Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 hours ago, red viking said:

 so I'm more qualified on this subject than 99% of the general population 

😆 

.

Posted
6 hours ago, red viking said:

Oh, ok. So he's saying we're at a tipping pt. What's your evidence to refute thst? What's your climatology background? 

You are so clueless on this subject, that you weren't aware that the "experts" have been predicting the end of the world as we know it for decades, and that we have already passed our "expiration date" multiple times.

Posted
7 minutes ago, Interviewed_at_Weehawken said:

You are so clueless on this subject, that you weren't aware that the "experts" have been predicting the end of the world as we know it for decades, and that we have already passed our "expiration date" multiple times.

The "tipping point" varies depending upon the latest data, assumptions, and climatic modeling used. Again though, nobody is predicting the "end of the world." 

Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, red viking said:

The "tipping point" varies depending upon the latest data, assumptions, and climatic modeling used. Again though, nobody is predicting the "end of the world." 

That is not what I said, but I forgot you struggle with simple ideas,

Edited by Interviewed_at_Weehawken
Posted

image.png.4caf19a0eeb6a96041818aeb50482990.png

 

So, did each port cost $20,000,000 dollars (20 MILLION!!) to build?  Or are there several billion dollars still unspent which can be returned, recissioned, repudiated, or "unspent" by whatever means necessary?

Goal:  500,000 charging ports by 2030.  Interpolated number to date should have been around 175,000.  Biden/Buttigieg performance 384.  

Yet judges are saying that this administration must continue to fund the hoax.

https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/biden-admins-7-5-billion-ev-initiative-built-fewer-than-400-charging-ports-in-3-years-watchdog-says/

People who tolerate me on a daily basis . . . they are the real heroes.

Posted

No no no no no, that is not how it works padawan.   2025 there will be 300, 2026, there will be 600, 2027, there will be 1000 total, 2028 there will be 1500 total, 2029 there will be 50000 total, 2030 there will be 500k total.   It is the D expectation curve of wishful thinking.   Under perform in the beginning humiliate completely alienate and humilate your core supporters, and do so for years, and then all of the sudden, it will happen and the goal will be met.   The above is just a fantasy.   

WA is the most green state in the union except taht we aren't.   Haven;t met a single climate goal yet, but we are paying lots of money for it.   Just gave us the highest tax increase in history so that we can be even more green with no mandatory reporting of progress or anything.   One WA guy went to court to get a WA gov report and the court said he didn't have standing.   That's how we roll in the PNW.  

mspart 

Posted
On 7/22/2025 at 10:05 AM, Offthemat said:

All your degree means is that you were able to memorize the material you were presented with.  You have no idea whether that information was nonsense or not.  Experience is the teacher.  Geology is the degree you seek when you don’t have what it takes to be a real scientist. 

Wow. This one really sticks out.

To you, advanced degrees are simply about memorizing material.

Wow.

You are obviously a child, but here's the thing - stop listening to whoever is telling you this garbage advice. Stop now.

Computers and smart phones could not have possibly been invented and built and manufactured at such ridiculously low prices... without a ton of people with degrees working smart with their knowledge behind the design and build plan.

Successful people with degrees didn't get through school by 'memorizing' things. They do it by hardcore learning.

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

Wow. This one really sticks out.

To you, advanced degrees are simply about memorizing material.

Wow.

You are obviously a child, but here's the thing - stop listening to whoever is telling you this garbage advice. Stop now.

Computers and smart phones could not have possibly been invented and built and manufactured at such ridiculously low prices... without a ton of people with degrees working smart with their knowledge behind the design and build plan.

Successful people with degrees didn't get through school by 'memorizing' things. They do it by hardcore learning.

Geologists invented smart phones ?    Army geologists stationed in Korea no less.    Enlisted man super scientist 

Edited by Caveira
  • Haha 1
Posted

No, he is saying that rocks built the cell phone.  

I have a master's degree and I memorized a lot.   That is what learning is all about.   if You learn and don't remember, you didn't learn it.  It is fair to say that not all higher degrees are equal.  

For instance, if I didn't not memorize F=ma, I would not have graduated with a bachelors much less a masters. 

Hard core learning is hard core memorizing in one form or another.   I'm hoping my grandson memorized that grabbing a tailpipe after getting out of the car is not a good idea.   That there would be real learning.  He's 2.5 years old so he may not remember until the next time, although he is pretty smart. 

mspart

Posted
19 hours ago, Caveira said:

Geologists invented smart phones ?    Army geologists stationed in Korea no less.    Enlisted man super scientist 

People with advanced degrees created smart phones. And that's the only way it would have been possible. Include modern computers, modern automotive technology, etc. in this list. (The list is quite long.)

For someone like you to claim an advanced degree is nothing more than "memorizing" shows that you are an idiot.

You're not alone. Quite a few low IQ folks in rural areas seem to dislike 'smart' people and their accomplishments, too.

It's similar to ugly people disliking beautiful people. 'Envy' is a terrible thing - which is why it is one of the seven deadly sins.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Did she say she was a dandelion or a dandy lying liar?

They’re just imo trying to fix their image.   Tell me some life coach didn’t tell her to look less like the angriest Karen scowl face corpse on the planet and just please for the love of god try to look a little more like-a-ble?

I mean all of a sudden the Ds are on TikTok lol ….. wasn’t TikTok the super insecure crazy app that needed to be shut down?!???  Embarrassingly lose an election to the worst candidate ever and things change ha 

just my 4 cents.  (Inflation lol)

Edited by Caveira
  • Haha 1
Posted

From a NYT article:

  image.png.a633f7f03fcf6b21882ddb63b70d6b93.png

These people are dumber than dirt.  Water vapor IS THE greenhouse gas.  Far larger amounts of water vapor are in the atmosphere than any other greenhouse gas. 

The rest of the article is fun to read for its silliness also  The summary - "Clean Hyrdrogen" takes so much energy to make that it is not good for use as an energy.  At least until we get a perpetual motion machine funded by a money tree.  THEN it will be perfect.  Until then, plug your cows' butts and pay more taxes.

https://archive.is/DRorH

People who tolerate me on a daily basis . . . they are the real heroes.

Posted
51 minutes ago, Lipdrag said:

From a NYT article:

  image.png.a633f7f03fcf6b21882ddb63b70d6b93.png

These people are dumber than dirt.  Water vapor IS THE greenhouse gas.  Far larger amounts of water vapor are in the atmosphere than any other greenhouse gas. 

The rest of the article is fun to read for its silliness also  The summary - "Clean Hyrdrogen" takes so much energy to make that it is not good for use as an energy.  At least until we get a perpetual motion machine funded by a money tree.  THEN it will be perfect.  Until then, plug your cows' butts and pay more taxes.

https://archive.is/DRorH

Dumbest post of the year. Water is not a factor because the total amount in atmosphere can't change unless overall temp changes first. Total CO2 has changed a lot though. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, red viking said:

Dumbest post of the year. Water is not a factor because the total amount in atmosphere can't change unless overall temp changes first. Total CO2 has changed a lot though. 

Are you a climatologist or a rock-ologist?

Posted
10 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Are you a climatologist or a rock-ologist?

It's very basic chemistry and earth science. Basic stuff. Did u take those classes in high school? 

Posted
58 minutes ago, red viking said:

Dumbest post of the year. Water is not a factor because the total amount in atmosphere can't change unless overall temp changes first.

Which happens every minute of every day everywhere. 

 

1 hour ago, red viking said:

Total CO2 has changed a lot though. 

We need more, not less. 

Posted
13 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Which happens every minute of every day everywhere.

Don't confuse the rock ... he's got a solid education.  

.

Posted
27 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Which happens every minute of every day everywhere. 

 

We need more, not less. 

Omg. Not the overall/average temperature of the earth though. The wingers have zero logic or understanding of basic science. The total amount of water in atmosphere can't change to any significant extent. It can only hold so much and then it rains. Overall CO2 can vary and has increased by huge amounts. 

Posted
43 minutes ago, red viking said:

Omg. Not the overall/average temperature of the earth though. The wingers have zero logic or understanding of basic science. The total amount of water in atmosphere can't change to any significant extent. It can only hold so much and then it rains. Overall CO2 can vary and has increased by huge amounts. 

I’ll supply a transcript for you to read.  Don’t worry.

In 1982, CBS had 34 year old Al Gore claiming that 25% of Florida will end up underwater due to the coal and gas that we have been burning for 100 years.  
 

breaking news:   43 years later and Florida is not submerged and holding strong.    
 

manbearpig sure is funny 

 

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP8k3jybD/

 

00:00:00 --> 00:00:03
about rising temperatures on planet earth

00:00:03 --> 00:00:05
heated up a hearing here in Washington today

00:00:05 --> 00:00:05
for years

00:00:05 --> 00:00:10
scientists have theorized about the dangers of the so called greenhouse effect

00:00:10 --> 00:00:14
the warming of the Earth's atmosphere due to the burning of coal and oil

00:00:14 --> 00:00:17
and in recent months as David Cohen reports

00:00:17 --> 00:00:20
research has uncovered facts to support that theory

00:00:21 --> 00:00:24
many scientists claim that the temperature of the Earth's atmosphere

00:00:24 --> 00:00:27
has been rising over the past 100 years

00:00:27 --> 00:00:30
that the great sheets of pack ice in Antarctica

00:00:30 --> 00:00:33
are melting at a much more rapid rate than previously

00:00:34 --> 00:00:38
and finally that the sea level has been rising with increasing swiftness

00:00:38 --> 00:00:41
over the past 40 years if these scientists are correct

00:00:41 --> 00:00:46
about 25% of Florida would be flooded sometime in the next century

00:00:46 --> 00:00:49
along with low lying areas all over the world

00:00:49 --> 00:00:53
climate changes could produce widespread disruption of agriculture

00:00:53 --> 00:00:55
the American farm belt might be too dry

00:00:55 --> 00:00:58
and the wheat and corn crops would have to move to Canada

00:00:58 --> 00:01:00
scientists blame the odourless

00:01:00 --> 00:01:02
colourless carbon dioxide gas

00:01:02 --> 00:01:05
for these potentially dangerous changes around the planet

00:01:05 --> 00:01:07
it is the greenhouse effect

00:01:07 --> 00:01:10
the gas allows sunlight to filter down and warm the earth

00:01:10 --> 00:01:12
but like the glass of a greenhouse

00:01:12 --> 00:01:17
the carbon dioxide tends to trap heat so that it cannot rise into space

00:01:18 --> 00:01:20
the scientists maintain that the coal

00:01:20 --> 00:01:23
oil and gas we've been burning for 100 years

00:01:23 --> 00:01:25
have produced more and more carbon dioxide

00:01:25 --> 00:01:27
and helped overheat the earth

00:01:27 --> 00:01:32
we are not doing the kind of research that we should be doing

00:01:32 --> 00:01:35
to determine whether or not these scientists

00:01:35 --> 00:01:39
who are so alarmed are correct in their assessment

00:01:39 --> 00:01:42
this computer model simulates Arctic ice

00:01:42 --> 00:01:46
scientists are trying to predict the rate at which it will melt

00:01:46 --> 00:01:48
and how much it will make the oceans rise

  • Bob 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...