people are trying to achieve are ways of maintaining or advancing standard of living while having less carbon output.
Post by Quadibloc
*will* throw people out of work, and thus
cause serious hardship to the working class.
because there's no work involved in building new power plants, electric cars etc...
Quadibloc
2017-02-16 04:24:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@gmail.com
because there's no work involved in building new power plants, electric cars etc...
That's the "broken window fallacy" in economics, basically.

Oh, and by the way...

http://www.straight.com/news/868051/could-abrupt-climate-change-lead-human-extinction-within-10-20-years

Yes, the Georgia Straight is - or was - a hippie newspaper from Vancouver. So I
can't claim it's the most credible source.

But if we do make the planet so warm that plants make more carbon dioxide than
they consume...

While it won't necessarily mean human extinction in 10 years from now, when that
happens, the days of life on this planet - except for the microbes that live off
the energy from hydrogen sulphide from volcanic vents - will be numbered.

This is not something we want to let happen.

John Savard
Greg Goss
2017-02-16 13:06:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Quadibloc
But if we do make the planet so warm that plants make more carbon dioxide than
they consume...
While it won't necessarily mean human extinction in 10 years from now, when that
happens, the days of life on this planet - except for the microbes that live off
the energy from hydrogen sulphide from volcanic vents - will be numbered.
The "Great Dying" of a quarter billion years ago seems to have been a
CO2 driven event. And the ecosystem recovered. We lost a lot of
species, but life, even land-based life, survived.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
Alan Baker
2017-02-16 20:19:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Greg Goss
Post by Quadibloc
But if we do make the planet so warm that plants make more carbon dioxide than
they consume...
While it won't necessarily mean human extinction in 10 years from now, when that
happens, the days of life on this planet - except for the microbes that live off
the energy from hydrogen sulphide from volcanic vents - will be numbered.
The "Great Dying" of a quarter billion years ago seems to have been a
CO2 driven event. And the ecosystem recovered. We lost a lot of
species, but life, even land-based life, survived.
Which is going to be of very little interest to the human race...

...if the human race is among the species who loses.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 20:16:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Alan Baker:

Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests,
during the protests over Trump's election?

*One* answer, not

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no
/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/n
o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/

like you've been doing.

We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick
with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more
prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters."
And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.

Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
interacting with the world around you any more.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Quadibloc
2017-02-16 04:29:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
But there is still a kernel of truth to it: reducing energy use drastically, the
preferred remedy to climate change,
WTF is selling you that crap?
Are you listening to Lynne, J.Clarke and Terry and taking them seriously?
Just about *every* news article about global warming I see in the mainstream media talks about how we're going to solve the problem through...

greater energy efficiency

reducing waste

conserving energy

switching to things like wind and solar power

Stuff like nuclear power, or more hydroelectric development, real solutions that
are proven by experience, and which would be politically acceptable to the
masses whose chief concern is jobs - but unpalatable to those who are very
concerned about radioactive waste, nuclear proliferation, losing wildlife
habitat, displacing indigenous people, all legitimate concerns, but not as
important to most people as keeping the economy functioning properly... hardly
*ever* get mentioned as options.

It has nothing to do with the more conservative posters here; it's what I see
every day in the news media, and what I think anyone else who looks would see as
well.

John Savard
h***@gmail.com
2017-02-16 04:49:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Quadibloc
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
But there is still a kernel of truth to it: reducing energy use drastically, the
preferred remedy to climate change,
WTF is selling you that crap?
Are you listening to Lynne, J.Clarke and Terry and taking them seriously?
Just about *every* news article about global warming I see in the mainstream media talks about how we're going to solve the problem through...
greater energy efficiency
reducing waste
conserving energy
switching to things like wind and solar power
None of this equates to "reducing energy use drastically"
Much of it is also sensible on many other grounds.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 05:54:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Quadibloc
It has nothing to do with the more conservative posters here;
it's what I see every day in the news media, and what I think
anyone else who looks would see as well.
The news media is a busines. It is not the business of selling news.
It is the business of selling advertising. They are literally
incapapble of providing accurate information on _any_ subject.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Greg Goss
2017-02-16 06:44:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@gmail.com
TVs are getting more energy efficient - although the larger size may
mean they still use more than CRTs used to, it's not something I've
looked at)
The peak was a decade back. I have roommates and provided several TVs
in rooms and the living room. Three of these are older plasma beasts,
and plasma burns a lot of power The 54 inch TV in my bedroom says 450
watts, though I don't know if that's a peak power or the sustained
power. I can hear the fan sometimes, and walking by it to the ensuite
in the summer, you can feel the heat generated. The one in the Living
room is well over 300 watts.

LCDs burn much less power. LCDs with LED backlighting instead of
fluorescent burn even less. Direct-LED (MOLED) screens burn even less
than that. I expect that a direct-LED sixty inch TV would burn less
power than a 28 inch TV from thirty years ago.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
Lynn McGuire
2017-02-16 18:54:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Greg Goss
Post by h***@gmail.com
TVs are getting more energy efficient - although the larger size may
mean they still use more than CRTs used to, it's not something I've
looked at)
The peak was a decade back. I have roommates and provided several TVs
in rooms and the living room. Three of these are older plasma beasts,
and plasma burns a lot of power The 54 inch TV in my bedroom says 450
watts, though I don't know if that's a peak power or the sustained
power. I can hear the fan sometimes, and walking by it to the ensuite
in the summer, you can feel the heat generated. The one in the Living
room is well over 300 watts.
LCDs burn much less power. LCDs with LED backlighting instead of
fluorescent burn even less. Direct-LED (MOLED) screens burn even less
than that. I expect that a direct-LED sixty inch TV would burn less
power than a 28 inch TV from thirty years ago.
My 55 inch LG UHD LED tv uses only 35 watts.
https://www.amazon.com/LG-Electronics-55UF6450-55-Inch-Ultra/dp/B010Q8ESMG/

Lynn
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 05:51:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@gmail.com
but generally what people are trying to achieve are ways of
maintaining or advancing standard of living while having less
carbon output.
Not a universal truth, unless you don't consider the leadership of
the environmental movement to be people.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Juho Julkunen
2017-02-16 13:49:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by David DeLaney
Meh, you've done better than that.
I do agree with you that the criticisms of Al Gore and others for their lifestyles
are off-base.
But there is still a kernel of truth to it: reducing energy use drastically, the
preferred remedy to climate change,
WTF is selling you that crap?
Nobody says it's the preferred remedy to climate change.
It is actually the preferred solution of many so called
environmentalists, who see global warming as an excuse to promote an
idealized simpler lifestyle. They are, at least, a loud voice.

Most of them don't dwell on the dramatically smaller population such a
lifestyle could support, at least publically.
--
Juho Julkunen
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 16:13:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Juho Julkunen
Most of them don't dwell on the dramatically smaller population
such a lifestyle could support, at least publically.
And some do.

http://www.vhemt.org/
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Kevrob
2017-02-16 17:26:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Juho Julkunen
Most of them don't dwell on the dramatically smaller population
such a lifestyle could support, at least publically.
And some do.
http://www.vhemt.org/
Presaged in the 1970s by the Woodchuck
Festival of Peace, Love & Death




Kevin R

"The Grateful Dead are dead....and they're grateful."
Dimensional Traveler
2017-02-16 17:54:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Juho Julkunen
Most of them don't dwell on the dramatically smaller population
such a lifestyle could support, at least publically.
And some do.
http://www.vhemt.org/
"Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we become
less dense."

Apparently some of them are unaware of alternative meanings of "dense".
--
Running the rec.arts.TV Channels Watched Survey.
Winter 2016 survey began Dec 01 and will end Feb 28
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 17:05:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 12:13:34 PM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Juho Julkunen
Most of them don't dwell on the dramatically smaller
population such a lifestyle could support, at least
publically.
And some do.
http://www.vhemt.org/
"Crowded conditions and resource shortages will improve as we
become less dense."
Apparently some of them are unaware of alternative meanings of
"dense".
While you are probably correct, given the history of technological
improvements outpacing demand from population growth, I'd say the
statement is true either way.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Peter Trei
2017-02-15 14:11:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 2:40:26 PM UTC+11, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists
if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-tru
st- glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the
Daily Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!")
and the Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed
too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cl
ima te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cli
mat e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it
is the people who live in mansions and own private jets who
are denying climate change because they are worried any
change might affect their lifestyle. It is the little people
who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make
in half a year.
Maybe.
However he's paid additional for his electricity to be sourced from renewables.
Electricity is fungible. Electrons don't have serial numbers. And
as long as renewable power is more expensive than natural gas (and
it is, so far), the only way he could actually reduce his carbon
footprint (instead of making other rich liberals richer) is to
reduce his power usage. Using more, because it comes from
renewables, has *zero* effect on base load generated with natural
gas.
That's not actually true. As you say, electricity is fungible, and in many
places you can designate which supplier gets your dollars. You can select a
'green' one.

http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.shtml

pt
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 15:50:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 9:19:37 PM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 2:40:26 PM UTC+11, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On 2/13/2017 1:47 PM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming
scientists if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-
tru st- glo
bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific
subjects, try citing a publication that actually, you
know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the
Daily Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!")
and the Mail Online website as a source. Formally
deemed too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia
was calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of
-cl ima te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-
cli mat e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they
should control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take
private jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates
while they scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for
the "little" people.
it is the people who live in mansions and own private jets
who are denying climate change because they are worried
any change might affect their lifestyle. It is the little
people who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I
make in half a year.
Maybe.
However he's paid additional for his electricity to be
sourced from renewables.
Electricity is fungible. Electrons don't have serial numbers.
And as long as renewable power is more expensive than natural
gas (and it is, so far), the only way he could actually reduce
his carbon footprint (instead of making other rich liberals
richer) is to reduce his power usage. Using more, because it
comes from renewables, has *zero* effect on base load generated
with natural gas.
That's not actually true. As you say, electricity is fungible,
and in many places you can designate which supplier gets your
dollars. You can select a 'green' one.
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.shtml
But when you are using more than the average person does - and he
does, with his two mansions - cutting back a little bit has zero
effect on the base load. The same amount of pollution is generated
by the gas fired power plants no matter what token measures you
take.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Peter Trei
2017-02-15 17:03:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 9:19:37 PM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 2:40:26 PM UTC+11, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Robert Bannister
On 2/13/2017 1:47 PM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming
scientists if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-
tru st- glo
bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific
subjects, try citing a publication that actually, you
know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the
Daily Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!")
and the Mail Online website as a source. Formally
deemed too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia
was calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of
-cl ima te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-
cli mat e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they
should control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take
private jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates
while they scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for
the "little" people.
it is the people who live in mansions and own private jets
who are denying climate change because they are worried
any change might affect their lifestyle. It is the little
people who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I
make in half a year.
Maybe.
However he's paid additional for his electricity to be
sourced from renewables.
Electricity is fungible. Electrons don't have serial numbers.
And as long as renewable power is more expensive than natural
gas (and it is, so far), the only way he could actually reduce
his carbon footprint (instead of making other rich liberals
richer) is to reduce his power usage. Using more, because it
comes from renewables, has *zero* effect on base load generated
with natural gas.
That's not actually true. As you say, electricity is fungible,
and in many places you can designate which supplier gets your
dollars. You can select a 'green' one.
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.shtml
But when you are using more than the average person does - and he
does, with his two mansions - cutting back a little bit has zero
effect on the base load. The same amount of pollution is generated
by the gas fired power plants no matter what token measures you
take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload sources include
hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.

pt
Scott Lurndal
2017-02-15 18:07:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Gutless Umbrella Carr=
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.shtml
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does - and he=20
does, with his two mansions - cutting back a little bit has zero=20
effect on the base load. The same amount of pollution is generated=20
by the gas fired power plants no matter what token measures you=20
take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload sources include
hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas plants in california.

see, zum beispiel, http://www.calpine.com/metcalf-energy-center
Lynn McGuire
2017-02-15 20:11:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Gutless Umbrella Carr=
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.shtml
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does - and he=20
does, with his two mansions - cutting back a little bit has zero=20
effect on the base load. The same amount of pollution is generated=20
by the gas fired power plants no matter what token measures you=20
take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload sources include
hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas plants in california.
see, zum beispiel, http://www.calpine.com/metcalf-energy-center
And in Texas.

Lynn
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 19:36:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.s
html
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does - and
he=20 does, with his two mansions - cutting back a little bit
has zero=20 effect on the base load. The same amount of
pollution is generated=20 by the gas fired power plants no
matter what token measures you=20 take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload
sources include hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas plants in
california.
90% of our electricity is generated with natural gas, last time I
checked.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Lynn McGuire
2017-02-15 21:08:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.s
html
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does - and
he=20 does, with his two mansions - cutting back a little bit
has zero=20 effect on the base load. The same amount of
pollution is generated=20 by the gas fired power plants no
matter what token measures you=20 take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload
sources include hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas plants in california.
90% of our electricity is generated with natural gas, last time I
checked.
Is that just the electricity generated in California ? I thought that 30 to 40% of the electricity generated in California was hydro.

I doubt that the imported electricity to California is even 50% natural gas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Verde_Nuclear_Generating_Station

Lynn
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 22:25:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
0 =20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.
s html
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does -
and he=20 does, with his two mansions - cutting back a
little bit has zero=20 effect on the base load. The same
amount of pollution is generated=20 by the gas fired power
plants no matter what token measures you=20 take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload
sources include hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas plants in california.
90% of our electricity is generated with natural gas, last time
I checked.
Is that just the electricity generated in California ? I
thought that 30 to 40% of the electricity generated in
California was hydro.
We don't generate that much of what we use in-state. LA is known in
the industry as "the sump."
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Peter Trei
2017-02-15 21:20:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.s
html
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does - and
he=20 does, with his two mansions - cutting back a little bit
has zero=20 effect on the base load. The same amount of
pollution is generated=20 by the gas fired power plants no
matter what token measures you=20 take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload
sources include hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas plants in california.
90% of our electricity is generated with natural gas, last time I
checked.
My point remains: In areas which offer a choice of electrical suppliers,
consumers can select a 'green' provider, and as a result there will be
more 'green' and less 'non-green' electricity put into the grid.

http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.shtml

pt
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 22:26:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 3:36:18 PM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
20
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_powe
r.s html
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does -
and he=20 does, with his two mansions - cutting back a
little bit has zero=20 effect on the base load. The same
amount of pollution is generated=20 by the gas fired power
plants no matter what token measures you=20 take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload
sources include hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas plants
in california.
90% of our electricity is generated with natural gas, last time
I checked.
My point remains: In areas which offer a choice of electrical
suppliers, consumers can select a 'green' provider, and as a
result there will be more 'green' and less 'non-green'
electricity put into the grid.
And my point remains: Al Gore has two mansions, both of which use
far more electricity per capita than the average home (that's per
capita, mind you), and while he could easily afford to remedy that,
he doesn't. Because convenience (or maybe just money, and not that
much to him) means more to him than the environment.

It's clearly the hypocricy you idolize.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Peter Trei
2017-02-16 14:29:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 3:36:18 PM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
20
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_powe
r.s html
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does -
and he=20 does, with his two mansions - cutting back a
little bit has zero=20 effect on the base load. The same
amount of pollution is generated=20 by the gas fired power
plants no matter what token measures you=20 take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload
sources include hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas plants in california.
90% of our electricity is generated with natural gas, last time
I checked.
My point remains: In areas which offer a choice of electrical
suppliers, consumers can select a 'green' provider, and as a
result there will be more 'green' and less 'non-green'
electricity put into the grid.
And my point remains: Al Gore has two mansions, both of which use
far more electricity per capita than the average home (that's per
capita, mind you), and while he could easily afford to remedy that,
he doesn't. Because convenience (or maybe just money, and not that
much to him) means more to him than the environment.
It's clearly the hypocricy you idolize.
If he pays for his electricity to be generated in ways which aren't
producing greenhouse gases, where lies his hypocrisy?

Flying by private jet, etc, on the other hand...

pt
Peter Trei
2017-02-16 14:40:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 3:36:18 PM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
20
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_powe
r.s html
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does -
and he=20 does, with his two mansions - cutting back a
little bit has zero=20 effect on the base load. The same
amount of pollution is generated=20 by the gas fired power
plants no matter what token measures you=20 take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload
sources include hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas plants in california.
90% of our electricity is generated with natural gas, last time
I checked.
My point remains: In areas which offer a choice of electrical
suppliers, consumers can select a 'green' provider, and as a
result there will be more 'green' and less 'non-green'
electricity put into the grid.
And my point remains: Al Gore has two mansions, both of which use
far more electricity per capita than the average home (that's per
capita, mind you), and while he could easily afford to remedy that,
he doesn't. Because convenience (or maybe just money, and not that
much to him) means more to him than the environment.
It's clearly the hypocricy you idolize.
If he pays for his electricity to be generated in ways which aren't
producing greenhouse gases, where lies his hypocrisy?
Flying by private jet, etc, on the other hand...
pt
Found this.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gore-defends-mansions-power-consumption/

Yes, Al Gore purchases 'green electricity'. At least, he was doing so in 2007.

There's claims that he does other things of offset his carbon footprint,
but those not as well explained.

pt
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 16:19:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 9:29:12 AM UTC-5, Peter Trei
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 6:26:49 PM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 3:36:18 PM UTC-5,
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5,
com:= 20
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying
_powe r.s html
=20
But when you are using more than the average person
does - and he=20 does, with his two mansions - cutting
back a little bit has zero=20 effect on the base load.
The same amount of pollution is generated=20 by the
gas fired power plants no matter what token measures
you=20 take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green
baseload sources include hydro and (for me, at least)
nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas
plants in california.
90% of our electricity is generated with natural gas, last
time I checked.
My point remains: In areas which offer a choice of
electrical suppliers, consumers can select a 'green'
provider, and as a result there will be more 'green' and
less 'non-green' electricity put into the grid.
And my point remains: Al Gore has two mansions, both of which
use far more electricity per capita than the average home
(that's per capita, mind you), and while he could easily
afford to remedy that, he doesn't. Because convenience (or
maybe just money, and not that much to him) means more to him
than the environment.
It's clearly the hypocricy you idolize.
If he pays for his electricity to be generated in ways which
aren't producing greenhouse gases, where lies his hypocrisy?
Flying by private jet, etc, on the other hand...
pt
Found this.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gore-defends-mansions-power-consumpti
on/
Yes, Al Gore purchases 'green electricity'. At least, he was
doing so in 2007.
Which still doesn't change the amount of power he's using for his
multiple mansions.
There's claims that he does other things of offset his carbon
footprint,
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why it's better for Al
Gore to "offset" his carbon footprint by getting someone *else* to
make sacrifices is better than Gore *and* someone else making
sacrifices.
but those not as well explained.
And they won't be.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 16:17:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 6:26:49 PM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 3:36:18 PM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5,
m:= 20
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_p
owe r.s html
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does
- and he=20 does, with his two mansions - cutting back a
little bit has zero=20 effect on the base load. The same
amount of pollution is generated=20 by the gas fired
power plants no matter what token measures you=20 take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload
sources include hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas
plants in california.
90% of our electricity is generated with natural gas, last
time I checked.
My point remains: In areas which offer a choice of electrical
suppliers, consumers can select a 'green' provider, and as a
result there will be more 'green' and less 'non-green'
electricity put into the grid.
And my point remains: Al Gore has two mansions, both of which
use far more electricity per capita than the average home
(that's per capita, mind you), and while he could easily afford
to remedy that, he doesn't. Because convenience (or maybe just
money, and not that much to him) means more to him than the
environment.
It's clearly the hypocricy you idolize.
If he pays for his electricity to be generated in ways which
aren't producing greenhouse gases, where lies his hypocrisy?
If producing greenhouse gasses were the only possible form of
environmental damage, you might have a point.

But we've already touched on the productions of solar panels, and
the disposal of worn out solar panels. And wind turbines kill
hundreds of thousands of birds a year. Lithium ion batteris can't
be thrown away, because of the environmental damage they do in
landfills. Etc.

All this has been mentioned before, and you pretend it hasn't. And
you will, again, I suppose.
Flying by private jet, etc, on the other hand...
And not one, but two mansions, and all the other conspicuous
consumption lifestyle choices.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Alan Baker
2017-02-16 09:29:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Scott Lurndal
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Gutless
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
=20
Post by Peter Trei
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/buying/buying_power.s
html
=20
But when you are using more than the average person does - and
he=20 does, with his two mansions - cutting back a little bit
has zero=20 effect on the base load. The same amount of
pollution is generated=20 by the gas fired power plants no
matter what token measures you=20 take.
Huh? Gas is used for peaking, not baseload. Green baseload
sources include hydro and (for me, at least) nukes.=20
Not necessarily. There are a number of baseload gas plants in california.
90% of our electricity is generated with natural gas, last time I
checked.
Wow.

Not even close.

<https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3>
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 16:13:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Alan Baker:

Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests,
during the protests over Trump's election?

*One* answer, not

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no
/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/n
o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/

like you've been doing.

We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick
with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more
prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters."
And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.

Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
interacting with the world around you any more.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Robert Bannister
2017-02-15 03:10:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
I've heard of him, but he's hardly important any more. Donald probably
spent even more before he moved into the White House, but didn't/doesn't
pay any taxes.
--
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 02:25:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists
if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trus
t- glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cli
ma te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clim
at e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change
might affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are
worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make
in half a year.
I've heard of him, but he's hardly important any more.
Not for lack of trying. He's taken a lot less seriously than he
used to be, because people have largely figured out what a
hypocrite he is.
Post by Robert Bannister
Donald
probably spent even more before he moved into the White House,
but didn't/doesn't pay any taxes.
Trump isn't telling me I should live in a grass hut and chase
dinner with a sharp stick, because anything more advanced than that
is evil. In fact, he seems to want *everyone* to be as rich as he
is, and live as luxuriously as he does. In other words, he may well
be a lot of bad things, but unlike Al Gore, he's not a hypocrite.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Alan Baker
2017-02-15 17:28:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists
if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trus
t- glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cli
ma te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clim
at e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change
might affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are
worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make
in half a year.
I've heard of him, but he's hardly important any more.
Not for lack of trying. He's taken a lot less seriously than he
used to be, because people have largely figured out what a
hypocrite he is.
Post by Robert Bannister
Donald
probably spent even more before he moved into the White House,
but didn't/doesn't pay any taxes.
Trump isn't telling me I should live in a grass hut and chase
dinner with a sharp stick, because anything more advanced than that
is evil. In fact, he seems to want *everyone* to be as rich as he
is, and live as luxuriously as he does. In other words, he may well
be a lot of bad things, but unlike Al Gore, he's not a hypocrite.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL/!
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 17:05:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On 2/13/2017 1:47 PM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists
if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-tr
us t- glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific
subjects, try citing a publication that actually, you
know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the
Daily Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!")
and the Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed
too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-c
li ma te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cl
im at e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi • 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it
is the people who live in mansions and own private jets who
are denying climate change because they are worried any
change might affect their lifestyle. It is the little people
who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I
make in half a year.
I've heard of him, but he's hardly important any more.
Not for lack of trying. He's taken a lot less seriously than he
used to be, because people have largely figured out what a
hypocrite he is.
Post by Robert Bannister
Donald
probably spent even more before he moved into the White House,
but didn't/doesn't pay any taxes.
Trump isn't telling me I should live in a grass hut and chase
dinner with a sharp stick, because anything more advanced than
that is evil. In fact, he seems to want *everyone* to be as
rich as he is, and live as luxuriously as he does. In other
words, he may well be a lot of bad things, but unlike Al Gore,
he's not a hypocrite.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL/!
Alan Baker:

Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests,
during the protests over Trump's election?

*One* answer, not

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/y
es/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/n
o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/

like you've been doing.

We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick
with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more
prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters."
And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.

Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
interacting with the world around you any more.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-16 00:54:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Alan Baker <***@telus.net> wrote in news:o8233v$9fu$***@news.datemas.de:

We're back to the original question, Alan:

Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests,
during the protests over Trump's election?

*One* answer, not

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no
/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/n
o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/

like you've been doing.

We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick
with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more
prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters."
And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.

Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
interacting with the world around you any more.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
J. Clarke
2017-02-15 10:22:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-
glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows
something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the
Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed too
unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-clima
te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it is
the people who live in mansions and own private jets who are
denying climate change because they are worried any change might
affect their lifestyle. It is the little people who are worried
about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I make in
half a year.
I've heard of him, but he's hardly important any more. Donald probably
spent even more before he moved into the White House, but didn't/doesn't
pay any taxes.
Donald doesn't ostentatiously preach about how
we all need to freeze to death in the dark to
save the planet while at the same time consuming
more resources than any ten "ordinary" people.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-15 15:51:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
On 2/13/2017 1:47 PM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists
if they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-tr
ust- glo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The
Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific
subjects, try citing a publication that actually, you
know, knows something about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the
Daily Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!")
and the Mail Online website as a source. Formally deemed
too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-c
lima te- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Except the 1,442 posted comments on that webpage.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-cl
imat e-scientists
robert corbett Don Lorenzi ? 2 days ago
It is even worse than that .....those who think they should
control us ride around in giant SUVs or limos, take private
jets, and live in mansions with walls and gates while they
scheme for climate rules and extra taxes for the "little"
people.
I'm afraid Mr Corbett has got completely arse backwards: it
is the people who live in mansions and own private jets who
are denying climate change because they are worried any
change might affect their lifestyle. It is the little people
who are worried about the floods and droughts.
Al Gore spends more on electricity for his mansion than I
make in half a year.
I've heard of him, but he's hardly important any more. Donald
probably spent even more before he moved into the White House,
but didn't/doesn't pay any taxes.
Donald doesn't ostentatiously preach about how
we all need to freeze to death in the dark to
save the planet while at the same time consuming
more resources than any ten "ordinary" people.
Which is to say, he's an asshole, but not a hypocrite. Like Al
Gore.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Robert Bannister
2017-02-14 02:37:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-glo
bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily
Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try
citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something
about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily Mail
("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail Online
website as a source. Formally deemed too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was calling
someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climate-
scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
Well, I noted a bit he wrote near the end:

You just witnessed a little trick I learned from President Trump. I gave
myself two ways to win and no way to lose. You should try it. It works
every time.
--
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2017-02-14 02:39:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Bannister
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:09:24 -0500, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if
they keep twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-g
lo bal-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you
actually want to say something about scientific subjects, try
citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something
about science.
Last week Wikipedia stopped taking citations with the Daily
Mail ("The paper that proudly supported Hitler!") and the Mail
Online website as a source. Formally deemed too unreliable.
I actually laughed out loud when I read that Wikipedia was
calling someone else unrelaiable.
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
It's particularly noted as flat out lying about climate
science. Lynn.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157072093411/about-the-97-of-climat
e- scientists
I doubt anybody will respond to it seriously.
You just witnessed a little trick I learned from President
Trump. I gave myself two ways to win and no way to lose. You
should try it. It works every time.
As predicted, no serious response.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Lynn McGuire
2017-02-13 18:29:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something about science.
Because AGW is junk science. And all of the noted individuals in the AGW crowd are getting government funding so thusly, biased.
The planet may be warming, in fact, the planet is probably warming. But the warming is natural and not caused by humans.

The Congressional hearings on the 2015 global temperature restatement will be starting in March. One whistle-blower is in the public
eye and several others are reputedly going to testify. I predict that someone will be going to jail. Misuse of government funds and
falsification of government documents are felonies. I also predict that many scientists and administrators will be taking the fifth.
I would not want to have Jeff Sessions's DOJ coming after me in this matter, these are serious items.

Lynn
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
2017-02-14 01:05:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If
you actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something about science.
Because AGW is junk science.
If you keep posting references to the Daily Mail and Rose, you're
telling me that AGW is the gold standard for absolute truth, Lynn.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com
h***@gmail.com
2017-02-14 01:33:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If you actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something about science.
Because AGW is junk science.
Repeated assertions don't make it so.
What part of AGW is junk science?
Post by Lynn McGuire
And all of the noted individuals in the AGW crowd are getting government funding so thusly, biased.
while people you've quoted as against AGW have been caught in discussions about taking money from organizations and hiding the sources or take money from fossil fuel companies and lobby groups...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The planet may be warming, in fact, the planet is probably warming. But the warming is natural and not caused by humans.
Where's your evidence for this assertion?
"It'll cost me" isn't evidence

Facts
- we've been burning fossil fuels which have been underground for millions of years
- this releases CO2 which has not been in circulation for millions of years
- CO2 is a greenhouse gas
- CO2 is at a much elevated level, the highest it's been in over 400,000 years

why do you think that this can't possibly be driving climate change?
what other source for climate change would you suggest?
Post by Lynn McGuire
The Congressional hearings on the 2015 global temperature restatement will be starting in March. One whistle-blower is in the public
eye and several others are reputedly going to testify.
a) You're taking a tabloid pretty seriously
b) Even if his claims are correct it seems to be a case of an administration error rather than anything which disproves the paper -> reviews of the paper and independent resource match the findings of the paper.
Post by Lynn McGuire
I predict that someone will be going to jail.
Would that be the person you've previously quoted approvingly who fell into a sting where he was discussing how to hide money paid to him?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Misuse of government funds and
falsification of government documents are felonies. I also predict that many scientists and administrators will be taking the fifth.
I would not want to have Jeff Sessions's DOJ coming after me in this matter, these are serious items.
Yawn.
Alan Baker
2017-02-14 07:52:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Why do you keep posting stuff from things like The Daily Mail? If
you actually want to say something about scientific subjects,
try citing a publication that actually, you know, knows something about science.
Because AGW is junk science. And all of the noted individuals in the
AGW crowd are getting government funding so thusly, biased. The planet
may be warming, in fact, the planet is probably warming. But the
warming is natural and not caused by humans.
How do you KNOW it's "junk science", Lynn?

What research into the question have you done?
Post by Lynn McGuire
The Congressional hearings on the 2015 global temperature restatement
will be starting in March. One whistle-blower is in the public eye and
several others are reputedly going to testify. I predict that someone
will be going to jail. Misuse of government funds and falsification of
government documents are felonies. I also predict that many scientists
and administrators will be taking the fifth. I would not want to have
Jeff Sessions's DOJ coming after me in this matter, these are serious
items.
Lynn
Carl Fink
2017-02-12 23:05:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Cryptoengineer
2017-02-13 01:27:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warm
ing-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
Stop right there.

The Daily Mail is not a credible source of information. It has
degraded into near Weekly World News levels of nonsense. Even
Wikipedia rejects it as a source.

You don't support your position by referencing it.

pt
Juho Julkunen
2017-02-13 03:24:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
It was only at this point that I looked at the 'From' field, thinking
to myself: "This is Lynn again, isn't it."
--
Juho Julkunen
Quadibloc
2017-02-13 17:24:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Juho Julkunen
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
It was only at this point that I looked at the 'From' field, thinking
to myself: "This is Lynn again, isn't it."
David Rose. I remember him...



John Savard
m***@sky.com
2017-02-13 06:22:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
"They were duped – and so were we. That was the conclusion of last
week’s damning revelation that world leaders signed the Paris Agreement
on climate change under the sway of unverified and questionable data."
"A landmark scientific paper –the one that caused a sensation by
claiming there has been NO slowdown in global warming since 2000 – was
critically flawed. And thanks to the bravery of a whistleblower, we now
know that for a fact."
Lynn
Any climate sceptics in the Trump administration now have an opportunity to launch an inquiry into what they proclaim is a conspiracy of misrepresentation fed by political motives and grant-seeking. If they are correct, this is massively important, causing the US and other governments to get any number of important decisions wrong. It must therefore be tackled as a matter of urgency.

They could impress me by holding a proper inquiry and following whatever facts turn up, wherever they lead. They could severely damage Trump if they are seen to hold a show trial. I think Trump will lose big if it is shown that ideological bias or sheer inexperience leads him into incompetence - the obvious precedent is the FEMA response to Katrina. At the moment it seems most likely that they will carefully do nothing whatsoever, in which case the climate sceptics lose by default, as far as I am concerned.
Lynn McGuire
2017-02-13 18:18:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
"They were duped – and so were we. That was the conclusion of last
week’s damning revelation that world leaders signed the Paris Agreement
on climate change under the sway of unverified and questionable data."
"A landmark scientific paper –the one that caused a sensation by
claiming there has been NO slowdown in global warming since 2000 – was
critically flawed. And thanks to the bravery of a whistleblower, we now
know that for a fact."
Lynn
Any climate sceptics in the Trump administration now have an opportunity to launch an inquiry into what they proclaim is a conspiracy of misrepresentation fed by political motives and grant-seeking. If they are correct, this is massively important, causing the US and other governments to get any number of important decisions wrong. It must therefore be tackled as a matter of urgency.
They could impress me by holding a proper inquiry and following whatever facts turn up, wherever they lead. They could severely damage Trump if they are seen to hold a show trial. I think Trump will lose big if it is shown that ideological bias or sheer inexperience leads him into incompetence - the obvious precedent is the FEMA response to Katrina. At the moment it seems most likely that they will carefully do nothing whatsoever, in which case the climate sceptics lose by default, as far as I am concerned.
Trump has announced that he is going to withdraw the USA from the IPCC and the one climate change treaty that the USA has
constitutionally signed onto. The other agreements are toilet paper. The money flow will stop.

Lynn
Scott Lurndal
2017-02-14 14:22:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
Even wikipedia has finally banned references to the daily mail
due to lack of truthiness.
Kevrob
2017-02-14 14:30:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Lynn McGuire
"DAVID ROSE: How can we trust global warming scientists if they keep
twisting the truth"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
Even wikipedia has finally banned references to the daily mail
due to lack of truthiness.
Jaimie Vandenbergh posted that yesterday in this thread.

I wouldn't depend on the Mail as a main news source.

Kevin R
Loading...