ZORRAM

_________________
I HAVE ABS OF STEEL
--
CAN YOU SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OK FOR WORK

@MEGA_RJ_MICAL

Lemmy on rich People

Software Failure - Guru Meditation

Last edited by QBit on 05-Jun-2022 at 07:20 AM.

@DiscreetFX

Quote:

With gas prices soon going to over $6 per gallon in the USA some type of solution is needed.

I know you guys over there aren't used to seeing these kinds of fuel prices, but much of the world pays that and more, and they are still out there driving.

You re-prioritize and adjust. It becomes a little like counting calories. You stop driving everywhere with wasteful abandon and plan ahead a bit more.

The way I see it, you've had it too cheap for too long. If you start treating it like a valuable commodity, then you start seeing your attitudes shift toward new dynamics, like shorter supply chains, more diverse residential and commercial neighborhoods redesigned to accommodate walking and cycling, a rise in popularity of sub 2-litre vehicles geared toward economy and the decline of gas guzzlers.

_________________
All the way, with 68k

@agami

Quote:

If you start treating it like a valuable commodity, then you start seeing your attitudes shift toward new dynamics, like shorter supply chains, more diverse residential and commercial neighborhoods redesigned to accommodate walking and cycling, a rise in popularity of sub 2-litre vehicles geared toward economy and the decline of gas guzzlers.

OMG - that's so Un-American. It will never work. Just take the politicians out of the equation and the market will adjust.

Here in CA, even though we have the largest usage of EV, the gasoline is way above $6 Per Gallon and we continue to be plagued by rolling black-outs.

bhabbott Quote:

Because it is? Show me any time within the last billion years that CO2 levels have risen that fast against the natural trend.

There has likely been some significant natural CO2 level fluctuations within the last million years, perhaps more severe CO2 level changes than in recent times.



bhabbott Quote:

Now sure, I know a billion years isn't that much. I mean, the Earth has existed for over 4 billion years. Who cares what happens over a blip of time that only spans few human generations? Well some of us do. Some of us don't think it's fair to continue pouring filth into the atmosphere (and everywhere else) with gay abandon, for future generations to clean up.

Burning is a natural process and cycle that took place on Earth even when and where there were no humans. CO2 is released from burning old vegetation and new vegetation is produced from it. Was the polluter the fire, the lightning bolt that hit the tree that started the fire or God who sent the lighting bolt that hit the tree that started the fire?

bhabbott Quote:

The horror! Yet you just did it yourself.

The graph started at 1 which is practically zero. Google pics of historic CO2 levels and many of the graphs do not start anywhere close to zero and effectively zoom in and exaggerate the data. Few of the graphs go back very far and are often conveniently cut off right after large drops and significant fluctuations in historic CO2 levels. I showed the big picture which goes back to these high and fluctuating CO2 levels which are not even that old. The Earth has likely experienced natural climate change much more severe than any industrial induced climate change and some of it likely occurred during semi-modern times. CO2 is only responsible for a portion of the "big worry" of global warming which has already been addressed by reductions in CFCs and methane. Let's not forget that some emissions reduce temperatures offsetting CO2 emissions as well.



More animal mass extinction events, including the dinosaur killing event, have likely been a result of global cooling rather than global warming and occurred with significantly higher CO2 concentrations in the air. The 1991 Mount Pinatubo volcano eruption in the Philippines had a global impact of lowering temperatures by 0.5 °C (0.9 °F) in the years 1991–1993.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Pinatubo Quote:

The effects of the 1991 eruption were felt worldwide. It ejected roughly 10 billion tonnes (1.1×1010 short tons) or 10 km3 (2.4 cu mi) of magma, and 20 million tonnes (22 million short tons) of SO2, bringing vast quantities of minerals and toxic metals to the surface environment. It ejected more particulate into the stratosphere than any eruption since Krakatoa in 1883. Over the following months, the aerosols formed a global layer of sulfuric acid haze. Global temperatures dropped by about 0.5 °C (0.9 °F) in the years 1991–1993, and ozone depletion temporarily saw a substantial increase.

Even in modern history there has been significant global natural climate change. Even acid rain can be natural which has largely been reduced from industrial outputs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_rain Quote:

Some governments have made efforts since the 1970s to reduce the release of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide into the atmosphere. These efforts have had positive results due to the widespread research on acid rain starting in the 1960s and the publicized information on its harmful effects. The main source of sulfur and nitrogen compounds that result in acid rain are anthropogenic, but nitrogen oxides can also be produced naturally by lightning strikes and sulphur dioxide is produced by volcanic eruptions.

The worst pollution has been cleaned up but leftist extremists will not stop until all capitalism is destroyed. If wanting to reduce global warming, maybe we should tolerate acidic rain, particulates and aerosols which lower temperatures but then is global cooling, global warming or leftist extremists the bigger threat?

bhabbott Quote:

I agree. But it's even more expensive to do nothing. Few are demanding extreme measures, and few are listening to them. But reducing emissions to less extreme levels is not so hard. In many cases renewables are actually cheaper. Coal is losing favor because coal power stations are more expensive to run than wind and solar. And if the environmental cost of fossil fuels was included in the price, well...

Renewables have become competitive in places although they are often subsidized into competitiveness. Multiple levels of subsidization often hide how much they are subsidized. Hydrocarbons have the reverse treatment where taxes and regulations make them more and more noncompetitive. Large coal plants with modern scrubbers are fairly efficient and not horrible for the environment but the problem is that the coal is going to 3rd world countries and China which is leveraging the competitive advantage of cheaper energy with reduced environmental controls. Coal does have the disadvantage of difficult to extract variable impurities. Environmental costs are difficult to calculate and extremists would like to make the cost of CO2 so high as to eliminate hydrocarbons completely. Leftists do want to destroy capitalism after all.

bhabbott Quote:

Oil, gas and coal are depleting resources. It's getting harder and more hazardous to extract. The Saudis are now pumping seawater into their wells to get the oil out. They know it won't last forever, which is why they are installing 200GW of solar power. They aren't extremists, just realists. BP is spending big on a new oil and gas field in the North Sea, but it won't come online until 2025. Meanwhile they are also building a lot of off-shore wind and solar in a 'transition' to renewables. Other oil companies are looking at making similar moves, so when when the oil runs out (or becomes noncompetitive) they will still have an income.

The peak oil theory has not been accurate so far although it can be achieved by artificially increasing the cost of using hydrocarbons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil Quote:

Numerous predictions of the timing of peak oil have been made over the past century before being falsified by subsequent growth in the rate of petroleum extraction. M. King Hubbert is often credited with introducing the notion in a 1956 paper which presented a formal theory and predicted U.S. extraction to peak between 1965 and 1971. Hubbert's original predictions for world peak oil production proved premature and, as of 2021, forecasts of the year of peak oil range from 2019 to 2040. These predictions are dependent on future economic trends, technological developments, and efforts by societies and governments to moderate climate change.

Fluid injection into wells is nothing new and more of a sign of local oil depletion than global oil depletion. There was a theory of limited commodity supplies which some leaders bought into. One of them was Adolf Hitler who invaded other countries for oil and agriculture lands for food. These theories proved ridiculous as even moderate oil supplies were found in Germany after WWII which could have supplied Germany's industrialization and ag technology improved so that food supply was no problem either. We may have food shortages today but that is more likely due to reductions in hydrocarbon use reducing fertilizer production and industrial productivity. Some of the problems are from supply line disruptions due to Covid and the Ukraine war but there were commodity shortages and increased prices of oil, fertilizer and other commodities before the war started. I believe this commodity super cycle is substantially driven by an extremist move to renewables and the resulting inflation will make many people poorer. I do not believe there is a global shortage of commodities in general.

BP has become a relatively smaller energy producing business and less profitable since transitioning to renewable energy. There last quarter results were better than expected so there may be hope at least when oil prices are high. The UK oil windfall tax should further reduce oil production and profitability resulting in even higher oil prices but that is what leftist extremists want. I do have a relatively small stock position in BP and I am considering selling calls which may result in me selling the position. It has not been a big money maker for me.

bhabbott Quote:

And in many cases it is. Warren Buffet runs an investment group that tries to make money off the markets. As you say, Energy and tech are not his strong points. He has never invested in Tesla, which is an unfortunate oversight because Tesla shares have increased in value by over 10 times in the last 2 years.

Buffett is normally very conservative often buying more conservative and mature undervalued businesses with cash flow to pay dividends. Tesla is a growth stock and likely still overvalued at this point despite the recent pull back in big tech. Musk is pushing boundaries and technology with Tesla but it is still less than obvious that Tesla will be the big beneficiary and the stock is priced like it will be.

Last edited by matthey on 05-Jun-2022 at 11:10 PM.
Last edited by matthey on 05-Jun-2022 at 11:02 PM.

A hybrid would be a good way to go, My Apt has no outlets in the carport so all electric wont fly.. Something like rear drive gas and front electric. Add power with gas, cruise on electric, add HP & Charge while you drive on a grade or passing.

I'm a bit older now and on my last car I think, 2002 Subaru WRX, bought new, no problems and economical. 180,000 mi and still like new. Passes California smog test every year, keep it serviced...

Chris

@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote: [...] Leftists do want to destroy capitalism after all.

There's no doubt that you're 100% trumpist.

In fact, you also recall me his older (maybe original ) Italian's version, Silvio Berlusconi, which said (no joke!) that he was anointed by christ to fight the communists...

https://youtu.be/P1EEjUD7vRw

_________________
Sent from my Quantum Computer.

cdimauro Quote:

There's no doubt that you're 100% trumpist. In fact, you also recall me his older (maybe original ) Italian's version, Silvio Berlusconi, which said (no joke!) that he was anointed by christ to fight the communists...

I never voted for Trump and I have been critical of Trump at times. We both are politically right of center so agree on many issues but he is populist and I am libertarian. I describe him as the best and worst at everything. My favorite choices for President in 2016 were Rand Paul and Ben Carson. Trump as a populist choice was a push back and sometimes overreaction to the extremism of the Democrat party which has moved further and further to the left. Democrats were giving immigrants socialist handouts and ignoring immigration laws. The great economist Milton Friedman was for even illegal immigration but his logic was that immigrants would pay taxes and receive no socialist benefits. It was inconceivable to him that governments would give socialist hand outs to new and illegal immigrants but the Democrats had moved that far to the left to gain votes from immigrants.

Milton Friedman Speaks: What is America? (B1225) - Full Video
https://youtu.be/hoFdVuqrMZw?t=57

Another example was the Democrats funding a one world government including the UN, NATO, WTO, etc. while running up U.S. debt. Democrats are anti-business and anti-law enforcement with radical environmental regulations as the U.S. voluntarily gives up its economic might to lead the way back to the horse and buggy. Democrats supported anarchist defund the police movements. Democrat wokeness knows no bounds and they have no problem forcing people to pay for their socialist and immoral issues that governments should have nothing to do with. It's a shame that populists have come to power as political pushbacks in several nations but extremist leftists are destroying nations economically.

Karl Marx advocated violence against capitalists in the Communist Manifesto.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf Quote:

In depicting the most general phases of the development of the proletariat, we traced the more or less veiled civil war, raging within existing society, up to the point where that war breaks out into open revolution, and where the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie lays the foundation for the sway of the proletariat. * By bourgeoisie is meant the class of modern capitalists, owners of the means of social production and employers of wage labour. By proletariat, the class of modern wage labourers who, having no means of production of their own, are reduced to selling their labour power in order to live. [Engels, 1888 English edition]

Socialists do not necessarily openly advocate violence but often advocate for the destruction of capitalism by non-violent means. It is clear to me that the extremist Democrats here at least want to destroy the U.S. economically either through this desire, economic ignorance or just voting the treasury as socialist handouts.

Alexander Fraser Tytler Quote:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.

I believe the current super commodity cycle and inflation are partially due to global national debt. Commodities are holding value while fiat currencies backed by nations with huge debts are losing value. A strong currency is a headwind for global trade and socialist nations had no problem spending there way to the bottom. Democrats here often support Keynesian economics which advocates for spending at every opportunity to stimulate the economy and is aligned perfectly with socialist handouts.

Edit example: The left, including Joe Biden, has viciously attacked Elon Musk despite Tesla being environmentally friendly. He is a rich capitalist and a moderate with a libertarian streak who is moving to the right because of Democrat intolerance and hate. The right accepts Elon and welcomes competition. There have been favorable articles about him on Fox news. The left tried to impeach Trump before he took office and then twice while he was in office looking for any little opportunity to impeach no matter how petty. He is also a rich capitalist. The Democrats are hypocrites as many of the top Democrat politicians are among the richest and some like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden have claimed to be poor (the commonly used victim game of Democrat propaganda).

Last edited by matthey on 07-Jun-2022 at 01:45 AM.
Last edited by matthey on 07-Jun-2022 at 01:43 AM.

I got a solution to help global warming caused by CO2 without changing radically our lives till we become lab rats of our governments. Plant forests! Why aren't they promoting that in a way that works (the attempts so far are laughable) ? Maybe (just maybe) it's because that solution wouldn't give them so much power and control...
In fact, I suspect many of the fires that have been happening are caused on purpose and them blamed on climate change. I know people here (Algarve, south of Portugal) that have seen with their own eyes a few years back, a plain dropping fire bombs, and it's not the only story I've heard. I've witnessed myself more than 10 years ago a fire starting in various places at the same time near the highway. The stories are many, some fires start during the night... The media rarely talks about it in those terms.
But then again, I'm a bit paranoid, so nothing to see here I guess :)

@Karlos
Nice seing you here dude :) Are you still on A.Org ? I remember posting there (not that I post much here either) like in another life, back when Matt and Piru were posting there... Good old times. I didn't like the new form the website took and got bored...

Last edited by Jose on 07-Jun-2022 at 12:14 AM.

_________________

José

@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote: cdimauro Quote: There's no doubt that you're 100% trumpist. In fact, you also recall me his older (maybe original ) Italian's version, Silvio Berlusconi, which said (no joke!) that he was anointed by christ to fight the communists... I never voted for Trump and I have been critical of Trump at times. We both are politically right of center so agree on many issues but he is populist and I am libertarian. I describe him as the best and worst at everything. My favorite choices for President in 2016 were Rand Paul and Ben Carson.

Are you stating that in 2016 you haven't voted for Trump's election?
Quote:

Trump as a populist choice was a push back and sometimes overreaction to the extremism of the Democrat party which has moved further and further to the left. Democrats were giving immigrants socialist handouts and ignoring immigration laws. The great economist Milton Friedman was for even illegal immigration but his logic was that immigrants would pay taxes and receive no socialist benefits.

That's correct: immigrants contribute to the Country's economy because they pay taxes (and receive less than citizens).

What's the problem with that? I don't see it.

If you pair it with the fact that usually they do jobs which regular citizens don't... then you should consider them as a good resource for the Country.

We had the same discussions and problematic in Italy, with the ultra-populist Salvini which is systematically obstructing immigration while "ignoring" the above.
Quote:

It was inconceivable to him that governments would give socialist hand outs to new and illegal immigrants but the Democrats had moved that far to the left to gain votes from immigrants. Milton Friedman Speaks: What is America? (B1225) - Full Video https://youtu.be/hoFdVuqrMZw?t=57

How could illegal immigrants vote and, therefore, contribute to the Democrats success?
Quote:

Another example was the Democrats funding a one world government including the UN, NATO, WTO, etc. while running up U.S. debt.

The US debt increased primarily because of you funded and fed your army lobbies by "exporting" your democracy worldwide.

Don't go over the world making wars and financing wars, and you'll see that your debt doesn't increase so much.
Quote:

Democrats are anti-business and anti-law enforcement with radical environmental regulations as the U.S. voluntarily gives up its economic might to lead the way back to the horse and buggy.

Do you know that US is the bigger consumer of the entire world resources PLUS it's the biggest polluter of the world?
Quote:

Democrats supported anarchist defund the police movements.

Hey, please bring some respect here: I'm an anarchist.

And police on US... well... needs to use its funds to teach agents how do avoid killing people so often.
Quote:

Democrat wokeness knows no bounds and they have no problem forcing people to pay for their socialist and immoral issues that governments should have nothing to do with.

This is your opinion which I respectfully reject: the society should put the human beings at the center, and not he money.

For this reason, Countries should provide and fund a social state which helps citizens living.

I means that it should guarantee at least the minimum for them to survive: the right for being healthy, the right for getting food, the right for getting an house, the right for getting energy for driving the house, the right to have an employment to make all of this happening.

I abhor the idea of a government where MONEY is at the center, and even letting people die if they have no resources for their survival.
Quote:

It's a shame that populists have come to power as political pushbacks in several nations but extremist leftists are destroying nations economically.

Could you please tell me where it's happening? Have you take a lot at Europe? I mean, especially the center & north Europe, where Countries are very "social". I don't think so, and I reveal you a secret: those nations are still healthy and nobody destroyed them.
Quote:

Karl Marx advocated violence against capitalists in the Communist Manifesto. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf Quote: In depicting the most general phases of the development of the proletariat, we traced the more or less veiled civil war, raging within existing society, up to the point where that war breaks out into open revolution, and where the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie lays the foundation for the sway of the proletariat. * By bourgeoisie is meant the class of modern capitalists, owners of the means of social production and employers of wage labour. By proletariat, the class of modern wage labourers who, having no means of production of their own, are reduced to selling their labour power in order to live. [Engels, 1888 English edition]

Please, read it carefully: "UP to the point".

It means that a certain point in time the situation of the proletariat could be in a so bad status that a revolution happens to make them changing it.
Quote:

Socialists do not necessarily openly advocate violence but often advocate for the destruction of capitalism by non-violent means. It is clear to me that the extremist Democrats here at least want to destroy the U.S. economically either through this desire, economic ignorance or just voting the treasury as socialist handouts. Alexander Fraser Tytler Quote: A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.

See above: socialism hasn't destroyed many Countries in Europe, where the social state is strong. Could you please tell me how this was / is possible?

On the other side, Capitalism is clearly destroying many people lives.

Do you think money deserve more importance than lives?
Quote:

I believe the current super commodity cycle and inflation are partially due to global national debt. Commodities are holding value while fiat currencies backed by nations with huge debts are losing value.

Again, see above: don't "export" your democracy and you'll see that your debt will not increase so much. This is the real root cause of your issues.
Quote:

A strong currency is a headwind for global trade and socialist nations had no problem spending there way to the bottom. Democrats here often support Keynesian economics which advocates for spending at every opportunity to stimulate the economy and is aligned perfectly with socialist handouts.

Exactly and correct: sometimes governments should spend to help the social welfare, starting a positive spiral which, at the end, will bring benefits to all sociaty.

Keynes was right (ehm... not at the right side; fortunately).
Quote:

Edit example: The left, including Joe Biden, has viciously attacked Elon Musk despite Tesla being environmentally friendly. He is a rich capitalist and a moderate with a libertarian streak who is moving to the right because of Democrat intolerance and hate. The right accepts Elon and welcomes competition. There have been favorable articles about him on Fox news.

Musk is a clear example of a people which, once became rich, he went to right side to defend his riches.

BTW, Tesla is NOT environmentally friendly. In fact, it recently LEFT the top 500 of green companies...
Quote:

The left tried to impeach Trump before he took office and then twice while he was in office looking for any little opportunity to impeach no matter how petty.

The impeachments were good actions. Unfortunately republicans wanted to protected their hero...
Quote:

He is also a rich capitalist.

That's why he's at the right side: to protect his capitals...
Quote:

The Democrats are hypocrites as many of the top Democrat politicians are among the richest and some like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden have claimed to be poor (the commonly used victim game of Democrat propaganda).

Well, fortunately some rich people aren't disgustingly capitalists. They think that the society should be different and it should put the human beings at the center (instead of money).

I hope that more of them should become wise and embrace/support a more social state / welfare.

@CO2 etc.

CO2 has a warming climate effect. That is a fact.
But it also a fact that sea water has the biggest effect on atmospheric CO2.
Small seat water temperature change cause a release of large amounts of CO2.

It could be that human effect is insignifficant or it could be the one that triggetred the global change and warming.

It is also a fact that fossil fuels will run out and/or become so expensive that no-one can afford to use them at some point in the future.

It is a smart move to go for fossil-free energy ASAP. Those who are pioneering them will get largest amount of future business that will run using fossil-free technology.

Because of oil company lobbying car companies have stayed on fossil fuels.
Because coal is cheap, it has been the mainstream energy source.

Those countries that are smart should be building nuclear plants like grazy to enable cheap and clean energy.

It will take a few years before normal people can afford electric family cars.

For example we changed our diesel car to a methane+gasoline variant.
There was no fully-electric alternative that would have fitted to our family needs and budget.
Methane+gasoline car cost roughly the same as a diesel car.

And gas+electric hybrids are idiotic (IMHO), because they carry the weight and complexity of both fossila car and a electric car. I will never buy that kind of sh*t.

When we drive on bio-methane we cause 0 emissions and cost per mile/km has dropped to half (vs last year prices) and to 1/3 when compared to current prices.
Driving experience is the same as with a gazoline car, refuelling is far nicer experience, even though methane stations are rare.

People should nag to their goverment to help fast forward bio-methane production globally,
until battery technology is ready for normal people to store energy on cars and on solar-powered homes.

In longer run, I see no true alternative for electric cars.
They will become mainstream very soon and a lot of legacy car firms will go bankcrupt because of their own stupidity/inaction.

LNG might be solution for ships and heavy trucks, until big leap in battery energy density is reached.

(silly companies mess around with hydrogen cars, absolutely futile, because of the low efficiency in production etc)
**********

I wish we had a OS/system in the mainstream that would be blindingly fast even when running on low performance cores of modern big-little CPUs.
(Amiga?)

Last edited by KimmoK on 07-Jun-2022 at 01:16 PM.
Last edited by KimmoK on 07-Jun-2022 at 01:16 PM.
Last edited by KimmoK on 07-Jun-2022 at 01:13 PM.

_________________
- KimmoK
// For freedom, for honor, for AMIGA
//
// Thing that I should find more time for: CC64 - 64bit Community Computer?

Here’s some leftist propaganda made by those long haired “chela artesanal” sipping hippies at JPL, adjusted to our apparent average level, for ease of understanding.

https://climatekids.nasa.gov

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

He decided to buy twitter after all.

@Nonefornow

Quote:

Nonefornow wrote: He decided to buy twitter after all.

OK, here's what we do.

We first convince Trump that Satya Nadella, Bill Gates, Tim Apple, and the "socialist agenda" LInux are all spying on the ReTrumplicans, and the only way to get around it is to use the AmigaOS 4 computers.

We get him to email his zombie army of "patriots" for money to produce a large batch of freedom X5000 and A1222 boards (is there a reason that that it's not X1222?), or he will have no chance of winning the presidency in 2024.

Then just as A-EonKit is about to deliver the boards, they ban Trump from the Amiga platform.

Then Elon swoops in with an offer to buy everything Amiga for $100M. Chump change in the scheme of things.

Then he attempts to back out of the deal because he says he was mislead on the readiness of the platform to be used by SpaceX for Mars missions.

Then the Amiga community jumps on all the social networks and does its thing.

Several news cycles later, Elon decides to go through with the Amiga et al acquisition.


Unless someone else has a better idea, which is not "enjoy what you have"?

_________________
All the way, with 68k

@agami

Smart idea.

Cos if there is one thing this community it is in desperate need it is more total nutjobs.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Kronos

Correction, it's "very well heeled" nutjobs

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@matthey

Quote:

There has likely been some significant natural CO2 level fluctuations within the last million years, perhaps more severe CO2 level changes than in recent times

Lol, them point you make, leave out the fact that mass extinction events happened. The planet can go though huge changes and the planet will be always here (until super nova) so we dont have to worry aboit the planet, we do have to worry about us. When crops fail or get taken out by climate events thats when we have to worry.

Quote:

Renewables have become competitive in places although they are often subsidized into competitiveness

I kinda agree i want all subsidize remove on both renewable and fossil fuels make it a open fair market.

https://www.rechargenews.com/transition/fossil-fuels-given-3-1-trillion-subsidies-at-staggering-twenty-times-level-of-renewables/2-1-868319

Quote:

BP has become a relatively smaller energy producing business and less profitable since transitioning to renewable energy. There last quarter results were better than expected so there may be hope at least when oil prices are high.

This is the biggest problem in the world. Its not about susinable business, things that can improve health, national security, and good working pratics and ethics, it about who growing the most and make the most money.

_________________
AmigaNG, YouTube, LeaveReality Studio

Nonefornow Quote:

He decided to buy twitter after all.

My understanding is that Elon had trouble backing out of the deal even though he had transparency concerns about the Twitter management and number of users.

amigang Quote:

Lol, them point you make, leave out the fact that mass extinction events happened. The planet can go though huge changes and the planet will be always here (until super nova) so we dont have to worry about the planet, we do have to worry about us. When crops fail or get taken out by climate events thats when we have to worry.

I talked about the mass extinction events most of which were caused by global cooling. Even relatively recently, global cooling was actually a bigger concern to food supplies and forced human migrations.

Farmers To Raiders: The Mysterious Origins Of The Vikings | Wings Of A Dragon | Timeline
Quote:

https://youtu.be/hOsTfZ8gTM8?t=1916 His promise of a green land was not a lie. A thousand years ago, the climate was much warmer than it is today.

The vikings likely abandoned Greenland because of global cooling. They had good nutrition when they arrived but were eating their dogs and had malnutrition before they left. Poor land management may have been a contributing factor but there was a mini-ice age. The video is worth rewinding and watching the whole thing.

amigang Quote:

I kinda agree i want all subsidize remove on both renewable and fossil fuels make it a open fair market. https://www.rechargenews.com/transition/fossil-fuels-given-3-1-trillion-subsidies-at-staggering-twenty-times-level-of-renewables/2-1-868319

That is a very liberal news source and research agency. Out of 3.1 trillion in subsidies, 2.3 trillion is because governments didn't charge for "air pollution" at some arbitrary cost. It's questionable whether to count cost of air pollution as a subsidy and cost estimates vary widely as they are based on models.

https://news.stanford.edu/2021/06/07/professors-explain-social-cost-carbon/ Quote:

There is considerable uncertainty about the magnitude of the social cost of carbon. Under the Obama administration, a task force consisting of 12 U.S. government agencies was put together to employ several climate-economy models and come up with an estimate of the social cost of carbon. They came up with a range – actually, a very wide range. They couldn’t rule out the possibility of a near zero social cost or a cost of around $100 a ton. But these probabilities were very small.

There are huge benefits of CO2 including increased agricultural yields, increased forest growth and decreased heating costs from the warming effect. Some scientists believe there is human caused climate change but that it is not nearly as big of concern as the hysteria spreading extremists claim.

Carbon Dioxide is Making The World Greener (w/ Freeman Dyson, Institute for Advanced Studies)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQHhDxRuTkI

Freeman Dyson is actually more neutral on human climate change but that is more than enough to get attacked by the liberals. My position is pretty much the same as that of Freeman and he only confirmed what I already believed including the effect of sun activity on the climate. He doesn't believe climate models are accurate because of the complexity (they haven't been) and believes the sun plays a large effect that is not understood (he talks about a solar minimum that corresponds to the mini ice age). The benefits of CO2 have often been overlooked while the detrimental effects are exaggerated.

Liberal extremists keep pushing themselves to new extremism and hysteria. Most of the Democrat party here in the U.S. used to be for a diverse energy policy with natural gas, oil and nuclear power being part of the solution but they are now for renewable/green energy only. At least Greta Thunberg finally came around to accepting nuclear power despite her previous intolerance for anything but renewable energy. Renewable energy usually delivers less energy for the same cost as petroleum energy. Germany bought into green energy in a big way and it is paying for it.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/energy/coal-mine-demolishes-neighboring-wind-farm-boost-countrys-energy-supply-drawing-climate-activists

Germany has 'learnt its lesson' as it looks to increase coal power
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YE5H5JYcLKg

Industrial production and national wealth go bye bye without energy and the people are poor from just paying their energy bills. Many of the liberal extremists are anti-business socialists that have no concept of economics though.

amigang Quote:

This is the biggest problem in the world. Its not about sustainable business, things that can improve health, national security, and good working practices and ethics, it about who growing the most and make the most money.

Those things are important. I believe poor management of land and resources has had more of an effect on our environment than CO2 petroleum emmissions. Humans have destroyed roughly half the forests in the world in recent history often to clear it for food and bio-fuel production which continues today. We have drained peat bogs and burned the peat. Forests and peat bogs are huge natural carbon sinks which, when destroyed, lose the carbon capture as well as releasing the carbon storage. Natural gas, oil and coal come from dead organisms and already lost any carbon capture effects so they only release stored carbon with less CO2 increase.

Careless land and sea management and elimination of natural animals and their environment has an effect too. The effect is not well understood by scientists. The environmental damage is often blamed on climate change but it is likely more than that.

How to green the world's deserts and reverse climate change | Allan Savory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI

We have the technology to fix the problem and green the world but we are still destroying it instead. We need to understand the problem better before we over react. Allan Savory doesn't have it all figured out but I believe he is on the right track. He is also often criticized by consensus science but consensus science is bad science. Anyone who doesn't think CO2 is the primary environmental problem is discounted and attacked.

PADDING

_________________
I HAVE ABS OF STEEL
--
CAN YOU SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OK FOR WORK