Weather Is Not Climate. Or Is It?
For years, experts warned that any given hurricane or heat wave cannot be attributed to long-term changes in average temperatures. But it turns out that climatologists and meteorologists sometimes can establish such causal relationships.

News outlets have long cited extreme weather events as examples of how greenhouse gas emissions affect the climate. In response, experts typically would emphasize the distinction between weather and climate, warning that any given hurricane or heat wave cannot be attributed to long-term changes in average temperatures. But it turns out that climatologists and meteorologists sometimes can establish such causal relationships.
"First of all, it's important to highlight that every climate extreme weather event has multiple causes," Friederike Otto, an Oxford University climate researcher associated with the World Weather Attribution (WWA) collaboration, told MIT Technology Review in 2020. "So the question of the role of climate change will never be a yes or no question. It will always be, 'Did climate change make it more likely or less likely, or did climate change not play a role?'"

For the last decade or so, climate researchers like Otto have been working on statistical techniques aimed at estimating the extent to which a warmer world is making weather events more extreme and/or increasing the frequency of such events. One technique is to run climate models using the current levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases to see if they reproduce the relevant observed weather trends for a region. If the models accurately track the actual record of weather events, the researchers next run them assuming pre-industrial greenhouse gas concentrations. The differences in, say, the maximum temperature during a heat wave, the amount of rainfall dumped by a hurricane, or the timing and extent of wildfires provide an estimate of how much man-made warming may contribute to specific extreme events.
Consider the massive heat wave in June 2021 that produced record-breaking temperatures in the Pacific Northwest, including highs of 116 degrees Fahrenheit in Portland, Oregon; 108 degrees in Seattle, Washington; and 121 degrees in Lytton, British Columbia. Under pre-industrial conditions, WWA researchers found, the chance of a heat wave like that was essentially zero. "Western North American extreme heat [was] virtually impossible without human-caused climate change," they concluded.
According to the latest comprehensive report on the physical-science basis of man-made climate change from the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), "it is extremely likely that human influence is the main contributor to the observed increase in the intensity and frequency of hot extremes and the observed decrease in the intensity and frequency of cold extremes on the global scale." Given that the average global temperature has risen by around 1.1 degrees Celsius during the last century, it is not too surprising that heat waves have become hotter, lengthier, and more frequent.
Other notable 2021 extreme weather events in the U.S. included Hurricane Ida, which slashed the coast of Louisiana in August; a massive December outbreak of tornadoes in Kentucky; and the Colorado wildfire that destroyed 1,000 houses just outside Boulder in late December. Are all those events also strong examples of weather as climate?
In just six hours before it came ashore, Ida intensified from a Category 1 storm (winds between 74 and 95 miles per hour) to a Category 4 storm (winds between 130 and 156 miles per hour). It dumped between 15 and 20 inches of rain on parts of southeastern Louisiana.
Studies "provide limited evidence of anthropogenic effects on [tropical cyclone] intensifications so far," the IPCC report notes, "but high confidence for increases in [tropical cyclone] heavy precipitation." In other words, the evidence that global warming is causing hurricanes to spin up faster is currently weak, but the evidence that it boosts rainfall during hurricanes is stronger. WWA researchers estimated that global warming likely intensified the rainfall from Hurricane Harvey, which hit Texas in 2017, by 15 percent.
Climate models are too coarse and observational data too sparse to draw firm conclusions about how climate change may be affecting tornadoes. The IPCC report notes that the annual average number of tornadoes in the U.S. has remained constant since the 1970s, although their location appears to be shifting from the Great Plains toward the mid-South, which includes Kentucky.
Fire weather involves a combination of high temperatures, drought, and low humidity. From 1979 to 2013, the global burnable area affected by long fire-weather seasons doubled, and the average length of the fire-weather season increased by 19 percent, according to research cited by the IPCC. Despite climate change "at the global scale," however, "the total burned area has been decreasing between 1998 and 2015 due to human activities" such as agricultural expansion and intensification.
During the final six months of 2021, Colorado's statewide temperatures were four degrees Fahrenheit above average, and it was by far the driest six-month period on record for the Denver area. Yet the National Weather Service had not issued a fire-weather "red flag" warning for the Boulder area on December 30, the day the wildfire broke out, because the relative humidity had not fallen below 15 percent.
In a May 2021 Climatic Change article, Otto and her collaborators observe that extreme event attribution studies have three primary uses: answering questions from the public, providing information on how to adapt to future weather extremes, and, last but not least, "increasing the 'immediacy' of climate change, thereby increasing support for mitigation." Mitigation means policies aimed at drastically cutting the amount of carbon dioxide emitted, largely from burning coal, oil, and natural gas.
"Every time you hear or read a claim about this or that disaster being linked to climate change, as interesting as the underlying science may be, what is actually being conveyed is a stealthy promotional message encouraging you to consider climate change to be important and thus to support efforts to decarbonize the economy," notes University of Colorado political scientist and climate change researcher Roger Pielke Jr. "As important as these messages are, what they leave out are all of those actions that are important for actually reducing the future impacts of extremes, regardless of the particular details of a climate change influence."
Cutting carbon dioxide emissions certainly will play a major role in addressing the problem of man-made climate change, though such a policy will also involve massive tradeoffs affecting human well-being and progress. But as Pielke observes, it is not the only policy that can help humanity cope with deleterious weather changes.
Economic growth and technological innovation already have enabled people to thrive as they adapt to extreme weather events. As a result, noted Copenhagen Consensus Center President Bjorn Lomborg in a 2020 Technological Forecasting and Social Change article, the chance that a person might die from climate-related risks such as floods, droughts, storms, wildfires, and extreme temperatures has fallen by more than 99 percent since 1920.
Attribution research is increasingly able to tell us how climate change is affecting the likelihood of extreme weather events. But it cannot tell us how best to handle them.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
So the severe blizzard in.Vieginia two months ago disproves global warming?
No, that's Weather. Climate only happens in summer.
No, climate only happens when it supports the marxist narrative. Ron is at least consistent as to what he supports.
Cue more short-tailed Tucker Carlson wannabes denying the statistically obvious
Nissim Taleb's work on statistical economics has returned to haunt those unable to change their minds in the face of how civilization is changing the radiative equilibrium of the atmosphere.
The fact that you think there is an equilibrium in the climate system shows how big of an idiot and how anti science you truly are.
Cue paraphrase of Christopher Moncktons silly elision of climate feedback & shrieking microphones.
How does referring to "changing the radiative equilibrium of the atmosphere", which fossil fuel CO2 has done to the tune of several watts/m2, translate into presuming a climatic steady state ?
Please show your work.
Cue Russell Seitz, who has not a single hour of training in climatology, and whose proposal to solve anthropogenic global warming is to carbonate the ocean (yes, really), regurgitating discredited research from 20 years ago and then eventually devolving into a gibbering, impotently raging moron who has to resort to mocking his ideological opponents' physical disabilities instead of presenting arguments for his position.
Speak up, Earlie! Do you need an ear trumpet to realize that the louder you shout the more you resemble a humorless twit pontificating like Willard Watts ?
Why don't you calm down and read for a change?
https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/4737323/Seitz_BrightWater.pdf?sequence=1
Are you aware that magnetic north has changed, the north pole is now in Sibiria? Let me pose a Scientific question to you. What happens to a magnet that is suspended in a vacuum and it's trajectory and position are governed by gravitational and magnetic forces after it's poles have shifted? Further more, if this magnet is a planet with an atmosphere, how will this shift effect it's weather patterns? The answer is simple enough, The magnet will seek to right itself. In the case of something as large as a planet This will take some time due to inertia and momentum. Slowly moving at first because of the planets mass, and over shooting it's equilibrium mark due to momentum, effectively swinging back and forth at shorter intervals until it settles on it's new position.
What I just stated is real physical science, based on the effects of mass, gravity, and magnetism. The earth does not exist outside of those principles.
Fail! Not equilibrium, steady state. You obviously know nothing of physics or kinetics.
We will now begin boarding Group 2 cranks, and anyone from Group 3 or 4 bold enough to try.”
Please advise how the Sunspot Cycle does NOT correlate to "Climate".
Please show your work.
Thus:
https://www.springer.com/journal/10584?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=MPSR_JRNLS_CON1_P5_MPAS_CONTI_EART_EX_MPAJ&utm_term=climatic%20change%20journal&utm_content=10584%7CClimatic%20Change_Climatic%20Change&msclkid=683c09141691110af8456b2d4d102e48&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=MPSR_JRNLS_CON1_P5_MPAS_CONTI_EART_EX_MPAJ&utm_term=climatic%20change%20journal&utm_content=10584%7CClimatic%20Change_Climatic%20Change
You will find my work in the index.
Your link Does not address his question. "Your work." As you put it, is really the work of a bunch of other climate crybabies. There are many variables that effect the climate on earth, volcanic activity, solar output, and changes in the magnetic field of the planet just to name a few. To send someone to this link stating there is some answer to their question, only to have them pick though the garbage to not find it, is quite dishonest.
The few articles that were listed were did not prove your point, they only pontificated what should be done, how moneys should be invested, and how do we cope with posable problems such as ice jambs that naturally occur anyway. All of these articles just state climate change as if it is fact in passing, none show their work. If you could be more specific maybe, you would not come off as such a wack job.
Listed did not*
By the way you probably mean climate system stability. And if this is what you meant then you 100% disagree with the climate models which use factors making a system inherently unstable. A system can not remain stable when it's primary growth terms have a feedback value > 1 but that is what the climate models do with carbon. A doubling of carbon in the atmosphere would give a radiating capture of an increase of 0.7C. Models estimate in average 3.2 showing feedback loops much greater than 1. Gas absorption is also logarithmic in effects, it has a decreasing contribution per molecule over time. Climate models don't capture this. They also don't run climate models out past 50 to 100 years because the models completely blow up showing the models are not system stable. Another proof they are shit.
Great analysis of what to look for when reading or looking at the information. Bailey's graph in the model is a prime example. It shows a shift in temperature and how it affects the extremes of hot and cold. Yet that model, applied over an extended period of time, would show exactly how the curve shifts left and right as the system changes from one month, year, decade, generation or epoch to the next.
Keep buying into the narrative and buy an electric car, while the elites fly over you in their private jets on the way to spending more of your tax dollars "studying" the effects of weather on the world. Or, in other words, gather together for a public recourse on the crisis, crisis, crisis; enjoy fine cuisine, stay in way too large, exclusive hotel resorts and fly privately home to their 20,000 sq ft mansions to chastise you on how you can eat less beef and drive less to save the planet while they and their associates soak up the taxpayer dollars earmarked for the 'climate projects'.
F You
Anyone can lie, but to be really good at it one needs statistics.
There are a number of things in play here that basically rely on faith to reach conclusions.
There are so many variables involved in climate that it is pretty much impossible to make a real SCIENCE based case that climate change is primarily caused by human action. Remember coincidence does not establish causation.
For those who maintain that humans do not impact climate, there is no hard science to say that either.
You can disagree with me, even quote "experts" but a deep dive into climate takes you EVERYWHERE into an enormous number of fields and topics we actually know very little about. Is world climate a balanced system that will compensate for say ... increased CO2? No one actually knows. Is it a positive feed back system where increased CO2 will create a feedback loop that dooms us all to extinction? Not likely, but we can't prove it.
Bottom line here is that all this stuff is a lot of smoke, and not nearly good enough to be driving economic world changing decisions.
This is Bailey at peak "I'm not a scientist" Bailey. So much in here to unpack.
The way they use models to predict... Bailey leaves out how they retune the models if they don't match historical records using knows like atmospheric particulates. Of course model to model uses different values for this as it is their March fitting know and not based on recorded evidence.
Then Bailey talks about a heatwave in the Northwest being the hottest in recorded history which goes back to the 1870s where the 1800s were a local minimum called the mini ice age. And then ignores the west coast has a long history of droughts with the 1900s being abnormally wet.
He doesn't even address the urban heating index factor in global temperature calculations. At all. Or the fact that countries like Australia have been replacing historical temperature recordings woth what models say those temperatures should have been instead. Of urban encroachment on the standardized measuring stations.
This is an article based solely on Baileys pre existing beliefs being reinforced by pretty words.
I should also add that since the 80s extreme weather events have been defined as events causing a billion dollars in damage. Example here:
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/
Of course they don't index this value to inflation.
They only recently started indexing it to CPI but still ignore population density.
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/calculating-cost-weather-and-climate-disasters
God damn. The whole thing is designed to prove the premise by only counting events that prove said premise, since any contrary evidence is, by design, ignored.
"We have more extreme weather events, showing the danger of global warming!!"
"But...what about the reduced frequency of adverse extreme cold weather events?"
":Our chart doesn't show things that didn't happen. SCIENCE!!"
I think they're saying "Let's go, Bailey!!"
It is a given for any hurricane, tornado, snow storm, frigid spell or heat wave that it will be tied to Global Climate Change. The thing that galls me the most is Global Climate Change is such an innocuous euphemism that can be tied to any change in the weather and at the same time used as a hand-wave when a weather event, such as winter, is used to try to dispel its absurdity.
Bailey's title brings it home.
Questioning the science guy: Is it weather?
Climate guy: Well, weather is not climate.
Questioning the Science guy: But climate is ever changing as evidenced by history.
Climate Guy: Not to this degree. 99%of scientists agree.
Questioning Science guy: So the Ice Age? Sand bars? Kettle Ponds?
Climate Guy: Denier!!!
I don't think they consider people building more expensive stuff in places likely to get hit be extreme weather events either.
" they retune the models if they don't match historical records" -- the heck with that. They can't even predict the past 170 years.
It also helps that the "climate scientists" go back and change historical data to match their model
No, the truth is like a statue, buried within a random rock, needing to be discovered.
It’s only climate when it supports The Narrative.
Goddammit reason put the reply button on the right like the rest of the internet does it.
It isn't whether it is or it isn't. The question is what do we do about it?
I propose governments abandon any new infrastructure in the areas predicted to be inundated by rising seas. So a line about 200ft above current MSL (if you believe AOC).
Individuals can still buy homes on Martha's Vineyard and Hawaii if they don't think the seas will rise and businesses (ports, fishing, and recreation) could still operate as they desire in those areas but the government should not repair or build anything in those areas.
Other than that WE shouldn't do anything about this global threat.
"Individuals can still buy homes on Martha's Vineyard and Hawaii if they don't think the seas will rise"
Exactly this. I will take climate change seriously when the very wealthy dems that scream at the top of their lungs the sea level will make places unlivable stop buying property at sea level. If you are OK putting 10+ million into a property, you clearly dont think there is any real concern.
Ill take it seriously when every person arriving in Davos to determine how I should live my peasant life doesnt get there in their own private jet. At least a few of them have to jet-pool for me to even think about taking this seriously.
And if anyone in their ranks was wrong about the climate apocalypse ending the world because they said the world was going to end in the 90's, then in the 2010's then in the 2020's and nothing has significantly changed (can still live at the same sea level and actually severe weather events were lower from 2010-2020 than they were from 2000-2010) then I dont have to take it seriously. Im not listening to chicken little AGAIN after this many wrong predictions.
But if you could reset your mental age to 20 every decade, it might look alarming.
And when they can stop holding up a garlic cross to nuclear power, I will believe they believe themselves. Any rational person who truly believes the climate will reach a tipping point in 10-9-8-7 years (what an oxymoron!) would be pushing nuclear power as if their life literally depended on it.
^
YEP!
They do scream, at Jersey shore, for the taxpayers to fund Corps of Engineers to build breakwaters and bulkheads to protect their seafront multi-million dollar homes. The average New Jerseyan can't afford a shack (if they even existed) in Margate but has to shell out so connected Trenton lawyers won't get water in their ground floors.
So, connected Trenton lawyers think they are more royal tha King Canute.
Background to that. King Canute was actually trying to demonstrate the limits of his power. He thought that by showing his subjects that he could not stop the rising tide they might be persuaded to stop asking him for free shit. 🙂
"jet pool" Great idea! Everybody to make a sacrifice in their own way.
I'm so glad we're in this together.
"Climate is what you expect. Weather is what you get." Mark Twain
Racist
Also known for there are lies, damn lies and statistics.
No, Twain gets the attribution for using that in the late 1890s, but he was QUOTING Lord Balfour's 1892 statement in Parliament:
"'After all, facts are facts, and although we may quote one to another with a chuckle the words of the Wise Statesman, "Lies - damn lies - and statistics," still there are some easy figures the simplest must understand, and the astutest cannot wriggle out of.’"
Which is a nice expansion of the formulation "liars, damn liars and experts" which is found in several variations in the 1880s. (the "Wise Stateman" reference my be to Disraeli, the second-most attributed source of the quote, though it is not found among his writings or recorded speeches,)
"
Attribution research is increasingly able to tell us how climate change is affecting the likelihood of extreme weather events. But it cannot tell us how best to handle them.
LOL. Of course it can tell us how to handle extreme weather events. Get rid of capitalism, institute totalitarian communism, kill all white men, you know, the usual prescription.
A "cure" in search of a disease--if you belong to the right tribe (and hate according to the proscribed list).
Here is where Ron shows what a retard he is. These people have literally never been correct, yet their predictions are better. You know what 1000 time better than 0 is, it's still 0. Ron get your head out of your ass
The climate insanity has gotten so close to a religion that this year we had a super cold winter and the usual progs at work legit blamed some of the colder days on climate change. In late January. No joke, a day where the temp was just at the lower limit of where it falls in the winter time here, in January, they were spouting the "well this is why we have to do something about it! See, climate change!"
I understand that an abnormal weather day (a single data point) isnt itself proof of anything at all (for or against climate change) as its just a data point, but making the argument that a cold day in winter is proof of climate change is probably the most interesting I have seen so far.
But then again, it doesnt have to make sense. They are putting as much scientific thought into this as they did with masks in restaurants to walk by the hostess stand but no mask to sit 4 feet away from a sneezing stranger in the same restaurant. As long as it supports the narrative and allows the govt more control over an issue, then it is a good thing, logic be damned.
Consider this progress. Just several generations ago, everything that happened was blamed on witches.
My argument would be that we are in exactly the same situation, we just think we are smarter and call it "the science" now, but really thats the only difference.
What do you think Hillary and AOC are? Have you heard Kamala's laugh?
Hillary a witch? Nah. She’s a fucking demon.
I heard Kammie might be a succubus. Or something that sounds like that.
I wouldn’t mind if a few iPhone sex videos from AOC’s college years showed up. She’s a stupid Marxist bitch, but the would have made a decent porn actress. She really missed her calling.
A crazy bitch like that probably gives really good head.
My blowjobs are problematic.
It's not a carrot!!!!!!
Sea Hag. That can apparently live on land too.
Everything bad is still is blamed on witches.
It’s just that they’re not called witches anymore, but straight white men.
Fun fact: many of the executed Salem witches were white men, perhaps straight (at least on the outside).
Well, considering how the lefturds treat Lindzen and any other dissidents in climate science, I'd say they're still in a witch-hunting frame of mind.
-jcr
I dunno. Back then they didn't have to ask if they were cold witches or hot witches before crushing them*.
*-the preferred method of execution was to put the witch under a barn door and pile rocks on it until they shut up about climate change. Burning them created a lot pollution, y'see.
I'm predicting a colder-than-normal year, thanks to the big Tonga volcano eruption.
If you want a really fun fact, look up the Year without a summer, and take note of the timeline in which this event has occurred over and over in the past.
Sex isn't gender, or is it?
It all depends on what the quack liberals want a word to mean in any given debate.
Sex is a verb, Gender is an adjective.
About 120,000 years ago the earth was pretty warm. By 100,000 years ago, it had cooled significantly, and temperatures kept dropping. By about 50,000 massive glaciers covered most of the mid to high northern latitudes. Starting around 15,000 years ago, global temperatures warmed, glaciers started melting, and sea level started rising.
Fun fact 1: These dramatic shifts in global temperature (climate) have occurred at least 50 times in the past 3 million years, with a general trend both more variation and colder lows.
Fun fact 2: The cycles before 3 million years ago only reached lows above recent highs.
Fun fact 3: human civilization and present global distribution exists only because of the most recent warming.
Fun fact 4: This recent cycle, about 120,000 years, represents 0.003% of Earth history.
Lesson: there is no such thing as The Climate, at least as a fixed and optimum "normal". Concerned humans could have been dropped in at any point in the past, and found alarming evidence that climate was changing, especially in the most recent few million years.
Climate is the last 30 years' weather averages. Whatever the actual term, whatever the averaging methods, the end result is the same: climate is both useful to predict vague trends (Where do I want to live? What kind of a house should I build?) and meaningless.
That graph in the article would seem to indicate that far fewer of the world's population will be experiencing harsh winters. Is a couple more tornadoes in Kansas more beneficial than having 25 million "Lake Shore effect snow" dwellers use their snowblowers and muscles fewer times each year? How do shoveling heart attacks match up to tornado deaths?
Cold kills 20 times as many as heat.
The tropics are full of people, the northern climes not so much.
Nope ifitgoed against the proggies narrarative the it's covid death
Hush, you! The whole point of collecting data to produce the nice ooga-booga!! charts is to ignore stuff that didn't happen-like extreme cold events, or Ronald Bailey not being a climate change whore.
This is your brain on climate nihilism—
EB is channelling Jordan Peterson on a bad rant day :
https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2022/02/wheres-his-brother-in-laws-climate.html
Interesting turn of phrase from a Malthusian death cultist who thinks decimating the world's population is necessary to preserve humanity.
Russell Seitz is channeling Paul Ehrlich on a failed prediction day (hint: it's every day that ends in y).
(Russel Seitz also can't embed HTML links, because while he was busy not studying anything related to climate science, he also missed out on learning the most basic elements of rendering text on the worldwide web)
Just be thankful the global cooling trend that ended in the Little Ice Age did not persist:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age
Or be glad we're not stuck in 536 AD style cooling, the "worst year to be alive":
https://www.science.org/content/article/why-536-was-worst-year-be-alive
Ask medieval historian Michael McCormick what year was the worst to be alive, and he's got an answer: "536." Not 1349, when the Black Death wiped out half of Europe. Not 1918, when the flu killed 50 million to 100 million people, mostly young adults. But 536. In Europe, "It was the beginning of one of the worst periods to be alive, if not the worst year," says McCormick, a historian and archaeologist who chairs the Harvard University Initiative for the Science of the Human Past.
A mysterious fog plunged Europe, the Middle East, and parts of Asia into darkness, day and night—for 18 months. "For the sun gave forth its light without brightness, like the moon, during the whole year," wrote Byzantine historian Procopius. Temperatures in the summer of 536 fell 1.5°C to 2.5°C, initiating the coldest decade in the past 2300 years. Snow fell that summer in China; crops failed; people starved. The Irish chronicles record "a failure of bread from the years 536–539." Then, in 541, bubonic plague struck the Roman port of Pelusium, in Egypt. What came to be called the Plague of Justinian spread rapidly, wiping out one-third to one-half of the population of the eastern Roman Empire and hastening its collapse, McCormick says.
And Exxon has denied any responsibility (for 536). Evil, greedy capitalist bastards!
The largest money manager in the world, Blackrock, which holds about 30% of the S&P 500 is preparing for a "climate bubble", which means that property insurance is severely mispriced and will cause another financial collapse like 2008.
Of course Blackrock CEO Larry Fink is getting the Soros treatment by the wingnut community. Capitalism always prevails over misguided wingnuts.
You mean black rock the bad guys for buying up houses as fast as they can?
Wow, not just a fluffer for an old Hitler Youth, he even shills for Blackrock, the embodiment of corporatism, government/corporate union incarnate.
When we call Shrike a "fascist" we mean it literally.
Same when we call him a pedo
Blackrock is capitalism.
Why do you hate capitalism?
Why do you fuck prepubescent children?
It's corporatism you lying fuck. Why do you hate the free market?
This is how you do stupid ass motherfucker. I expect Entelechy, Joe, and Molly to take notes.
Nothing to do with more people building more expensive houses in the same places we have recognized as dangerous for the past 1000 years?
Insurance companies in Florida have been trying to get their premiums in line with rational actuarial data for the actual risks of living in the state for decades. Florida insurance commissioners and the regulatory climate have been largely captive to populist forces which saw insurances companies as grasping capitalists and policyholders as victims. Any effort from the insurance industry to point out the risks associated with living in the state, especially the risks to coastal development and the need to collect higher premiums to cover losses fell on deaf ears from insurance commissioners who insisted on higher coverages with no premium increases.
It is no wander that faced with increasing losses insurance companies are playing the "climate change" card to get premium increases.
Anyone who thinks that increased insurance premiums are a sign of insurers "accepting the science" are naive and possibly hopelessy ignorant.
Increased premiums are simple an indication that increasing coastal development carries higher risks. Unfortunately, inland policyholders who face lower risks are subsidizing beachfront property owners.
20 years of $6 gas to flatten the curve!
We need more testing !
Sad when the AP is more logical than Reason.com:
High gas prices falsely attributed to Keystone XL cancellation
CLAIM: The Keystone XL pipeline cancellation caused the current high gas prices.
AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The Keystone XL crude oil pipeline wasn’t yet operational when it was canceled in 2021, and wasn’t expected to be running until 2023. Rather, experts say gas prices are high due to other factors such as the global spike in the cost of crude oil and increased demand after pandemic lockdowns ended.
“Problem with the Keystone: It’s like saying a highway that was built but never completed is somehow making your commute to work way longer. You never got to ride on that highway. It was never opened. It was never relied on,” said Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis for GasBuddy.com, referring to the Keystone XL pipeline.
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-895299166310
Only in Wingnut World would a pipeline cancellation that never carried any oil would cause world oil prices to double from 2020 pandemic lows.
(I still give both Sleepy Joe and Donnie the Liar both an 'F' for their performance as POTUS)
RIG COUNT!
Haven't looked in a while:
601 today - versus a low of 250 during Donnie's last year.
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/e_ertrr0_xr0_nus_cm.htm
BIDEN DON'T LET US DRILL!
Must dry wells.
Wonder why you always choose 2020 and not 2019... are we still under government mandated lockdowns?
Because wingnuts always choose pandemic 2020 when they compare how much prices have risen since.
If you chose 2008 when oil hit peak highs during the Bush years you wouldn't have an inflation argument to blame on Biden.
Haperinflation boys!
You are free to compare 2019 inflation. To today's inflation. You'll find spittin tobaccy still going up dummy.
Why did the AP ignore the pipeline has been held up by the left for over a decade and would have been in production if not for Obama? They didn't use the original completion date. Because they are dishonest like yourself.
First proposed in 2008, the pipeline has been delayed for the past 12 years due to opposition from U.S. landowners, Native American tribes and environmentalists.
Or are you just ignoring those delays shrike?
And the framing of that by AP is laughable. It was primarily environmentalists and the government delaying it through tossed aside court orders.
No chance the land owners and tribes were just maneuvering for more compensation, right?
As for the environmentalists, they are simply religious fanatics. And probably included nut jobs happy to embrace creationism--the Noble Savage kind, not the nasty Christian kind.
They didn't ignore that. RTFA.
The U.S. is still receiving oil from Canada through other means, like railways and other operational oil pipelines running in the U.S in addition to the original Keystone pipeline, said Ramanan Krishnamoorti, a professor and the chief energy officer at the University of Houston.
Even if the Keystone XL pipeline had been completed, the amount of oil it was designed to transport would have been a drop in the bucket for U.S. demand, experts noted. The U.S. used nearly 20 million barrels of oil a day last year, while global consumption of oil was near 100 million barrels. The pipeline would have contributed less than 1% to the world supply of oil, according to AP reporting.
“The total volume of additional supply is negligible in a market that uses 100 million barrels of oil every day,” Jason Bordoff, founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia, said in an email statement to the AP.
That oil gets here anyway. It just takes longer.
So what if it costs more!
We are talking about the price of gas here! What do transportation costs of oil have to do with it!
Higher transport costs don't equate to higher consumer price, duh!
Paying for a new pipeline and all the eminent domain payoffs would actually increase the transportation costs over the pipeline that carries the oil today.
Yes, they always want to build things to increase costs.
Fuck shrike. Please learn how much oil is transported through pipes so you don't look so stupid.
It wouldn't help. But your suggestion is thoughtful.
See, gentlemen: the same masters of the universe at Blackrock who can price global warming 50 years from now into their pricing models are in the practice of expending capital on projects that increase costs and result in no benefit to the market.
Don't forget, shreek is an economics expert and the world's biggest proponent of capitalism!
It takes longer. It is more expensive. It moves less overall.
God damn you are dumb.
Write the AP. Tell them you want to be their energy expert. Tell them about your wingnut shit-posting credentials.
Tell them about the rig count!
It is almost like the market is drilling for more oil because of the high crude prices! Just like it curtailed drastically in 2020 because of oversupply!
NAH! THAT CAN'T BE TRUE CAUSE SLEEPY JOE SHUT DOWN DRILLING! READ IT ON WINGNUT.COM!
I love how they all became way less greedy during the trump years, and super not greedy at the start of the pandemic. That's the only explication, as Gov policies have nothing to do prices
Just like it curtailed drastically in 2020 because of oversupply!
You mean the year of the forced lockdowns you use as your benchmark to lie about a "Biden recovery".
Also you and the AP's narrative is hot garbage. If Obama and Biden hadn't shut down Keystone XL in 2015 it would have been transporting in 2019, and a planned further expansion of 250k bpd would be almost complete.
CAUSE SLEEPY JOE SHUT DOWN DRILLING! READ IT ON WINGNUT.COM!
How about the New York Times talking about his public lands ban?
Biden Administration Halts New Drilling in Legal Fight Over Climate Costs
Or the BBC talking about him shutting down Alaska drilling?
Biden to suspend Trump Arctic drilling leases
The Washington Post has an interesting article about how the
Biden administration won’t appeal judge’s ruling revoking Gulf of Mexico drilling
You just always come and lie and lie and lie.
Being a compulsive liar isn’t even his worst trait.
Ooh, ooh! Is it his terminal stupidity?
Nope, even worse. Rhymes with mild corn.
There are millions of democrat shitbags just like him. We can’t keep them around anymore, they have to go.
But how could that be? You just taught us all that the amount of supply does not affect demand or price. That's why it was literally impossible to forecast prices after eliminating a pipeline project, and why bringing a higher volume of oil to the market more quickly would not have lowered prices.
It's almost like that magic trick that ends up your finger up the asshole of a 5 year old boy. Maybe you should keep your rank sophistry to the realm of the children you rape; they're smart enough to see it through it too, but you use your size advantage to fuck them anyway.
But you know Jesse wouldn't be hired since he doesn't spout the desired AP narrative.
And "energy expert" means a journalism major who took a science elective. Not really that impressive.
The journalist for the AP isn't an expert. First mistake.
Appeal to authority is your second.
I'll repeat for you shrike. You are dumb.
The journalist quoted two experts, idiot.
And you are certainly no expert.
What are their credentials shrike? Did you investigate? I can cite dozens of experts directly dealing with energy exploration blaming lack of permits on exploration, drilling, access rights, rail rights for first mile transport, etc.
So tell me shrike. What were the experts credentials. Again. Appeal to authority without ever looking at their actual expertise.
This is like saying Krugman was right on Estonia despite him being wrong for over a decade shrike.
Let's take expert number 1.
From CGEP where they research and analyze transformative energies. They are ebiased to green and renewable. So no bias at all right shrike?
https://www.sipa.columbia.edu/faculty-research/libraries-resources/center-global-energy-policy-cgep
Let's just take his comment shrike.
JASON BORDOFF: That would impact how much oil supply comes to the market years and years into the future. That doesn't affect the fundamentals of supply and demand and prices today.
Bordoff is clearly not an economics expert as he claims here future supply has no impact in current price commodities. That must be why wheat went up in price on expectations of a decrease in supply in the future.
Bordoff is clearly not an economics expert.
Fucking devastating.
Shrike's ass must be pretty sore by now.
He must just hate his boss at the fifty-cent factory for making him push such a retarded narrative.
He is right.
In April 2020 when oil prices plummeted on the spot market futures still sold higher.
Look up "spot price". Learn something.
They’re experts in green energy propaganda.
Lol. Shrike responds he is right cementing him as the complete economics expert OBL proclaims he is.
Stop coming here. It’s probably time we found out who you really are so your pedophilia can be stopped.
I was honestly hoping you'd also argue something stupid like future projected supply does not have cost effects on current supply like you have in the past. Totally shows your economic knowledge.
You kind of implied it through the fact check though.
(I still give both Sleepy Joe and Donnie the Liar both an 'F' for their performance as POTUS)
Ugh. Impostor Buttplug here once again, doing what he always does — trying to make Real Buttplug look like an incoherent moron.
Let's review:
1. Real Buttplug uses the Warren Buffett Net Worth Index as his most important economic metric; in fact the WBNWI was Exhibit A in his 2009 to 2016 case that Obama's economy was the best ever.
2. The WBNWI went up $21.3 billion in Biden's first year, and has already added $14.9 billion in 2022 — a gain of $36.2 billion in just 14 months.
3. Therefore by the economic analysis Buttplug has been promoting for years we must conclude the Biden economy has surpassed the Obama economy as the best ever.
4. Only a lazy, sloppy idiot would give a President an "F" grade when that President is directly responsible for the best economy ever.
5. Since Mr. Buttplug is certainly not an idiot, we must conclude the Impostor wrote that post.
#StopSmearingButtplug
Nobody likes a smearing butt plug.
Turn yourself in for your crimes against children.
Let's go ahead and further your analogy. Ignoring, of course, the giant gaping hole you ignored that is future oil speculation and investment is not reliant on political and policy trends.
Say I never use that highway, but a good number of other cars on the road would. Therefore, having opened that highway presents massive opportunity for others to I get off my road and decrease my commute.
Problem is you observe things in isolation rather that how they impact the whole. That's what Keystone is; part of an integrated system.
investment is not reliant on political and policy trends.
I believe markets are at least 90% of the factor for oil and gas prices. Cartels or OPEC is the rest.
Policy is effecting coal. But that same policy is driving up demand for natural gas. Policy is hurting nuclear. But again that same policy drives up demand for natural gas.
So if you say "policy is driving up supply and demand for natural gas" you would be correct but not in the way you intended.
Natural gas is the essential bridge fuel.
Your a pedofile and should kill yourself
There is enough energy in the US to be energy independent dumbass.
So we don't need that dirty Canuck tar sand oil.
You're agreeing with me now. I am pro-US oil and gas. I am an investor.
And it is not "greed" to return money to shareholders rather than produce more like US companies are doing. It is capitalism.
Hey Shrike.
How much oil extracted from the Athabasca oilsands was due to be shipped via Keystone? And what makes it "dirtier"? Are the extraction methods for the Cold Lake oilsands different?
I eagerly await your answers.
Quick warning. Most of the "tar-sands" attack sites are nonsense and easily disprovable, and I'm feeling sparky so you can guarantee I will make you look like a fucking moron if you copy and paste.
So you might want to start with Wikipedia.
Canadian oil works just the same dumbass. I thought you used to be anti america first lol. Lose your values defending biden?
Shreek is showing solidarity with a fellow Marxist child rapist.
Bans on fracking are causing an increase in the price of natural gas.
Not according to shrikes Green energy experts above.
SUPPLY AND DEMAND ISN’T REAL!
I'm the one using classic supply/demand arguments.
Jesse/ML keep claiming government action determines gas prices. They really don't grasp markets.
Jesse/ML keep claiming government action
determinesaffect gas prices.Difference.
You can’t be this dense.
Holy fuck shrike. Government actions influence supply shit for brains. Future commodity estimates effect current commodity prices.
You are honestly one dumb mother fucker. Scratch that. Child fucker.
No, no, NO!!!
It does not pass the absurdity test that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 would have any significant impact on temperature. CO2 is a trace gas with immense benefits to life on Earth. Indeed, life on Earth is not possible without it.
400ppm sounds significant until you do the math. 400ppm is the equivalent of 1/2500 or 0.0004. It is infinitesimal. If we were discussing a toxic chemical, that would be one thing. But CO2 is not only benign in terms of reactivity, it happens to be required for photosynthesis. If we deplete atmospheric CO2, the results are predictable: He dies, she dies, everybody (and everything) dies.
The rise in CO2 is much, much, MUCH more likely to be linked to warming which is being driven by another source. And further, warming could turn out to be of benefit to life on Earth.
Famine is much more closely linked to child temperatures than to warm.
I wish Reason would have the courage to present counter narratives instead of buying into the green (as in $$$$) revolution.
Kiddie Raper, this has been explained to you. Now go commit suicide.
Supply has no effect on price. Yeah, that was Ricardo right? Page 20 of On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation.
Nobody cares what you believe you retarded ass demhag.
Blackrock is capable of pricing climate change into its economic models, but can't predict that canceling a capital project that would increase the supply of a commodity might affect the future price of that commodity.
Apparently futures markets and demand forecasting are not part of capitalism.
Or maybe shreek is just a brainless piece of shit child fucker who likes to post child pornography and has been banned for doing so here at Reason.com
Yay, freedom!
https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1505545543237480451?t=sDMQHQSz5vK6YbiUuzuUAA&s=19
LVIV, Ukraine (Reuters) - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has signed a decree that combines all national TV channels into one platform, citing the importance of a "unified information policy" under martial law, his office said in a statement on Sunday.
Finally catching up to your fav, Putin. Progress!
Keep sucking that globalist totalitarian cock, soy.
Corporate media, the State Department, and the Intel agencies would never lie to you.
I mean, why else respond in the way you did? Our government is sending billions "to fight for freedom and democracy" in Ukraine... who conscripted their entire male population into State service and just went full Enabling Act.
Our government is pushing us more and more into a war that otherwise wouldn't threaten the American people, and in which participation offers us no possible benefit.
Yet your reaction is to whine when I point out we're being mislead, via lies and massive covid style propaganda, and deflect to the institutionally designated Bad Guy.
You work towards totalitarianism, comrade.
offers us no possible benefit.
90% of UN member nations are nodding their heads in agreement that one's borders should be secure against Nation-State aggression.
I don't care what one does with one's own subjects and you have no say in how we treat ours is a pretty good start to a Defensible Treaty of new societal norms.
If it takes some force to impose that... well then, yeah. Sometimes one needs a bloody nose or worse
Try again.
Just because you lie doesn't mean everyone else lies, nor does it mean I believe any of you liars.
"you lie" says the servile little lemming, hoping his imitation of Walter Duranty will please Big Brother.
Eh? Mixed up a bit, are you? First I hate Russians, then I glorify them?
Boomers really need to learn that "Soviet" and "Russian" are different things. It's been more than 30 years since the USSR disintegrated.
I'll do you a favor and explain the Duranty reference since you're unable to figure it out.
Duranty ran cover for the Soviets to whitewash the Holodomor, like you run cover for the modern Soviets (leftists/globalists) by accusing people critical of Ukraine, and spreading information revealing that your "Good Guys" aren't good at all, of lying.
You have absolutely nothing to back up your claim, you just repeat it like a mindless, State Department and corporate media globalist bot.
I'm surprised they didn't do it already. They are in a war for survival.
Not really, but I'm sure Adolf's party would've described it in similar terms 88 years ago.
Pretty sure Adolf's party were the invaders, not the invadees.
And I'm pretty sure Nazi Germany's 1933 Enabling Act did precisely the same things, outlawing opposition parties and consolidating media into one entity under State control, that Zelensky's orders just did. I bet if you go back and look at Hitler's rhetoric around that bill, you'll find it utilizes arguments about the nation being under dire threat, fighting for its survival, and infiltrated by outside forces.
Oh for fuck's sake, Nardz. That's a pretty far-fetch analogy. Come back to it if the Ukraine invades someone.
It's not an analogy.
Are you disputing that similar rhetoric was used or that Zelensky's order does the same thing?
I'm surprised you've fallen for the bs this hard.
Context matters. Like Ukraine is actually being invaded, not just posturing and nation statin’ for shits and giggles. It’s fine if you don’t think we should be supporting them or whatever, but what candy land are you living in where this isn’t the natural response of a government up to their tits in it? We’d probably be doing all sorts of awful shit Here if China was invading from 3 directions.
So it's okay if Ukraine does it?
Personally, Until I’ve been engaged in house to house street fighting to maintain the independence of my country, I’m not gonna get judgy about it.
I’m not sure a freedom index counts too much in the middle of a war zone.
If Zelensky tries to hold dictatorial power years after the Russians pull out we can talk about it.
Zuckerberg: *furiously taking notes*
https://twitter.com/aimeeterese/status/1505529373071671299?t=1ONUa5XbiIm2JjA94SHefQ&s=19
remember what you're fighting for (democracy!)
She works at the new school, a frequent Jacobin advertiser and partner, described by Jacobin as "radical" and by the New York Times as "unabashedly left wing".
I guess they rewrote the American Dream?
[Link]
https://twitter.com/bopinion/status/1505292742993321993?t=fMFYYEygWes11XTNF_Egag&s=19
Inflation stings most if you earn less than $300K. Here's how to deal:
- Take the bus
- Don’t buy in bulk
- Try lentils instead of meat
- Nobody said this would be fun
[Link]
You will own nothing and be happy.
That's working well for me.
This advice was brought to you by the company whose owner is worth 82 billion dollars.
So, "let them eat lentils is the new let them eat cake"?
Wait, what? WHAT?!!
For the poor and middle class to help avoid the sting in inflation, they're supposed to do the following:
o Take the bus
o Don't buy in bulk
o Try lentils instead of meat
o Nobody said this would be fun
1. All poor and middle class live in coastal urban areas where there is a comprehensive public transit system. I'll drive to work in my s-class, you take the bus. Jesus these people are the worst people in America.
2. Don't buy bulk? Based on... what set of metrics?
3. Lentils instead of meat. The vegan diet: The whitest of white privilege
4. No one said it would be fun? What ills does the bitter pill we're being told to swallow curing? And since the little 'heart' has the Ukraine flag colors, is this hack really suggesting that all the inflation and resultant pain purely because we sanctioned russia? Do these idiots really believe that?
https://babylonbee.com/news/8-ways-to-deal-with-inflation-if-youre-one-of-those-filthy-poors
5) If you're struggling to afford $7 gas, buy a $60,000 Tesla. - It's the obvious call.
No no, white mike and chemjeff normal collectivist get upset when you point out that progressives are the worst people in America.
Rainfall in historical hurricanes is totally fine, and proves modeling skill??? Even now, we can't measure most parameters in hurricanes reliably. Rainfall in stronger historical hurricanes was absolutely measured with a low bias.
"Economic growth and technological innovation already have enabled people to thrive as they adapt to extreme weather events."
Improved batteries, controlled nuclear fusion and adoption of a vegan diet are adaptions to climate change. Economic growth as it stands now requires burning fossil fuels. This is why the environmentalist and author frequently cited in these pages, Schellenberger advocates Western funding of coal mining in Africa to 'grow the economy.' But the contradiction, of course, is that it only increases CO2 emissions. Raising the standard of living for Africa and the rest of the world to that of the US would mean burning an enormous amount of fossil fuels. It's no solution to dealing with climate change.
So they should remain a third world country?
There's only one world. The notion there are 3 is nonsense.
So you’ve never heard the phrase?
I've heard it. And burning more and more fossil fuels to grow the economy will only exacerbate the challenge of climate change. Technical and social innovation is more promising.
I understand the promise of having your cake and eating it too is very attractive, but it's no solution.
We must condemn a huge swath of humanity to eternal poverty.
By ignoring the problem and hoping it will disappear? You may be right. There are many who look forward to a solution that addresses global wealth inequality and climate change, together hand in hand. Check out UNICEF, for example, if you are curious.
Why is wealth inequality highest in blue areas?
Because whale and dolphin salaries are far greater than those of plankton, krill and jellyfish.
Talk about nonsense.
To judge by this commentariat, a huger swath has already achieved eternal inanity.
Hurr durr.
And we should join them in poverty. Less CO2, more equity--win, win!
What makes you think you have a choice? Mother nature, the bitch, doesn't care about your lifestyle, your standard of living, your wealth, your guns or your traditionally gendered washrooms.
It’s called trade offs. What you’re really railing against isn’t just American white Republican standards of living but those countries trying to pull themselves out of the worst kind of poverty. They’re the ones making most of the pollution because they’re having their industrial revolution.
Well, they were. Until world wide COVID lockdowns have absolutely decimated their economies even worse than anyone else’s. Another policy elitist lefties support, while feigning the moral high ground.
"They’re the ones making most of the pollution because they’re having their industrial revolution."
That would be China. I've said it before. Look to places like China and India for leadership on the issue. America is too beholden to the fossil fuel lobby and the status quo to take seriously. Just look at the inane comments here if you need confirmation.
Problem is there is no solution.
That's why this inane subject won't go away.
Burning more and more fossil fuels, ie growing the economy, is no solution.
Carl Sagan and four other scientists published a mathematical theorem in 1983 that proved then-current technology could be used to cause temperatures to plumge drastically overnight.
Just do what they proved.
Science and math are two different animals. Science is about observation and measurement. Global temperatures have been observed for decades now, and measured, and found to be increasing, as the rising CO2 levels would indicate.
Decades. Good thing climate doesn't act on hundred year signals.
Sunspots cycles are about a decade and don't seem to affect the climate. El Nino does affect climate but is again about a decade or so.
Let's keep ignoring cycles and trends on 100,000 year, 1 million year, and 10 million year scales.
You didnt understand my response. Try education. Basic climate science. Look at a temperature graph. Start there.
"Basic climate science. Look at a temperature graph. Start there."
Temperature graphs are intermediate climate science. You want basic, try thermometers.
In an effort to scare the world into disarmament, Carl played a bad joke on policy analysts on the eve of the global warming debate.
It's ironic the main victim was the street cred of pre-AI climate modeling, because like it or not, forty years of Moore's Law enabled global circulation models that just get better with increasing resolution. The problem, to whose solution Ron tries to contribute, is that Dunning-Krugeroids who refuse to read climate science textbooks are clueless by choice.
Yes, anyone with the wrong opinion is clueless .
Wow, just like progressive politics!
I do not care.
Any restrictions on normal life are unacceptable.
You will care when your precious life style is threatened. Laugh while you can, monkey boy.
I’ve got my truck running out in my driveway just for fun.
Rolling coal is funny.
Every time mtrueman comments I go out and rev the engine.
You naughty person!
But that's the catch, our lifestyle isn't threatened. That's where the whole scare mongering derails. You argue end of the world scenarios that aren't remotely true.
"our lifestyle isn't threatened"
You prefer 'restrictions on normal life?'
Democrats do.
It doesn't matter. I think an eventual solution, if it comes, will emerge from places like India and China. Places with large powerful well educated productive populations without the investment in maintaining the status quo.
If history is a guide, we cannot look to those places for technology innovation.
History is not a guide. It's a story. His story.
Sexist! That's her story.
It can also be a guide.
You are joking, right? the last figures I saw say that China produces 3X the CO2 emissions to produce $1US$ of GDP as the USA. India produces 5X. I have great respect for India trying to produce economic growth while remaining a putative functioning democracy (something I don't consider that China is) but neither country is making any effort to reduce their CO2 emissions.
" but neither country is making any effort to reduce their CO2 emissions."
China has a goal of reducing CO2 but also a goal of economic growth and a goal of reducing pollution in the cities. Coal is the only fossil fuel they have in abundance and oil and gas have to be imported. They have the world's most active nuclear program and have constructed hydro electric producing dams larger than anywhere else in the world. Concrete production is an extreme source of CO2 emissions, and China produced more concrete between 2011 and 2013 than the U.S. used in the entire 20th century. Look at what the U.S. built between 1901 and 2000: all those skyscrapers, the Interstate, the Hoover Dam, the list goes on and on but all that concrete only amounted to 4.5 gigatons vs China's 6.6.
Seriously, you really believe press releases from the Chinese government?
Now I know you should not be taken seriously.
Isaac Bartram
March.20.2022 at 11:45 pm
Flag Comment Mute User
Now I know you should not be taken seriously.
He’s also investing in an avocado orchard on his apartment’s roof or something.
It’s always nice when Tony’s fellow travelers show what abject pieces of shit they are.
I bet if we pushed, Entelechy would call for all of our executions too.
Improved batteries, controlled nuclear fusion and adoption of a vegan diet are adaptions to climate change.
Those are presumed adaptations to climate change. With the probably exception of nuclear fusion, improved batteries are a means to an end, not an end. You have to put energy into those batteries and we have no idea how to do that on a global scale.
Adoption of a vegan diet is pure speculation. As much as I would refuse a vegan diet because... I have taste in food, despite my personal objections to it, we have no idea what a global vegan diet would do in regards to the requirement of massive changes and expansion to farming, requirements for arable land, the fuel and energy requirements to maintain and expand it etc.
It's entirely possible that a vegan diet would produce as much or more carbon than we do with the dietary profile of humanity now.
"You have to put energy into those batteries and we have no idea how to do that on a global scale."
That's why I agree with Bailey when he says that social and technical innovations are necessary. Where we part ways is when he and others claim the economic growth is part of the solution.
" we have no idea what a global vegan diet would do"
It's pretty clear that the crops that go into feeding the animals we eat would be eaten directly by humans. A vegan diet would also cut out the energy consumption, almost entirely fossil fuels, associated with processing meat. I'm not sure why you are concerned with growing more vegetables. If anything it would tend to sequester more carbon, wouldn't it?
The number one crop grown in the US is corn. About 100 million acres according to various internet sources. It overwhelmingly ends up as animal fodder or into the production of ethanol. Less than 10% is consumed by humans, as syrup, cereal etc. A vegan diet would probably see us eating more corn, and a fair number of those 100 million acres switching over to other grains and vegetables.
Yes, because you can grow anything anywhere.
I'm growing avocado seeds in my bedroom. Take the seeds, peel of the outer husk, put them flat side down in a glass of water propped up by a few toothpicks, and soon the seed will split and roots will sprout. A while later shoots and leaves will emerge from the top of the seed. And I am not a professional agronomist, either.
You can feed the world with your bedroom avocados lol.
Maybe the humans. Avocados are not good for dogs or budgies.
How many years until you eat an avocado from it?
Try it yourself and see. It's a wonderful hobby and fascinating to watch the daily changes.
Please stay locked in your avocado farm habitat. In fact, I bet we can raise enough money for you to try a 10 year bedroom-sphere experiment.
I actually already did look into it years ago. It’s why I’m not growing avocados in your mom’s bedroom.
Do you realize how much environmental harm is caused by avocado cultivation.
Fine, an avocado tree in your yard is not a big deal.
Also, please note the number of times that reason has criticized corn and all othe agricultural subsidies.
I don't see your point. And it seems you don't see mine. I repeat again: burning more fossil fuel isn't a solution to climate change. I've stated this plainly again and again. You're more worked up over avocado cultivation, as if to avoid addressing my claim.
You’re never going to eat an avocado from your seed.
I'm not sure why you are concerned with growing more vegetables. If anything it would tend to sequester more carbon, wouldn't it?
Yes, it would sequester the same carbon that growing it for animal feed does.
But until you did a very comprehensive engineering study, it's still speculative. It's based on "meat production releases carbon, don't eat meat, voila carbon reduced. It's not entirely different from "gas engines emit carbon, eliminate the gas engine and voila carbon reduced". Just ignore the fact that in many places in the world, that electric car will be charged using coal plants.
A vegan diet would probably see us eating more corn, and a fair number of those 100 million acres switching over to other grains and vegetables.
I wouldn't deny that, but you're stealing a base to suggest that it automatically means a gross reduction in carbon emissions. You might be right, I'm not saying "you're wrong", I'm merely saying that it's purely speculative.
"But until you did a very comprehensive engineering study,"
You just need to think this through. All life requires energy to sustain itself. This is true of animals, vegetable and humans. There are some 6 billion humans on the planet. The number of chickens, cows and pigs on the planet at any given time is over 20 billion. The amount of energy required to sustain 6 billion humans is less than the amount of energy to sustain said humans AND those 20 billion farm animals. That less energy means less fossil fuel burning which means less CO2 emissions which may mitigate climate change. That's why a vegan lifestyle is all but inevitable if we are to take the challenge of climate change seriously. I've already said, forget America, the lead is going to come from India and China, two nations with a proven record of survival going back 5000 years and where veganism and vegetarianism is part of the culture and not an alien idea to be feared and scorned.
And yet for some weird reason, we only needed 200 years to pull way ahead of all those places.
"And yet for some weird reason, we only needed 200 years to pull way ahead of all those places."
We never accomplished anything by putting our heads in the sand and flinching from a challenge in the name of comfort and a cozy lifestyle.
Because we were allowed to work towards our own enrichment and/or pursuit of happiness. If blazing a new trail in this case means cutting ourselves off at the knees to empower a world government to decide for us and an aristocracy who don’t have to play by the same rules, then you’re not invoking the same thing.
“There are some 6 billion humans on the planet.”….. Pretty sure it’s closer to 8 billion.
Damn, covid really is a bitch. It killed 2 billion people! Go get your third booster, m!
It was 6 last time I counted.
That’s because you’re almost as stupid as shrike.
Almost.
How does the avocados grown in mom’s basements market play into this?
It sounds wonderful!
Batteries are already increasing in cost due to sanctions on Russia for Nickel extract lol
"Batteries are already increasing in cost "
I read somewhere that the price of oil and gas is also increasing.
Yes. So your green solution to avoid increased inflation is...
How are you able to tie your shoes but not understand simple argumentation?
I think he’s got an avocado oil based solution, but I can’t quite flesh it out.
No, they are capitalism at work. Climate change has nothing to do with it.
Innovation is risky and requires lots of money. The research into controlled fusion is almost entirely government funded. Even something as banal as the touch screens on your smart phone came of research funded by government. That's socialism at work.
Wrong.
In 1965 E.A. Johnson invented, what is generally considered the first finger driven touchscreen. Published in Electronic Letters, Johnson’s article “Touch display – a novel input/output device for computers” outlined a type of touchscreen that many personal devices today use; capacitive touch.
DEVELOPMENT
In the 1970’s Dr Sam Hurst developed a new type of sensor called the “Elograph”. Discovered almost by accident, Hurst’s touch screen was not transparent, as most touchscreens are today. Using the force of a touch, the technology required a conductive layer to contact a separate layer below containing an X and Y axis, the coordinates were then transmitted to a computer. Today we refer to this type of touchscreen technology as “resistive” and is one of the most widely used touch variants. Later in 1974, the first transparent resistive touchscreen was developed by Hurst and his team (the Elographics) and was patented in 1977.
Innovation and invention are two different animals. And the touch screen on your smart phone was not invented in 1977, 1974, or 1965.
Show your work.
I've worked on jobs with my feet and my hands
But all the work I did was for the other man
And now we demands a chance
To do things for ourselves
we tired of beating our heads against the wall
And working for someone else
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hj1iWqoYEc
Lying idiot.
All government funded, and no result for, what, 50 years now? Yes, that's typical of government.
As I say, risky. Private business is about making money, not taking risks.
Are you the same idiot who argued several months ago that roads, dams, airports, etc were all government creations because private industry couldn't invent such expensive projects? Sure think alike.
Did you know that air traffic control was invented by private airlines, and only later taken over by government? Did you know that lighthouses were run by private individuals and organizations before government took them over? Ronald Coase wrote about them, but you probably have no use for him either.
Your are not only ignorant and happy about it, but have no imagination and are proud of that too. You really need to widen your horizons and have a little more faith in humans to figure things out without a government paycheck.
"couldn't invent"
Couldn't and won't are two different animals.
Yeah, we all know that N****ers aren't entitled to the same living standard as white people, don't we?
Do you even think your comments through before you post them?
Nobody is entitled to any living standard. You shouldn't need me to tell you this. We are born into a world where we have to make our own way and find our own niche. The only thing we are entitled to is the love and care of our parents and family members. And even there there are limits.
So, are you prepared to lower your living standard to the level where the average nignog, wog, gook or chink lives his to share your largesse? I didn't think so. So, while keeping your current living standard, you are willing to stop the people who you consider your racial inferiors from aspiring to have the same living standard as you have?
Seems like pure unadulterated self-entitled racial bullshit to me.
"So, are you prepared to lower your living standard to the level where the average nignog, wog, gook or chink lives his to share your largesse? "
Adapt or die, the cruelest law of the universe. No one is exempt, no matter how entitled they think they are. Give a thought to the stresses and strains of those billions of China and India, adapting to their newly acquired wealth and security.
You are free to adopt a vegan diet. I am free to reject it. I don’t see that changing anytime soon.
Or is this one of those “as long as your betters permit” wet dreams that progs fantasize about?
Smug asshole.
"I don’t see that changing anytime soon. "
So much for plan B.
Vroom vroom!
OMG! Major new #DeathSantis scandal!
Ron DeSantis' net worth at the end of 2020 was less then 350k. His net worth now is 52 million. How did he make over 51 million in a year?
Now don't get me wrong. As a Koch / Reason left-libertarian I support politicians like Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry who are worth a lot more than $52 million. But an increase that sudden is suspicious.
#AtLeastJohnKerryEarnedItTheRightWay
The fucking lefty doesn't know what a campaign war chest is versus a net worth lol.
This is why I say you truly can't parody the left OBL. They are all idiots.
Bad news, twitter is not a reliable, verifiable source.
Post a link to the original analysis.
Thanks.
I used to perform performance testing of steam turbines and am fully aware of uncertainty and how that translates when many measurements are used in a calculation. I've never been able to reconcile how all these climate scientists can take measurements from the last hundred years and extrapolate it out to some increase in global temperature in tenths of a degree. This doesn't account for the fact that temperature measurements in the past that might have been taken in somewhere out in a field might now be measured in a suburb or city.
"I used to perform performance testing of steam turbines"
On an oboe or a tuba?
Either one would be more than sufficient to blow your complete and total lack of any form of climatology training out of your ass, Russ.
Divine inspiration?
“Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are pliable.” Mark Twain.
Let us keep in mind that mean temperature for any location is determined by taking the sum of a large number of actual physical readings (ie some guy or gal went out each day at an appointed time and reads a thermometer, again ie a glass tube with calibrated engravings by which the height of a column of mercury is read as proxy for ambient air temperature) divided by the number of observations made. Let us also keep in mind that the accuracy (until recently with the advent of electronic digital thermometers) with which the glass thermometers could be read was about one half of their least division (ie one degree, hence an accuracy of one half of one degree).
But then a computed average X/Y can be computed to any number of decimal places even though the best of the individual observations was not even accurate to even one.
You see where I'm going here?
'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics'
"Consider the massive heat wave in June 2021 that produced record-breaking temperatures in the Pacific Northwest, including highs of 116 degrees Fahrenheit in Portland, Oregon; 108 degrees in Seattle, Washington; and 121 degrees in Lytton, British Columbia. Under pre-industrial conditions, WWA researchers found, the chance of a heat wave like that was essentially zero. "Western North American extreme heat [was] virtually impossible without human-caused climate change," they concluded."
The weather record for west coast of NA only goes back to 170 years. They have no idea what the chances of heat wave were 500 or 100 years ago.
0% the earth is only 170 years old duh!
Yeah, and don't give me "tree ring study". That heat wave, while historic in the context of the last 170 years, was very brief. If I recall, that record breaking temperature was across a couple of days, and then we shot back to not only normal, but if I recall, below normal temperatures. I don't believe any tree ring study is going to show you a single day high temperature.
So yes, we have no idea if, 500 years ago the temperature went to 107 for two days, then fell back to normal for the next 20 years.
"was very brief."
Brief? It was long enough to kill humans. If a heat wave strikes at the wrong moment it can wipe out entire crops. That can result in more human deaths. Its brevity is irrelevant.
All crops everywhere? At the same time?
No. The growing seasons are reversed in the northern and southern hemisphere. The heat wave in question lasted about a week. Long enough to kill hundreds of humans.
That happens almost every week in Chicago.
See?!?! More climate change deaths!!!
More people die yearly from cold than from heat dummy.
More people die from old age than heat or cold put together. Still the point remains, a heat wave doesn't need much time to start killing people. You could die quicker if you drank a bottle of liquid oxygen if that makes you feel less threatened.
Orange Meme Good
That's maybe a good enough reason to burn fossil fuels (the cheapest source of constant power) to make sure people have air conditioning. 🙂
"to make sure people have air conditioning"
Because air conditioning those withering fields of corn is not going to happen. Making sure people have air conditioning is not going to stop crop failure.
All of the evidence shows that higher temperatures produce higher corn yields.
Also. try getting anything like a decent corn crop without a gas or diesel tractor. Unicorns don't like pulling plows. 🙂
Look at the graph Bailey has posted for us. The one with the shifted gaussian curves. If you don't see the relevance to the discussion, ask me.
No one is going to ask you anything.
Its brevity is not irrelevant if we're sticking to the subject at hand: Weather as a gauge for long-term climate change. Now, if we're going to drag the goalposts out of the stadium, yes, two days of 108 in a region where no one has an air conditioner in their home is going to have consequences. No one denies that. Think of the carbon emissions that were reduced by killing all those people. That's the goal here, right?
" That's the goal here, right?"
What's all this talk of goals and goalposts? Forget the metaphors and state your case clearly in plain language.
The same week that Oregon was cooking, it was relatively mild in California.
"it was relatively mild in California."
The entire world was relatively mild in comparison. The temperature reached 121 F in a town in BC.
Happy first day of Spring everyone! You know who else it’s SPRINGTIME FOR?
Hitler? And Germany? Dutch land is happy and gay? Their marching to a faster pace?
Putin, from what I'm hearing.
The guy who just copied Nazi Germany's 1934 Enabling Act?
*1933
Everything about the 'new models' and the process for determining if anthropogenic climate change is impacting weather events should be sounding alarm bells as textbook selection and confirmation biases. The concept that changing up models and data to make the outcome the climate activists want is not new. Shorter: advocacy/activism 'science' leads to GIGO, which is breathlessly hyped, circulated and repeated ad infinitum. Bailey contributes, as is expected, given his apparent liking for the narratives.
Bailey failed to reveal the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been relying upon inaccurate models and predicting climate change armageddon for decades.
Since writing his rather objective book about climate change and fearmongering about it, Bailey seems to have jumped onto the climate change fearmongering bandwagon.
Anyone interested in the actual science of climate change should read Bjorn Lomborg's books.
Or watts up with that
or The American Thinker
or Ron Hubbard's commentaries on the Book of Mormon
Nobody has enriched and emboldened Putin more than the climate change fearmongers and environmental extremists (and their left wing allies in the media, Big Tech and Democrat Party), who have demonized, banned, excessively regulated, taxed and/or banned natural gas, oil and carbon free nuclear power.
Meanwhile, Putin's Russian, Xi's China, Modi's India, the Iranian mullahs and the Saudi monarchs are far wealthier because they have no plans to go to zero carbon, but rather continue expanding their carbon emissions.
Every victory for the climate change crusaders has enriched and emboldened Putin and Xi.
Because that's totes what's most important, not our way of life being harmed nor our oligarchs raping the middle/working class...
Wtf
"Meanwhile, Putin's Russian, Xi's China, Modi's India, the Iranian mullahs and the Saudi monarchs are far wealthier because they have no plans to go to zero carbon, but rather continue expanding their carbon emissions."
Bailey, Lomborg et al are also calling for continued expansion of carbon emissions. Not explicitly, but nevertheless economic growth = growth in burning fossil fuels.
Bailey, Lomborg et al are NOT calling for continued expansion of carbon emissions, they are calling for market forces to be allowed to determine what energy sources should prevail.
"Bailey, Lomborg et al are NOT calling for continued expansion of carbon emissions"
They call for economic growth. And they don't call for decreasing our burning of fossil fuels. They seem to believe that our higher standard of living will somehow equate to a more desirable environment.
Show me that they are wrong. Show me that people having clean water to drink, increased food production and better clothing is not "a more desirable environment."
Goddamnit you are an elitist fuck.
Jesus Christ, I've put up with shits like you since I was in college nearly sixty years ago. Your kind were as tiresome then as you are now.
"Show me that people having clean water to drink, increased food production and better clothing is not "a more desirable environment."
You are misreading. Bailey, Lomborg et al aren't talking about cleaner water or better clothing. They both use the words economic growth specifically. That means burning fossil fuels. It's that simple.
Sohrab Ahmari
@SohrabAhmari
What I tweeted on that fateful day. Totally and completely vindicated.
Sohrab Ahmari
@SohrabAhmari
· Oct 14, 2020
This is a Big Tech information coup. This is digital civil war.
I, an editor at The New York Post, one of the nation’s largest papers by circulation, can’t post one of our own stories that details corruption by a major-party presidential candidate, Biden.
https://twitter.com/SohrabAhmari/status/1505275210647457793
Related:
Biden’s Handlers Are Preparing to Eject Him (and Kamala)"
We can only hope.
Hillary, is that you?
Seth Dillon
@SethDillon
Reality is a South Park episode.
[image]
https://twitter.com/SethDillon/status/1504901417953243136
aaronshem
@aaronshem
Nothing would do more to reduce fuel consumption & traffic than to get people to accelerate faster, pay attention & avoid using brakes. After that, get rid of speed limits, get rid of unnecessary stop signs, & instead have adjustable Target Speeds.
[chart]
https://mobile.twitter.com/aaronshem/status/1504494423777943557
https://twitter.com/Youblacksoul/status/1505309631542931459?t=qJO2zRyxKhvvcNJjBPcCUQ&s=19
Thread. Hundreds of civilians have been punished for diverse reasons in Ukraine by paramilitary groups and National guard. Strong footage. Tortures, abuses, humiliation, even of kids and girls.
[Videos]
If the Ukrainians win there are still going to have to be war crimes trials.
What's that old adage about yes/no questions in article titles again?
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1505586684238438412?t=EAKRY9Dzc3sX9vzowjSTPw&s=19
It's been 72 hours since NYT -- their Paper of Record -- stated the archive liberal outlets spent weeks lying was "Russian Disinformation" is, in fact, 100% authentic, and not one of them which spread the lie retracted it or even acknowledged it, because lying is their function.
If you ever wonder if the seething contempt and distrust you have for the US corporate press is excessive, just look at this and realize that, if anything, it's insufficiently intense:
[Links]
What difference, at this point, does it make?
Better late than never.
https://babylonbee.com/news/new-york-times-announces-they-have-finally-confirmed-the-watergate-tapes-are-authentic
https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1505490174918238209?t=vm6MsLILuA-3SKten2nXxA&s=19
Tweeted just hours before Zelensky unilaterally banned 11 opposition parties -- impressive
[@davidfrum
Ukraine may be the first example in human history of a country that under the pressure of war is becoming *more* tolerant and *more* liberal]
Just to be clear, Zelenski could end this war tomorrow. Putin's offer is on the table and it's essentially the same offer he's been making for years. Zelenski's intransigence will lead to more civilian death and suffering. He's demanding nothing less than direct NATO intervention i.e. WW3. I never thought I'd agree with Biden on anything but to date at least, he's not willing to cross that line. The war party right and left control the narrative at this point. The Ukraine cannot win this war without dragging us into it. This is not our war.
Sadly, this is correct.
This conflict might have been avoided if Zelensky and his Western backers had accepted the terms that they are now proposing:
1: Neutral status for Ukraine: No NATO membership.
2: Determination of the status of the Donbas region through an internationally supervised plebiscite
3: Acceptance that Crimea is Russian territory, a status which existed before 1954 and is reinforced by the fact that the majority of its population are Russian speaking and identify ethnically a Russian.
I get it that Vlad Putin is a thoroughly nasty dictator ruling and enriching himself with a thoroughly horrible oligarchy of former Soviet apparatchiks who got rich looting Soviet state assets etc and so on but I'm not entirely sure that that principal is a hill for thousands of innocent Ukrainians to be sacrificed on.
You are both correct.
Ukrainians have been mislead by their leaders and globalist activists into thinking this is a war of conquest and/or extermination, when in reality the only issue at hand is Ukrainian oligarchs' connections with western/globalist oligarchs. Billions have flowed into their pockets since 2014, as Ukraine has served as the world's primary location through which to launder money confiscated from the western world's middle/working class. The Ukrainian people are dying to protect this corruption and Slavic ISIS (the proudly neonazi paramilitaries and security state).
An independent nationalist Russia, home to a plurality of the world's nuclear weapons, has been something of a roadblock to the globalist goal of a world subject to their one-government rule since Putin replaced Yeltsin 2 decades ago. The "Build Back Better" "Great Reset" cabal desires regime change by any means necessary, probably up to and including nuclear catastrophe.
People really need to start understanding the absolutely dire situation we find ourselves in. 2020 was a phase shift into the endgame, where freedom and independence are extinguished worldwide. Like it or not, our prospects are tied up with the fate of Putin's Russia.
Here's a good article on the topic: https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/putin-destined-hang-or-drown
The guy is doing a lot of editorializing based on visuals. He may be correct in cases, but the videos don't back him up.
https://twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1505594039034281985?t=B9HxlejdBC2er71UAJ0UeA&s=19
Has anyone mentioned that Devon Archer was the guy who got Hunter Biden appointed to the Burisma Board at the cool salary of $82,000 a month -- only a couple months after he was Admin. separated from the Navy for cocaine use -- Joe was still VP?
Archer was Christopher Heinz's roommate at Yale. Archer had various positions in Heinz family ventures. Archer got started in politics as a "Bundler" for John Kerry's 2004 POTUS run. Archer was put on the Burisma board by another American who was a Burisma board member.
Archer was put on the Burisma Board in 2013 because Kerry was Secretary of State. Archer gave Hunter's name to the guy who put him on the Board because Joe was given Ukraine as part of his "portfolio" by Obama.
But $84,000 a month to be board member isn't really a job.
And in the circles Archer traveled in, $1 million a year wasn't "real" money. Rosemont Senaca was not terribly active the first 5 years -- hence Hunter going into the Navy to look for a path to straighten out his life.
So while on the Burisma board, Archer looked for "get rich quick" schemes on Wall Street. That's how he fell in with fraudsters, leading to his involvement in the fraudulent Indian bond scheme. In that same time frame -- 2014-2017, Archer and Hunter went looking for China deals.
Their Burisma board seats were a step to far for Chris Heinz so he quit Rosemont Seneca. That left only Archer -- dragging along the drug-addled Hunter -- to chase down whatever Chinese backed venture was offered them if it meant money for them.
Sounds like a good Netflix series.
I don't see Barak signing off on it though
https://twitter.com/ISeeDanger_/status/1498358565576208386?t=6Me6YnV7dBWGNCFnmRTveA&s=19
Thread of sources on Ukraine that can't be dismissed as Russian propaganda. If you have more please link them below.
1. Ukrainian media discusses President Zelensky praising Nazi collaborator, Stepan Bandera.
[Links]
These aren't your grandparents Nazis. These are good Nazis. Freedom fighters.
For years, experts warned that any given hurricane or heat wave cannot be attributed to long-term changes in average temperatures. But it turns out that climatologists and meteorologists sometimes can establish such causal relationships.
No they didn't. They warned that any given weather event couldn't be attributed to climate change when that weather event contradicted the narrative on Climate change.
When the weather event helped bolster the narrative, then it was climate change.
Well after two years as a member of the Branch Covidians, Ron returns to the fold. His promiscuity and apostasy apparently forgiven, the Church of Climate Change welcomes him back into it's warm embrace. I'm a believer in redemption and I fully support his quest as he blunders his way from faith to faith. His plaintive cries of "testing, testing!" and "Pfizer,Pfizer!" will fade away and his tried and true mantra, "models, models!" will once again dominate his meditations. We can only hope that before Ron meets his final judgement he will find the Top Men who will lead him to his salvation. Godspeed to you sir.
I would rather someone shove a grenade up his ass.
Walter Duranty's spirit is still strong
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1505592512643313670?t=A9FGS5JYKDN8NRgfg-26IQ&s=19
Drug-addled neo-Nazis. Genocide. American biological weapons factories. The Kremlin has used a barrage of increasingly falsehoods to justify its invasion of Ukraine.
[Link]
"American biological weapons factories. "
It's plausible that there are such factories in Ukraine. But these weapons don't appear to be used against the invading Russian military. Do you think they have some other purpose?
Nardz the Nazi
Learn to read sheep entrails.
Only the Science! can do that.
Option one: The religious are correct, and the universe was created by God. In that case, we should do nothing because saying God made a mistake and we have to fix it will bring down a rain of fire, which is worse than global climate warming change.
Option two: Darwin was correct, and we cannot fix evolution, so we should do nothing.
Option three: global climate warming change is a false flag operation by fascists intent on taking over the world by destroying the economy so that they can rush on and "save" us with totalitarian dictates.
Or Great Haruspexations
https://twitter.com/GuyFrees/status/1505377197128749056?t=lqkzJKO2YxAKtTCWn1ixGA&s=19
This pic says it all.
[Pic]
The trifecta.
https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1505604257138962432?t=WkhYqJbVQeVD1Yw8CoHhNQ&s=19
“Queer camp.” Imagine sending your kid to this
[Link]
Nardz the Nazi
How exactly is Nardz a Nazi Karen?
He wants to kill people if they didn’t vote for his guy.
He spreads antisemitic conspiracy theories about Ukraine and Soros.
I don’t know why I’m explaining this to you. Your the America will fail because different ethnic groups can’t coexist guy. You’re a pos.
Can't really decifer your comment but I guess I'm the America (that) will fail because something, something ethnic groups can't coexist with (some) guy and that makes me a pos. Did I get that right? But thanks for clarifying your assertion that Nardz is a Nazi. He wants to kill people who didn't vote for his guy, whoever that may be, and spreads antisemitic conspiracy theories. I read the comments here pretty frequently and I've never seen Nardz do either of those things. I'm hoping you can give me an example or better still a link because I probably had other things to do that day. Thanks in advance for your help.
Nardz wants to kill everyone who didn’t vote for Trump. He says it all the time.
I have you confused with another commenter, so sorry.
You’re sorry alright.
I'd bet there's similar coordination with "climate change" results
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1505578950722007040?t=HjEhf0dBHPIUn35ZlZBvgA&s=19
Fascinating.
[Graphic-
How should Canada respond to the Ukraine invasion: vaccinated vs unvaccinated]
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/citing-martial-law-ukraine-president-signs-decree-combine-national-tv-channels-2022-03-20/
It's just another conspiracy, except instead of every doctor in the work being in on the COVID hoax, or every election official in the country being in on the Big Steal, every climatologist in the world is in on the global warming hoax.
What all three of these have in common in Marxists. Every doctor and every election official and every climatologist is a Marxist. They all hate America. If you don't agree then you're a Marxist who hates America.
Or you get canceled.
Every doctor in the world wasn't in on the climate hoax. But those that weren't were either too scared to speak up, or they were deplatformed.
Every climatologist isn't in on the climate change hoax, but those that aren't are either bullied into submission or they get deplatformed.
If that was true how would you know?
Ideas! So well read. So informed.
Good article, if you're into that kinda thing
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/putin-destined-hang-or-drown
https://twitter.com/richimedhurst/status/1505229579597893632?t=pWDgIDxZVA_qaEqXWktg6w&s=19
Remember that email from Jake Sullivan to Hillary Clinton during their war against Syria, where he says “Al Qaeda is on our side in Syria”?
Imagine the emails right now going “Azov are on our side in Ukraine.”
This is why Assange is in prison. Too much truth-telling.
Liz Cheney says there could be criminal penalties for Trump
Federal prosecutors have charged more than 700 people in 48 states over the deadly attacks
Wow, Liz is not happy with what she calls the "Putin wing of the GOP".
This is not some starry-eyed moonbat speaking either.
Liz Cheney is a neocon clown shoe desperate for attention and relevance.
Liz Cheney has said that Donald Trump could face criminal penalties over the fatal January 6th riots at the US Capitol.
The Wyoming congresswoman told NBC’s Meet the Press that the January 6th committee is considering whether to recommend criminal punishment for the “kind of supreme dereliction of duty that you saw with President Trump”.
For the good of the country we need to punish criminal action even if it is a former POTUS.
IMPEACH 45!
Now do BLM and antifa mobs, and all political office holders who encouraged and enabled them.
You are also a clown shoe who is desperate for relevance and attention.
Even the Daily Mail is going anti insurrection:
Liz Cheney reveals Capitol riot committee is looking at whether ‘enhanced criminal penalties’ are warranted over Trump’s ‘dereliction of duty’ and promises ‘new information’ is coming about January 6
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10632931/Cheney-looking-enhanced-penalties-needed-Trumps-dereliction-duty-Jan-6.html
Is this what you meant when you predicted back in May 2021 The Dotard will join his convict team soon?
#WallsClosingIn
The walls are closing in!
Unlike Democrats, Liz Cheney has balls.
#RepublicansNeverCaveSeeBenghazi
Michelle Obama isn’t a Democrat?
But the balls Michelle carries came from Barrie.
"Liz Cheney has balls"
Unlike the little girl tied up in your basement.
Back in 2003 I bet you never imagined you'd one day be on the same side as the neocons who helped start the Iraq War you hated so much.
But these days it's not surprising the Democratic Party's favorite Republican is a Cheney. After all, Bill Kristol (wrote an entire book advocating the Iraq War), David "Axis of Evil" Frum (George W. Bush speechwriter), Max Boot, Jennifer Rubin, and Tom Nichols are all now effectively Democrats.
#LibertariansForEmbracingNeocons
From NYT in 2014, long before Drumpf won the GOP nomination:
The Next Act of the Neocons
"Even as they castigate Mr. Obama, the neocons may be preparing a more brazen feat: aligning themselves with Hillary Rodham Clinton and her nascent presidential campaign, in a bid to return to the driver’s seat of American foreign policy."
Indeed, Drumpf irreparably damaged the GOP (and helped the Democrats) by formalizing the Dems' status as the new party of choice of the neocons.
When, exactly, were the Democrats not the party of choice of the neocons?
Everyone has forgotten the two-year Al Gore/Mad Albright Roadshow (1997-98) that tried to persuade Americans that what Iraq needed was "regime change" good and hard and NPR hosts like Terry Gross and Diane Rehm giving us week after week of interviews with "the usual suspects" proclaiming that Saddam Hussein was literally Hitler.
Dubya was derided by the media for advocating a "humble foreign policy". If only he had really meant it. He lost the plot after 9/11 and the neocons took over.
road
Pretty much
If I had to identify the greatest mischief that has been part of US foreign policy in the last thirty years, it would be the idea of "regime change".
Where regime change has been "successful" it has produced dire results, whether in Iraq (enough said), Afghanistan (where "we" replaced the Taliban with a kleptocracy that an energized Taliban replaced before our withdrawal was even complete*) and Libya (need I say more, oh wait a minute, the slave trade has been reinstated). Then we have to consider Syria (where "we" did not just fail but we risked WWIII when we took sides against the Russians).
What we need now in the Ukraine is regime change. Oh wait. We already did that. I'm sure if we keep trying there's a happy ending someday, somewhere.
You're correct.
Thankfully, the Bush Doctrine and his entire presidency has been thoroughly discredited. Nation building, spreading democracy by military force, big Government compassionate conservatism, anti-gay, huge deficit spending, etc.
Trump kept Big Government Big Deficit Conservatism and just killed the Neocon part and friendly immigrant GOP.
Maybe the GOP has no use anymore. Progressives are no improvement.
Both parties suck. It is why I vote for gridlock.
Gridlock is the best we can do.
Guess that means you'll vote Republican in the midterms then?
Wow, what a dilemma. I have to be truthful.
The only race that matters is the US Senate but the GOP is running a world-class moron in Herschal Walker. Warnock is a no.
Maybe Walker will say something so incredibly Todd Aiken stupid he has to drop out.
I would vote for the GOP witch Christine O'Connell - the embarrassment from Delaware.
But Walker is brain-damaged stupid.
The net is closing.
Why would they charge more than 700 people, when only a couple of cops perpetrated the deadly attacks on the protestors?
Because fuck you that's why and shut the fuck up. I think that covers it.
As the billions of other 'Nazi' released science goes.
#1.. Title - This is an Emergency
#2.. Pretext - Everyone is going to die unless gov gets more power.
#3.. Charts - The everyone is going to die 'we think'.
Mini-texted Cites....
Supporting Evidence.... Oh whoops there isn't any really. All the numbers don't predict anything. Oh whoops; the 'Title' prediction never happened and Oh whoops; "well it could happen"...
It's really absurd that ALL Gov-Reports read like that. And when an independent outlet runs the exact same 'actual' conclusion it become the arc-nemesis of centralized propaganda even though both *real* supporting evidence say the exact same thing.
#4... Action - the government spends a few trillion dollars on stuff that has little impact on the supposed problem.
#5... Analysis - If the catastrophe fails to materialize, the government claims victory for their quick action. If the catastrophe happens anyway, the government announces that A) they didn't spend enough, or B) it would have been much worse without the government's quick and decisive action.
This is the best and most comprehensive timeline of the Brandon administration's war on domestic energy production that I've seen laid out yet:
https://nypost.com/2022/03/18/president-biden-is-at-fault-for-high-gas-prices-not-putin/
It's best to keep in mind that the main factor in our current inflation is the Fed flooding the money supply through quantitative easing for the last fourteen years.
Even the hiccough of Covid was not enough to set of massive price increases. It took Biden's massive spending bills and the uncertainty of his idiotic energy policy to unleash the crisis that fourteen years of Fed policy set in motion. Like years of tectonic buildup of pressure results in a massive earthquake when the plates suddenly shift.
I'd like to see Shrike try to lie his way around that.
Earth's climate has been changing for over 4 billion years and it will continue changing until the Sun goes red giant and either literally swallows Earth or at a minimum blasts all its air and water into space and bakes Earth to a crisp. The very idea that the incredibly feeble creature that is man is going to bring this process to a halt is risible.
And of course the liberal "elite" are well aware of this--heck, even Black Hitler himself just bought a 10 million dollar mansion a few steps away from the beach he and his disease ilk claim will be inundated a few years hence.
The problem with humanity these days is that liberal "leaders" are so profoundly evil, and their followers so profoundly stupid.
We feeble creatures have tapped into millions of years worth of saved up sunlight in the form of fossil fuels, and are using it much faster than it was produced. As a result the climate is changing a bit faster than before we started burning stuff we found underground.
Environmentalists seem to want the solution (which assumes that this is a problem) to come from government.
What if it isn't a problem? And assuming it is, why are men of force better equipped to deal with it than the free market?
The problem with humanity these days is that liberal "leaders" are so profoundly evil, and their followers so profoundly stupid.
I'm sure they say the same thing about you.
You're betting a lot on a fringe ideology. There's an answer for you: if the free market were capable of handling climate change on its own, it would have done so by now.
It's obviously a problem in that the average temperature of the planet will be some measure higher than it ever has been in the history of the human species. Coastal cities will be gone (and that's most of the major cities).
The quantity of heating (and sea-level rise and species extinction and effects we don't even know about) depends on the quantity of fossil fuels we allow ourselves to pump into the atmosphere.
The oil industry made a choice. Rather than go to the trouble of investing in other things, they chose to fund propaganda campaigns in the model of the tobacco industry, choosing short-term profits over the entirety of the future of humanity.
From a utilitarian sort of perspective, they've killed trillions of people for a few hundred million bucks. The free market failed here. You should be taking this as a lesson for why your ideology is flawed.
lmao... "we don't even know about" ------ That about summarizes that. but, but, but Dictation and Gov-Gun Force will fix it!!!!!!
Because that's what Nazi's do for a living.......... FORCE 'those' people to fix all their own personal problems they "don't even know about".
Huh, "...killed trillions of people..."? That alone should have you dismissed as a liar, a nutcase or an ignoramus. But of course, the latter two are not mutually exclusive.
Here's a little challenge for you. How has the free market failed to deal with "climate change"?
First of all, no one has actually demonstrated that any harm has been caused by "climate change" and furthermore, no one has demonstrated that any proposed government intervention will have any effect on any of the predicted future consequences of "climate change".
Since you have absolutely no idea what kind of innovations individuals or groups of people might introduce in the future, how can you say that the free market is not capable of handling climate change on its own? You have no idea how people will handle challenges in the future.
You have demonstrated over and over that you are a "great man" devotee. You are waiting for you Hitler, Mussolini, Mao or Stalin to take charge and make the trains run on time or you are imagining an Obama who will create "the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal ...". Guess what, Obama didn't sop the seas from rising any more than King Canute could. And Mussolini didn't make the trains run on time competent railway managers and workers do. And Hitler, Stalin and Mao simply murdered millions and left behind destruction and mayhem.
And, I will add, neither Obama, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao nor Stalin left behind any positive legacy that makes their reigns on earth worthy of any historical recognition.
Actually, the oil industry could kill a few billion people and still be the greatest force for good ever, if net lives is the criteria. Given that in pre-industrialized societies most people died before adulthood, the only way we reached nearly 8 billion on the planet is due to modern food production, technology, and health care. And none of that would exist without the global use of first coal, and then oil and gas. Without that, most of the 8 billion would have died young--or never been conceived.
Without that, most of the 8 billion would have died young--or never been conceived.
And the projected trillions of dead would still be projected dead.
Translation: I'm too busy pontificating to read your damn dirty textbooks and science journals.
Sorry, but which "dirty textbooks and science journals" have predicted "...trillions of people..."... "killed"?
We know you’re too stupid to read, you’ve proved that very effectively in these comments.
"First of all, no one has actually demonstrated that any harm has been caused by "climate change" and furthermore, no one has demonstrated that any proposed government intervention will have any effect on any of the predicted future consequences of "climate change"."
Nor do we know that any intentional interventions, if 100% effective as planned, would have a positive or life sustaining impact on the climate. If we did indeed succeed at cooling the climate, it would probably be catastrophic. Life thrives in warm conditions, is inhibited and dies the colder it gets. The Little Ice Age ended 150 years ago, and was a time of great suffering in blight. Yet it's been set as the benchmark for conditions we need to return to?
Hi Tony. Hope all is well.
“ if the free market were capable of handling climate change on its own, it would have done so by now.”
You could say the same thing about the government.
"fringe ideology!!!"
"The oil industry... killed trillions of people for a few hundred million bucks."
Lol, Tony's his own self-discrediting machine. It's almost like he doesn't understand what "million" and "trillion" are.
I don't see why that is a problem at all. Humans well being and prosperity is positively correlated with global average temperatures, and massive sea level rise in the past has had no observable deleterious effects on humans.
Are you effing kidding? The oil industry has been diversifying for decades. They are chomping at the bit about receiving all those juicy crony-capitalist handouts leftists like you want to give thhem.
There have only ever been 117 billion humans across all time. The idea that the oil industry "killed trillions of people" is utterly ludicrous. What kind of scientific illiterate moron are you?
I agree, Earths climate has always changed, and will continue to change regardless of human life, but the real tragedy would be global cooling. Not that human life wouldn't survive, it would, but the reduction in food production due to even a mini-ice age would kill billions on a hurry.
I don't see why that is a problem at all. Humans well being and prosperity is positively correlated with global average temperatures, and massive sea level rise in the past has had no observable deleterious effects on humans.
Also, it's between factually incorrect and irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the Arctic gets 10 degrees warmer or cooler for 1 year or 10 if the near entirety of the human species is living in the tropical desert of the Fertile Crescent. If the Fertile Crescent gets 10 degrees colder for a decade, it doesn't matter if the rest of the world stays stable or the Arctic gets 10 degrees warmer to more than make up the average.
Even the climate change models of climate change alarmists predict a rise in global average temperatures occurring primarily due to a rise of temperatures at high latitudes.
Overall, climate change due to higher CO2 concentrations means milder and wetter conditions across the entire globe, which is a good thing for humans.
Please stay away from science. Stick to your drugs and burning meat.
Tony's meat doesn't burn anymore thanks to his recent penicillin prescription. Not until bear week anyway.
If a meteorologist and a climatologist have a causal relationship, that's none of our business.
Rats! I thought this was going to be a X and Y walk into a bar joke.
A meteorologist and a climatologist walk into a bar. The climatologist says "we'd better only have one drink each, or people will think we get drunk all the time." The meteorologist says "keep 'em comin', barkeep, this is just a one-time event."
A meteorologist and a climatologist walk into a bar. The meteorologist has a shot of whiskey. The climatologist downs an entire bottle in one go. A nearby leftist screams "SEE? THEY'RE EXACTLY THE SAME!!!"
Are thinking about the time Paul Ehrlich and John Holdren got drunk and brainstormed the book John has since disavowed? Whatever they were serving in Woods Hole, Unicorn Abbatoir should try a bottle
You should try a bullet, self-administered
Bollocks ! - the non-polo playing Kochs took over the Coors Reason funding franchise back in the days when Ron and Tuck to the same What Climate Change ? page as yourself.
Did you come directly from Stupidville, or did you have to change planes in Chicago?
What time does Stupidville stop at the next swamp gas Zeppelin?
The Heartland Institute needs to know so they can arrange speaker transport for their next International Climate Conference at the Trump Hotel
Go back to your handlers.
Of course, the whole "climate catastrophe" narrative falls apart once you realize that:
A. Warmer temperatures are more amenable to human life and flourshing, and
B. Our primitive "caveman" ancestors adapted to much greater warming and sea-level rises, without the benefit of the modern technologies that we enjoy (such as air conditioning, sea walls, engineered foundations, etc.)
Excellent points.
Bingo
Clarence Thomas hospitalized with flue like symptoms
https://www.newsbreakapp.com/n/0ekoCVO4?pd=05vSRvT0&lang=en_US&s=i16
Maybe the junta's giving him the Scalia retirement package. They must have big plans for midterms.
I find it really odd that we didn’t all more about Scalia being found with a pillow over his face.
Let's all for a moment step back from the current atrocities in Ukraine just a few weeks. The Biden administration was telling us every day that Putin was going to invade at any moment. The Ukraine government said that they saw no reason to believe that. Did the US not share their intelligence with Zelenski? Did the Ukraine not have their own intelligence? Who wanted this war? Who didn't? How did the Biden family's well documented profiteering in Ukraine play into the administration's response and propaganda? Why does Zelenski think he has the leverage to demand that NATO defend his corrupt government at the risk of nuclear war? Did Putin fuck up the end game by slow walking the invasion? This is one of many regional wars that are happening right now. Why should I give a shit? Ukraine has had Nazi military units killing people in the Donbas region for eight years. Who are the good guys? Who are the bad guys? I don't know the answers to all of these questions but I do know that the people pulling the levers do not have my best interests on their radar screen.
I think the Western powers were deliberately giving Zelensky every reason to think that Nato had his back, because they wanted this war far more than Putin.
Correct
In addition, Zelensky has to worry about the extremist elements (his sponsor's street soldiers), especially within the security service, suiciding him if he intends to make peace.
Talks are apparently progressing, but we'll see. The elimination of Azov particularly, by the Russian army, may weaken that element enough to allow a deal to be made.
https://twitter.com/ChuckCallesto/status/1505699098954973188?t=QbBbiVyOkJoHqtTlymerzQ&s=19
BREAKING REPORT: US Army Officially Begins Dishonorably DISCHARGING SOLDIERS Who Haven’t Taken The Vaccine...
Just like our "moderate" rebels (al queda) in Syria, except to a greater degree, these guys were equipped, trained, and funded by the US State Department and CIA
https://twitter.com/Youblacksoul/status/1504596675746271233?t=kEUKtvpftWg7TSniF_1WpA&s=19
@MapsUkraine Testimony of Mariupol residents: Azov Batallion executed civilians triying to escape the city.
[Thread, links, videos]
What you call "attribution research" amounts to comparing the frequency of extreme weather events under different climate model simulations. But those simulations themselves are mostly pulled out of thin air, have not been experimentally validated, and are often fitted to match actual observations retroactively. And their predictions for extreme and rare events are even less reliable and meaningful than their predictions for statistical averages.
In other words, what you call "attribution research" is bullshit; it's a scientific sounding veneer for the opinions and beliefs of the people publishing the papers.
Just to remind everyone, this exchange occured almost a month ago.
Fat Mike's Drug Habit
February.22.2022 at 11:45 am
Flag Comment Mute User
So was that agreement about not moving NATO shit into Warsaw pact countries.
Sure seems like this whole situation was caused by a series of US foreign policy fuckups, maybe we should just stop.
Gaear Grimsrud
February.22.2022 at 12:05 pm
Flag Comment Mute User
Well the Victoria Nuland coup in Ukraine sure didn't reassure Putin much. Now she works for Biden. If the Russians installed an anti American regime in Mexico we might be sending peacekeepers into Arizona at some point.
Isaac Bartram
February.22.2022 at 7:41 pm
Flag Comment Mute User
Baja California, Chihuahua, Sonora or one of the other three states that border on the US might be better example.
Just saying.
This Russian incursion might have been forestalled if not completely prevented if the US had simply said to Russia, "We will promise that Ukraine, Georgia et al will never be allowed to join NATO (an alliance that has outlived its usefulness to the US, IMO) and in return you will vacate the Crimea and all other Ukrainian and Georgian territory that you are currently occupying and renounce all claims to said territory.
Unfortunately, the democrats and many republicans are so beholden to NATO and other European interests that they will not give up on the idea of complete encirclement of Russia.
In all fairness, I was probably wrong. Russia will not give up its claim to Crimea, given that Crimea was only given to Ukraine in 1954.
Putin has been quite consistent in his demands for a couple of decades: he wants Crimea, Donbas, and a commitment that Ukraine remain neutral and out of NATO. He has also been consistent that any move towards incorporating Ukraine into NATO would result in war.
Nope, it’s just because Putin is a final level Bond villain boss.
LOL
https://twitter.com/thebenbergman/status/1505679545965314054?t=Ni646jeMWtOBwkMnVUDD7Q&s=19
The very rare time as a Tesla owner I wish I could pay $6/gallon for gas and be on my way. We need more super chargers @elonmusk
[Video]
Not quite peak schadenfreude, but ill take it. Town I live in isnt podunk, but its not a major city either. We have a single Tesla charging station and a single [whatever the other GE vehicles charge at] station. Its not like this is CA so there arent 1000s of teslas, but I have definitely seen when too many people go there at once (since it takes a not insignificant time to charge). Its not pretty. It sucks waiting in a gas line when a car can get in/out in 3-5 minutes, it really sucks when that time increases to 10-20 minutes per car.
This article is insidious. It speaks of hypothetically lowering and raising concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (for testing models) and, without skipping a beat, implies that any increase in greenhouse gases is the result of human activity. That's a pretty big conclusion to just slip in and accept with neither caveat nor other discussion of any kind.
Anyway, I can see what I am supposed to think now, without any extra unnecessary thinking, please.
Reason needs to up its science game considerably.
This is such a silly thing to argue about. Weather and climate are extremely complex systems. Everything is basically a cause of everything else. So if there is climate change, human caused or not, absolutely everything that happens is caused to some degree by climate change. It means nothing.
Are you an Elite?