This women Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has the GOP panties in a bunch even on climate change


"I don't think we're going to listen to her on much of anything, particularly not on matters that we're going to leave in to the hands of a much, much higher authority," Sanders said on Sean Hannity's Fox News program on Tuesday night. She argued that the country should leave the fate of the planet in "the hands of something and someone much more powerful than any of us," presumably referring to God.

This women Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has the GOP panties in a bunch even on climate change




I'm pretty sure 100% of the GOP is hoping she runs for President...I heard 70% of democrats would vote for her for president,,,,I know I would :bl:

when you use AOC and panties in the same sentence....:kewl:

I'm pretty sure 100% of the GOP is hoping she runs for President...I heard 70% of democrats would vote for her for president,,,,I know I would :bl:

when you use AOC and panties in the same sentence....:kewl:

so this idiot claims
to knownthe planet will
die in 12 years, and wdmso is ok with that statement. but he is offended when the white house dismisses it.

he is also wrong about how we feel about her, as you said she is a precious gift to republicans.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm pretty sure 100% of the GOP is hoping she runs for President...I heard 70% of democrats would vote for her for president,,,,I know I would :bl:

when you use AOC and panties in the same sentence....:kewl:

Sadly this has nothing with her running for POTUS

But when Sanders uses GOD or she is referring to Trump to solve America issues... with this Higher power ..

"the country should leave the fate of the planet in "the hands of something and someone much more powerful than any of us,"

Seeing Tumps administration mission has been to rollback any environmental rules to help out corporations... asking God to fix things when your done is asking a lot

, as you said she is a precious gift to republicans.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

wrapped in a nice little package ;)

so this idiot claims
to knownthe planet will
die in 12 years, and wdmso is ok with that statement. but he is offended when the white house dismisses it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
She's just referencing a recent intergovernmental report which cites 2030 as a tipping point. If that happened the relationship between people and the planet will forever be changed. She’s a hell of a lot more accurate than those who call climate change a hoax.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

She's just referencing a recent intergovernmental report which cites 2030 as a tipping point. If that happened the relationship between people and the planet will forever be changed. She’s a hell of a lot more accurate than those who call climate change a hoax.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

oh man...imagine if she got some hot for teacher glasses :shocked:

AOC needs a hat....MASTA "Make America Socialist Totally Awesome":kewl:

She's just referencing a recent intergovernmental report which cites 2030 as a tipping point. If that happened the relationship between people and the planet will forever be changed. She’s a hell of a lot more accurate than those who call climate change a hoax.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

well if that’s what she was referencing, she’s as stupid at math as she is at everything else because that’s 11 years.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

well if that’s what she was referencing, she’s as stupid at math as she is at everything else because that’s 11 years.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
It’s called rounding up. What do you do for a living again?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It’s called rounding up. What do you do for a living again?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

oh, so the report knows the exact day that’s the tipping point. wow. this how many climate change predictions have come to pass, exactly?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

so jim you have no issues with our elected officials and their spokespersons
leaving the solutions of America's problems up to God ...

Ok may God can build your wall if you pray hard enough ...

so jim you have no issues with our elected officials and their spokespersons
leaving the solutions of America's problems up to God ...

Ok may God can build your wall if you pray hard enough ...

I have no problem with the press secretary saying that human beings have absolutely no business saying that they know what day the earth will end on.

If a Christian claimed the world was ending, you'd lock them up. And you'd be right to say that.

NOTHING that the climate change fanatics said would happen, has happened. Thanks God.

I believe the climate is changing, I believe man is influencing it. I believe that it's impossible to predict the effects, because there are too many variables we don't come close to understanding.

So let's study it. I'll pay taxes to study it. But have honest scientists study it, not people who already have their mind made up.

I


So let's study it. I'll pay taxes to study it. But have honest scientists study it, not people who already have their mind made up.


Really thats your take we need honest scientists to study it ??

It has been studied at length
There is an 85 % Consensus On Anthropogenic Climate Change that's a bunch of dishonest scientists

Really thats your take we need honest scientists to study it ??

It has been studied at length
There is an 85 % Consensus On Anthropogenic Climate Change that's a bunch of dishonest scientists

it’s been studied by ideologues who keep making dire predictions that don’t come true. i’m not impressed.

i said i agree there’s climate change, maybe you need to take a reading comprehension course. we have no idea when the impacts will be, not do we know if it can be offset by changing our behavior. al gore wants his
mansions and jets, and wants me to live in a yurt and take the bus. not so fast.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and there you have it why the Republicans cannot get college-educated people to vote for them. Lack of belief in science
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and there you have it why the Republicans cannot get college-educated people to vote for them. Lack of belief in science
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

paul, how many times do their predictions have to fail
to come true, before you’d be skeptical? when someone is wrong again and again, it makes
me a science denier if i’m skeptical of the next dire warning?

your side can’t grasp two genders. they can’t begin to grasp economics 101. they deny, at least in NY, that a baby is human on the day of birth. they’re suddenly the worlds greatest scientists?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it’s been studied by ideologues who keep making dire predictions that don’t come true. i’m not impressed.

i said i agree there’s climate change, maybe you need to take a reading comprehension course. we have no idea when the impacts will be, not do we know if it can be offset by changing our behavior. al gore wants his
mansions and jets, and wants me to live in a yurt and take the bus. not so fast.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device



And No one every thought we could overfish the oceans how's that working out ....

But lets let the Trump Administration roll back anything environmental rule or regulation he can ... because nothing cataclysmic has happened yet ... cant argue with that kind of logic

paul, how many times do their predictions have to fail
to come true, before you’d be skeptical? when someone is wrong again and again, it makes
me a science denier if i’m skeptical of the next dire warning?

your side can’t grasp two genders. they can’t begin to grasp economics 101. they deny, at least in NY, that a baby is human on the day of birth. they’re suddenly the worlds greatest scientists?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Actually if you look at the prediction models back to the 1970s compared to actual measurements most are pretty close.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And No one every thought we could overfish the oceans how's that working out ....

But lets let the Trump Administration roll back anything environmental rule or regulation he can ... because nothing cataclysmic has happened yet ... cant argue with that kind of logic

but when people said fish stocks could never crash, and then they did, we no longer took seriously, the clowns who were spectacularly wrong. That's my point, how many times do they have egg on their faces, when you would wonder if they were fudging the numbers?

Actually if you look at the prediction models back to the 1970s compared to actual measurements most are pretty close.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The 1970s? That's when they said an ice age was coming. Then Al Gore said the ice caps would have gone, and then Obama said his first inauguration would be the day we remembered, as the day the waters stopped rising and the planet began to heal...but he's not a narcissist.

I love the environment, I cry watching nature documentaries when I see any animal struggling. My wife and I saved for YEARS to go to Alaska to watch brown bears snagging salmon at a waterfall, it was the coolest thing I ever saw, I want them doing that for another 1,000 years. I'm not willing to give up every comfort I know just yet, to ensure that.

Show me long term indepth climate data that looks at more than a single data point that is incorrect.
I can say it's cold out, need some of that global warming now or some BS, that doesn't make it true.


Who said you would
Have to live in a yurt
Give up every comfort you know

It's like Trump saying Germany will be dependent on Russia for gas (though he wants to sell it to them), when their plans is to eliminate the use of fossil fuels.
We can keep investing in technology that will be outmoded (coal) gas and oil before too long or we can be on the cutting edge.

Show me long term indepth climate data that looks at more than a single data point that is incorrect.
I can say it's cold out, need some of that global warming now or some BS, that doesn't make it true.


Who said you would
Have to live in a yurt
Give up every comfort you know

It's like Trump saying Germany will be dependent on Russia for gas (though he wants to sell it to them), when their plans is to eliminate the use of fossil fuels.
We can keep investing in technology that will be outmoded (coal) gas and oil before too long or we can be on the cutting edge.

the polar ice caps were supposed to be gone by now. the models are based on wild assumptions, because we have no idea what the atmospheres ability is, or oceanic currents, to absorb current levels of emissions. so i’m the absence of
knowledge, they fill in the blanks with guesses. history shows they haven’t been very accurate guesses, because nothing they predicted would happen, has happened.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We can keep investing in technology that will be outmoded (coal) gas and oil before too long or we can be on the cutting edge.

people have ben saying as long as i’ve been alive ( longer), that oil
is on its way out. it’s nit true. another demonstrably false prediction.

i have no issue with investing. i have issues with transferring huge sums of money and power to the self proclaimed leaders of this movement. especially given that they live in a way that spits in the face of what they say they believe.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the polar ice caps were supposed to be gone by now. the models are based on wild assumptions, because we have no idea what the atmospheres ability is, or oceanic currents, to absorb current levels of emissions. so i’m the absence of
knowledge, they fill in the blanks with guesses. history shows they haven’t been very accurate guesses, because nothing they predicted would happen, has happened.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
What glaciers did you visit in Alaska, how much have they changed?
How much old ice is left in the Artic?
What happened to the Long Island lobster fishery?
Why do Hurricanes and cyclones do more damage
Does the insurance company you work for see climatic threats or are they waiting for “real” proof before they reassess their exposure.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What glaciers did you visit in Alaska, how much have they changed?
How much old ice is left in the Artic?
What happened to the Long Island lobster fishery?
Why do Hurricanes and cyclones do more damage
Does the insurance company you work for see climatic threats or are they waiting for “real” proof before they reassess their exposure.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i said i think the climate is changing, and i said i think we are contributing to it. i’m not an idiot. but we have absolutely no specific idea what’s happening, or what will happen, or what will happen if we respond. it’s almost pure speculation, because of the degree to which the
models are based on assumptions.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i said i think the climate is changing, and i said i think we are contributing to it. i’m not an idiot. but we have absolutely no specific idea what’s happening, or what will happen, or what will happen if we respond. it’s almost pure speculation, because of the degree to which the
models are based on assumptions.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
So insurance firms are waiting for?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So insurance firms are waiting for?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i don’t understand that question.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So insurance firms are waiting for?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://www.wsj.com/graphics/climate-change-forcing-insurance-industry-recalculate/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://www.wsj.com/graphics/climate-change-forcing-insurance-industry-recalculate/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i can’t read it. the insurers have noticed change for awhile. frequency and severity of storms is increasing. but the insurers have no idea how to change forecasts if, say, we all drive electric cars. no one knows.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i can’t read it. the insurers have noticed change for awhile. frequency and severity of storms is increasing. but the insurers have no idea how to change forecasts if, say, we all drive electric cars. no one knows.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So, because you can't quantify it, you can't justify it.

Sounds like a similar reason given by the people who don't want to build a wall, though those people want to do something about illegal immigration, not just stick their heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist.

So, because you can't quantify it, you can't justify it.

Sounds like a similar reason given by the people who don't want to build a wall, though those people want to do something about illegal immigration, not just stick their heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist.

"So, because you can't quantify it, you can't justify it."

gain, I'd take you more seriously if you could respond to what I actually say, rather than responding to nonsense that I never said.

For the tenth time, I feel it's justified to study this some more. I don't think it's justified to ask people to make massive sacrifices, nor to transfer wealth and power to the self-described leaders of this movement. Especially when those leaders sure act like they don't think this is an issue, with their mansions and private jets.

"So, because you can't quantify it, you can't justify it."

gain, I'd take you more seriously if you could respond to what I actually say, rather than responding to nonsense that I never said.

For the tenth time, I feel it's justified to study this some more. I don't think it's justified to ask people to make massive sacrifices, nor to transfer wealth and power to the self-described leaders of this movement. Especially when those leaders sure act like they don't think this is an issue, with their mansions and private jets.

the questions I asked and you didn't answer
1. Who said you would
Have to live in a yurt
Give up every comfort you know
2.What glaciers did you visit in Alaska, how much have they changed?
How much "old" ice is left in the Arctic?
What happened to the Long Island lobster fishery?
Why do Hurricanes and cyclones do more damage?
Does the insurance company you work for see climatic threats or are they waiting for “real” proof before they reassess their exposure?
3.So insurance firms are waiting for?

But perhaps you could tell me
1. What the Massive sacrifices people are being asked to make are?
2. Who the self-described leaders are that all have Mansions and Private Jets (I thought that you would think those are good things, perhaps they should burn them)?

the questions I asked and you didn't answer
1. Who said you would
Have to live in a yurt
Give up every comfort you know
2.What glaciers did you visit in Alaska, how much have they changed?
How much "old" ice is left in the Arctic?
What happened to the Long Island lobster fishery?
Why do Hurricanes and cyclones do more damage?
Does the insurance company you work for see climatic threats or are they waiting for “real” proof before they reassess their exposure?
3.So insurance firms are waiting for?

But perhaps you could tell me
1. What the Massive sacrifices people are being asked to make are?
2. Who the self-described leaders are that all have Mansions and Private Jets (I thought that you would think those are good things, perhaps they should burn them)?

no one said i’d live in a yurt. it’s called humor. not something liberals are known for.

i visited a few glaciers in glacier bay, they are shrinking. i conceded that.

i don’t know how much oldmuce is left.

don’t know what happened to long island and ct lobster fishing. but lobsters are doing ok in RI and cape cod bay. so is weather different in LI and CT?

i don’t know why hurricanes and cyclones do
more damage. i’m not sure anyone else knows either . i can build a model that says it’s because of climate change.

my insurance company is pricing for recent changes in hurricanes. they don’t know what’s causing the recent trends, or if they can be reversed. neither does anyone else.

carbon taxes are sacrifices we’d be asked to make. potentially big sacrifices. are you saying we don’t have to do anything different, in order to undo the damage?

the hypocritical, self described leaders are al gore, everyinenin Hillywood, and democrats in congress.

i do say mansions and jets are good if people want to buy them. but those who buy them, shouldn’t tell everyone else
not to buy them.

that’s liberalism. never about what “they” should
do, always about what “we” should
do.

lead by example, or shut up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes Jim things would change, they always do.
Change is great, just look at your phone.

Question: Won’t a carbon fee be bad for the economy?
Answer: A properly designed carbon policy will be good for the economy. The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act will have a positive impact on our well-being, especially if we consider the avoided costs of climate change and the health benefits from reduced air pollution.

An impressive 98 percent of economists agree that a price on carbon will promote efficiency and innovation. [1] A 2013 review by Resources for The Future [2] held that the impact of various carbon tax plans on GDP would be ‘trivially small,’ and a 2014 analysis of the carbon fee and dividend by REMI [3] predicted that over 20 years, it would actually increase U.S. GDP by $1.4 trillion.

Neither of those studies accounted for how much money we will save by avoiding fossil fuel damages. [4] According to a 2016 government report, every metric ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted now will cost tomorrow’s economy from $12 to $120, and that cost could double by 2050. [5] We currently emit over 160 metric tons of CO2 per second. [6] In 2017, a string of climate-related disasters cost our economy over $300 billion,

Include the health costs of fossil fuel air pollution, which have been estimated at $188 billion annually, [7] and it’s clear that burning fossil fuels is already costing our economy upwards of $250 billion a year. This was confirmed by the Fourth National Climate Assessment [8] issued by our government in November 2018.

When someone claims a carbon tax will depress the economy, they fail to consider how returning the money back to U.S. households changes the results, and also fail to account for the huge costs of doing nothing.

Why do you think change is bad for you or the economy
https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/follow-leader-how-11-countries-are-shifting-renewable-energy

I'm sorry that you feel victimized by all of the moviestars, all dem Democrats and Al Gore but many more people than that have concerns about the environment. Look at polling and tell me that the environment is not viewed as important by a majority of voters. Lead or get left behind. Currently the US is getting left behind and the administration is bragging about it.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/03/how-trump-is-changing-science-environment/

Leading by example on Immigration would be a good start for the current President
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/trump-and-his-company-are-no-aliens-to-undocumented-workers.html

Yes Jim things would change, they always do.
Change is great, just look at your phone.

Question: Won’t a carbon fee be bad for the economy?
Answer: A properly designed carbon policy will be good for the economy. The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act will have a positive impact on our well-being, especially if we consider the avoided costs of climate change and the health benefits from reduced air pollution.

An impressive 98 percent of economists agree that a price on carbon will promote efficiency and innovation. [1] A 2013 review by Resources for The Future [2] held that the impact of various carbon tax plans on GDP would be ‘trivially small,’ and a 2014 analysis of the carbon fee and dividend by REMI [3] predicted that over 20 years, it would actually increase U.S. GDP by $1.4 trillion.

Neither of those studies accounted for how much money we will save by avoiding fossil fuel damages. [4] According to a 2016 government report, every metric ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted now will cost tomorrow’s economy from $12 to $120, and that cost could double by 2050. [5] We currently emit over 160 metric tons of CO2 per second. [6] In 2017, a string of climate-related disasters cost our economy over $300 billion,

Include the health costs of fossil fuel air pollution, which have been estimated at $188 billion annually, [7] and it’s clear that burning fossil fuels is already costing our economy upwards of $250 billion a year. This was confirmed by the Fourth National Climate Assessment [8] issued by our government in November 2018.

When someone claims a carbon tax will depress the economy, they fail to consider how returning the money back to U.S. households changes the results, and also fail to account for the huge costs of doing nothing.

Why do you think change is bad for you or the economy
https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/follow-leader-how-11-countries-are-shifting-renewable-energy

I'm sorry that you feel victimized by all of the moviestars, all dem Democrats and Al Gore but many more people than that have concerns about the environment. Look at polling and tell me that the environment is not viewed as important by a majority of voters. Lead or get left behind. Currently the US is getting left behind and the administration is bragging about it.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/03/how-trump-is-changing-science-environment/

Leading by example on Immigration would be a good start for the current President
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/trump-and-his-company-are-no-aliens-to-undocumented-workers.html

"Change is great, just look at your phone"

That change, maybe, is good. Some change, like announcing that I can follow a 9 year-old girl into a public restroom if I feel like it, not so much. "Change" isn't always an improvement.

"A properly designed carbon policy will be good for the economy."

well, by jiminy, that's good enough for me!

Green energy, at this time, is stupidly inefficient and expensive. Oil is cheaper than green. Far, far cheaper. Not even close., When green is cheaper, companies will have no reason to use oil.

"An impressive 98 percent of economists agree that a price on carbon will promote efficiency and innovation"

Obviously a carbon tax will incentivize businesses to use less carbon. It will also result in price increases, layoffs, and cuts to employee compensation.

"When someone claims a carbon tax will depress the economy, they fail to consider how returning the money back to U.S. households "

Oh, geez, how could I be so stupid! Because every time the feds impose massive regulations, I always get huge checks in the mail from Uncle Sam! How could I forget?

"In 2017, a string of climate-related disasters cost our economy over $300 billion"

And no way of knowing what the cost would have been, if we all used zero carbon. Impossible to tell, too many variables.

"I'm sorry that you feel victimized by all of the moviestars, all dem Democrats and Al Gore "

I don't feel victimized by them, they aren't taking anything from me - yet. Once again, you ignore what I actually said, and pretend I said something I never said. I am not victimized by them, and I prefer to continue to avoid being victimized by them. If you want to buy Al Gores book, so he can put an addition on his house which requires another central A/C compressor, knock yourself out. I think it's funny. If the leaders of the movement don't believe in it, why should I?

"Look at polling and tell me that the environment is not viewed as important by a majority of voters"

Count me among them. But I'm not ready to demand massive, burdensome changes, based on assumptions made by people, some of whom will (or already have) profit form the shift.

"Lead or get left behind"

What does that mean? Don't we all live on the same planet? So if we outlaw gas-powered cars, but India and China produce more gas-powered cars, is the planet better off? I don't see how...it's all too connected.

We can’t do anything till we study it
Would you say that about Trump’s Wall, I can find plenty of conflicting evidence on that, but for that anecdotal evidence that it would have some result suffices.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We can’t do anything till we study it
Would you say that about Trump’s Wall, I can find plenty of conflicting evidence on that, but for that anecdotal evidence that it would have some result suffices.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"We can’t do anything till we study it
Would you say that about Trump’s Wall"

Yes, I would say that. So let's see what happened in San Diego and Yuma, when they expanded barriers. Or on Israel's southern border, where a wall was build not to keep out terrorists, but to keep out illegal immigrants. And let's see how many people build houses without doors. Barriers work. Anyone who says otherwise, is an idiot. Your "conflicting" evidence might show that walls aren't perfect. But no one is saying they are.

By what logic do walls not help keep people out of places where we don't want them to be?

You're talking nonsense. Sheer nonsense. You have a door on your house? How come? A master thief could still get in, right?

You're talking nonsense. Sheer nonsense. You have a door on your house? How come? A master thief could still get in, right?
It's 30 degrees outside.

"We can’t do anything till we study it
Would you say that about Trump’s Wall"

Yes, I would say that. So let's see what happened in San Diego and Yuma, when they expanded barriers. Or on Israel's southern border, where a wall was build not to keep out terrorists, but to keep out illegal immigrants. And let's see how many people build houses without doors. Barriers work. Anyone who says otherwise, is an idiot. Your "conflicting" evidence might show that walls aren't perfect. But no one is saying they are.

By what logic do walls not help keep people out of places where we don't want them to be?

You're talking nonsense. Sheer nonsense. You have a door on your house? How come? A master thief could still get in, right?

So if you want a impenetrable house will doors do it?
And do you need an alarm system?
Which is the greater deterrent to a master thief, the door or the electronic device?
I guarantee you a standard door is one kick

What will the wall do here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLVdi14ECCc

Why did Trump's budget for border wall go from 1.6 billion to a ransom demand of 5.7 billion?
Here is what his FY 2019 budget issued in February of 2018 called for
"Critical investments include $1.6 billion for construction of the border wall and $782 million to hire and
support 2,750 additional law enforcement officers and agents at U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)."

It's 30 degrees outside.

so in the early summer, you take your door off the hinges? houses don’t have doors in San Diego?

you sure showed me there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So just what source would be believable?

The climate of the United States is strongly connected to the changing global climate. The statements below highlight past, current, and projected climate changes for the United States and the globe.

Global annually averaged surface air temperature has increased by about 1.8°F (1.0°C) over the last 115 years (1901–2016). This period is now the warmest in the history of modern civilization. The last few years have also seen record-breaking, climate-related weather extremes, and the last three years have been the warmest years on record for the globe. These trends are expected to continue over climate timescales.

This assessment concludes, based on extensive evidence, that it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.

In addition to warming, many other aspects of global climate are changing, primarily in response to human activities. Thousands of studies conducted by researchers around the world have documented changes in surface, atmospheric, and oceanic temperatures; melting glaciers; diminishing snow cover; shrinking sea ice; rising sea levels; ocean acidification; and increasing atmospheric water vapor.

For example, global average sea level has risen by about 7–8 inches since 1900, with almost half (about 3 inches) of that rise occurring since 1993. Human-caused climate change has made a substantial contribution to this rise since 1900, contributing to a rate of rise that is greater than during any preceding century in at least 2,800 years. Global sea level rise has already affected the United States; the incidence of daily tidal flooding is accelerating in more than 25 Atlantic and Gulf Coast cities.

Global average sea levels are expected to continue to rise—by at least several inches in the next 15 years and by 1–4 feet by 2100. A rise of as much as 8 feet by 2100 cannot be ruled out. Sea level rise will be higher than the global average on the East and Gulf Coasts of the United States.

Changes in the characteristics of extreme events are particularly important for human safety, infrastructure, agriculture, water quality and quantity, and natural ecosystems. Heavy rainfall is increasing in intensity and frequency across the United States and globally and is expected to continue to increase. The largest observed changes in the United States have occurred in the Northeast.

Heatwaves have become more frequent in the United States since the 1960s, while extreme cold temperatures and cold waves are less frequent. Recent record-setting hot years are projected to become common in the near future for the United States, as annual average temperatures continue to rise. Annual average temperature over the contiguous United States has increased by 1.8°F (1.0°C) for the period 1901–2016; over the next few decades (2021–2050), annual average temperatures are expected to rise by about 2.5°F for the United States, relative to the recent past (average from 1976–2005), under all plausible future climate scenarios.

The incidence of large forest fires in the western United States and Alaska has increased since the early 1980s and is projected to further increase in those regions as the climate changes, with profound changes to regional ecosystems.

Annual trends toward earlier spring melt and reduced snowpack are already affecting water resources in the western United States and these trends are expected to continue. Under higher scenarios, and assuming no change to current water resources management, chronic, long-duration hydrological drought is increasingly possible before the end of this century.

The magnitude of climate change beyond the next few decades will depend primarily on the amount of greenhouse gases (especially carbon dioxide) emitted globally. Without major reductions in emissions, the increase in annual average global temperature relative to preindustrial times could reach 9°F (5°C) or more by the end of this century. With significant reductions in emissions, the increase in annual average global temperature could be limited to 3.6°F (2°C) or less.

The global atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration has now passed 400 parts per million (ppm), a level that last occurred about 3 million years ago, when both global average temperature and sea level were significantly higher than today. Continued growth in CO2 emissions over this century and beyond would lead to an atmospheric concentration not experienced in tens to hundreds of millions of years. There is broad consensus that the further and the faster the Earth system is pushed towards warming, the greater the risk of unanticipated changes and impacts, some of which are potentially large and irreversible.

The observed increase in carbon emissions over the past 15–20 years has been consistent with higher emissions pathways. In 2014 and 2015, emission growth rates slowed as economic growth became less carbon-intensive. Even if this slowing trend continues, however, it is not yet at a rate that would limit global average temperature change to well below 3.6°F (2°C) above preindustrial levels.
https://science2017.globalchange.gov/chapter/executive-summary/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

late Senator McCain Put climate action in simple terms (i am paraphrasing) his basic premise was

if we build renewables we reduce emissions increase gas mileage increase energy efficiency in all areas home business clean our air

and Climate change doesn't happen as expected what harm have we done? compared to doing nothing .....

its a much different stance than todays GOP denial its man made or that some how it will destroy the economy..

I dont hear Jim talking about those predictions which haven't happened at all

oil and gas extraction employment has increased 16 percent since 2009, correlating directly with the shale revolution that has taken place during that time. By comparison, DOE estimated that 2,989,844 Americans were directly employed by the fossil fuel industry


According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), renewable energy employment alone (excluding efficiency) grew by nearly 18 percent between Q2 2015 and Q1 2016. The agency reports that 3,384,834 Americans were directly employed by the clean energy industry


Coal employment averaged 6,550 in Kentucky in the first quarter of 2017 when Trump was sworn in, according to the state Energy and Environment Cabinet.

The estimated average in the July-through-September quarter this year was 6,381,

Trump's U.S. Coal Consumption Is Less Than Obama's

late Senator McCain Put climate action in simple terms (i am paraphrasing) his basic premise was

if we build renewables we reduce emissions increase gas mileage increase energy efficiency in all areas home business clean our air

and Climate change doesn't happen as expected what harm have we done? compared to doing nothing .....

its a much different stance than todays GOP denial its man made or that some how it will destroy the economy..

I dont hear Jim talking about those predictions which haven't happened at all

oil and gas extraction employment has increased 16 percent since 2009, correlating directly with the shale revolution that has taken place during that time. By comparison, DOE estimated that 2,989,844 Americans were directly employed by the fossil fuel industry


According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), renewable energy employment alone (excluding efficiency) grew by nearly 18 percent between Q2 2015 and Q1 2016. The agency reports that 3,384,834 Americans were directly employed by the clean energy industry


Coal employment averaged 6,550 in Kentucky in the first quarter of 2017 when Trump was sworn in, according to the state Energy and Environment Cabinet.

The estimated average in the July-through-September quarter this year was 6,381,

Trump's U.S. Coal Consumption Is Less Than Obama's

"if we build renewables we reduce emissions increase gas mileage increase energy efficiency in all areas home business clean our air"

I agree 100% with that sentence.

"and Climate change doesn't happen as expected"

That is a "maybe".

"harm have we done?"

well, for one, where did we talk about the cost of switching to renewable energy? Hybrid cars are insanely expensive. Geothermal systems in homes are insanely expensive. If we mandate those things, you think that has no impact on the middle class, or on business?

And then, where do we get all the electricity needed? because liberals are opposed to nuclear plants which produce massive amounts of dirt cheap electricity. Do we all spend all day, rubbing balloons on our heads to power all these batteries?

"I dont hear Jim talking about those predictions which haven't happened at all "

I have no idea what that sentence means, no idea.

"DOE estimated that 2,989,844 Americans were directly employed by the fossil fuel industry

Many of whom will be disrupted by switching to green energy.

The switch is coming, it will be a good change, and we should be investing in it. And we are.

I believe in climate change. I'm not a zealot or a disciple.

"if we build renewables we reduce emissions increase gas mileage increase energy efficiency in all areas home business clean our air"

I agree 100% with that sentence.

It's great when you state the obvious and people agree with you :rotflmao:


"I dont hear Jim talking about those predictions which haven't happened at all "

I have no idea what that sentence means, no idea.

frequent occurrence probably your fault and inability to understand gibberish

"DOE estimated that 2,989,844 Americans were directly employed by the fossil fuel industry

Many of whom will be disrupted by switching to green energy.

The switch is coming, it will be a good change, and we should be investing in it. And we are.

shhhhh....don't disrupt the narrative

I believe in climate change. I'm not a zealot or a disciple.

I heard on the news this morning it's so cold in the midwest that people's eyeballs are freezing and forecasters are warning people not to breathe or talk....

I heard on the news this morning it's so cold in the midwest that people's eyeballs are freezing and forecasters are warning people not to breathe or talk....

That's why they switched it from global warming, to climate change. That way, unless nothing ever changes, they are correct and you're a science denier if you disagree.

But in NY, they are lighting up buildings to celebrate the fact that babies can be aborted for any reason, up until the moment of labor, because even at that moment, it's not a human being. And I am the science denier.

Now denying climate change while professing to believe it’s occurring, Jim somehow conflates it with abortion as a reason why you cannot believe science.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But in NY, they are lighting up buildings to celebrate the fact that babies can be aborted for any reason, up until the moment of labor, because even at that moment, it's not a human being. And I am the science denier.
You continually complain that I am not responding correctly
Explain how this fits in to the discussion
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Now denying climate change while professing to believe it’s occurring, Jim somehow conflates it with abortion as a reason why you cannot believe science.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Now denying climate change "

Please point to where I denied it's changing. I said multiple times that it's changing.

"Jim somehow conflates it with abortion as a reason why you cannot believe science"

Nope. Your reading comprehension is abysmal. What I said was, it's funny that the side which claims that an about-to-be delivered, full-term baby isn't human, accuses me of denying science. The side that claims that walls don't keep people out, has little to teach me about science.

The left will say or do anything to advance The Narrative. The Narrative checked itself into rehab on the eve of the 2016 election, and now it's back, and it's angry.

"DOE estimated that 2,989,844 Americans were directly employed by the fossil fuel industry

Many of whom will be disrupted by switching to green energy.

.

This is the false claims I was referring to ^^^^^

Fossil fuel jobs grew along side green jobs

There is No massive disruption and the elevated claims of cost are also a red herring.. solar cost have come down
A new Tesla is like 45 what’s a Ford F-150
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You continually complain that I am not responding correctly
Explain how this fits in to the discussion
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"You continually complain that I am not responding correctly "

Because you are responding to silly gibberish that no one has ever said.

"Explain how this fits in to the discussion"

So the discussion isn't served if you respond to what I actually say?

This is the false claims I was referring to ^^^^^

Fossil fuel jobs grew along side green jobs

There is No massive disruption and the elevated claims of cost are also a red herring.. solar cost have come down
A new Tesla is like 45 what’s a Ford F-150
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"There is No massive disruption "

That's because we haven't mandated a massive shift away from oil towards renewable. I want to prevent that disruption. Of course it hasn't happened yet. because climate zealots aren't running things yet.

"solar cost have come down"

Not much. And state and federal subsidies are vanishing, so it's still very expensive to a middle class person. I put them on my house in 2016. I know what it cost. I leased my system, to buy it, would have been more than $20k, on the roof of a 2750sf house.

"A new Tesla is like 45 "

You think that refutes my point? I can get two Honda Civics for that price. And I can drive them to Florida without making hours-long stops to re-fuel. You are making my case for me.

"what’s a Ford F-150"

You're comparing the dinky little Tesla sedan, to a Ford F150? That makes all kinds of sense!

I can get an F150 for under 30k. And I can drive it to Florida without having to make hours-long stops along the way, to recharge.

This is the false claims I was referring to ^^^^^

Fossil fuel jobs grew along side green jobs

There is No massive disruption and the elevated claims of cost are also a red herring.. solar cost have come down
A new Tesla is like 45 what’s a Ford F-150
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I hope you understand why solar costs came down.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I hope you understand why solar costs came down.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


The Price Of Power. Even without subsidies, new wind and solar power plants are usually cheaper than new coal, nuclear, or natural gas power plants.

Better technology and panel design

Lower manufacturing costs

Lower soft costs

Soft costs － the costs that are not directly associated with panels inverters, and other

Government investment and financial incentives

Economies of scale and better financing options

So let me guess your reason for lower prices are just subsidies?
Like oil companies? I can only guess . because you never stated a reason
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The Price Of Power. Even without subsidies, new wind and solar power plants are usually cheaper than new coal, nuclear, or natural gas power plants.

Better technology and panel design

Lower manufacturing costs

Lower soft costs

Soft costs － the costs that are not directly associated with panels inverters, and other

Government investment and financial incentives

Economies of scale and better financing options

So let me guess your reason for lower prices are just subsidies?
Like oil companies? I can only guess . because you never stated a reason
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Even without subsidies, new wind and solar power plants are usually cheaper than new coal, nuclear, or natural gas power plants. "

Wow. Wind is cheaper than nuclear, to generate electricity? Maybe when talking about a house or two. Not when talking about 300 million people.

If what you said is true, why are developers still building homes and building with systems powered by natural gas and oil?

Here is a really simple analogy for why energy conservation is important and not a great fortune.
The client asked, what's the return on investment for my solar panels, upgraded insulation, more efficient heating system and the answer is: "A lot better than your Granite countertops"
Now if you don't do the upgraded energy items, not only do you pay, but in many cases all the owners of the house do forever.
It's not just about changing the method, it's changing what is valuable to us.

"Even without subsidies, new wind and solar power plants are usually cheaper than new coal, nuclear, or natural gas power plants. "

Wow. Wind is cheaper than nuclear, to generate electricity? Maybe when talking about a house or two. Not when talking about 300 million people.

If what you said is true, why are developers still building homes and building with systems powered by natural gas and oil?


You got a Myopic view just because it’s not happening every place it’s Not happening ?

How long did it take the country to move from heating a house with wood to coal to oil to gas ... or electric or pellets or a little of both I call it progress slow and steady
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You got a Myopic view just because it’s not happening every place it’s Not happening ?

How long did it take the country to move from heating a house with wood to coal to oil to gas ... or electric or pellets or a little of both I call it progress slow and steady
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"just because it’s not happening every place it’s Not happening ?"

Do you hear voices in your head? Are the voices telling you that I'm saying these things?

If green was cheaper, we'd all be doing it. It's not, so we aren't.

When we had our house built, we looked at a development that was all solar and geothermal. The houses had an enormous price tag, because that stuff is still very expensive.

"I call it progress slow and steady"

I agree 100%. Slow and steady. I AGREE WITH YOU. I don't want massive, sudden disruptions, that aren't based on good science. That's all I'm saying.

Simply put,without the subsidies only a fool with money to burn would put in solar.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Boston announced they will ban all carbon based vehicles by 2050 and I heard Ford is moving to all electric on the F150 line, so it’s coming whether we (I won’t be anyway) will be around to witness it is another story. The irony is the technology was available to make that change long before now.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Simply put,without the subsidies only a fool with money to burn would put in solar.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

geothermal was so expensive, it had a very low return on investment, and only if you stayed in your house forever.

I leased my panels, cost me $0. I save about $400 a year. I will have to pay between 500 and 1,000 when I need a new roof, to take the panels off and put them back on, so that will eat a year of savings. And there's always a risk that when I sell my house, no one wants panels, that's a rick, I had to do a 25 year lease, I'm stuck for 25 years.

Simply put,without the subsidies only a fool with money to burn would put in solar.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Would you say only a fool would put money into the automobile when Ford floated his idea . because we all ready have the Horse and carriage
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Solar farms make putting panels up a none starter for sure, plenty of solar opportunities out there, without having to throw panels up on your roof. We joined a solar co-opt and cut our costs without the expense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

carbon based vehicles

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

what vehicles would this include?

Would you say only a fool would put money into the automobile when Ford floated his idea . because we all ready have the Horse and carriage
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, you said that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

what vehicles would this include?

Don’t know channel 5 reported it at lunch, without to many details.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don’t know channel 5 reported it at lunch, without to many details.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

give it a shot...

No, you said that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

yep but you were thinking it

the leftists have been feeling very clairvoyant lately

the leftists have been feeling very clairvoyant lately

they’re never wrong...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

every time I drive through boston I wish they would ban carbon based life forms

yep but you were thinking it

No, you were.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"I think God calls all of us to fill different roles at different times and I think that he wanted Donald Trump to become president," Sanders said. "And that's why he's there, and I think he has done a tremendous job in supporting a lot of the things that people of faith really care about."
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"I think God calls all of us to fill different roles at different times and I think that he wanted Donald Trump to become president," Sanders said. "And that's why he's there, and I think he has done a tremendous job in supporting a lot of the things that people of faith really care about."
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I saw that but if i posted it I would be picking on her.


but it will be defended as she is entitled to her 1st amendments rights.. (even if she is the mouthpiece of the administration)

the right will ignore the position she holds and some will hear it a policy and rejoice at Trump divinity the rest all ready believe he was appointed by God anyway

I saw that but if i posted it I would be picking on her.


but it will be defended as she is entitled to her 1st amendments rights.. (even if she is the mouthpiece of the administration)

the right will ignore the position she holds and some will hear it a policy and rejoice at Trump divinity the rest all ready believe he was appointed by God anyway

you’re right, i see nothing wrong with that statement. trump’s policies, not his personal behavior, are way more in line with christian beliefs, than hilary’s. is this news to you? you didn’t know this?

you and pete are surprised she believes in god? are you offended at any and all references to god?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you’re right, i see nothing wrong with that statement. trump’s policies, not his personal behavior, are way more in line with christian beliefs, than hilary’s. is this news to you? you didn’t know this?

you and pete are surprised she believes in god? are you offended at any and all references to god?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Once again you spout gibberish and claim that I said something
And do a typical but Hillary
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And do a typical but Hillary
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

well...that was the choice...Trump or Hillary...remember?

you and pete are surprised she believes in god?

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

what he's saying is if not for the first amendment she would not be allowed to say stuff like that

you’re right, i see nothing wrong with that statement. trump’s policies, not his personal behavior, are way more in line with christian beliefs, than hilary’s. is this news to you? you didn’t know this?

you and pete are surprised she believes in god? are you offended at any and all references to god?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Not surprise you don’t understand and thanks making my point
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not surprise you don’t understand and thanks making my point
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you’re right, i don’t understand the point of this post. i presume the point is that it’s weird to think that gods will is reflected in the things that happen around us. i would not be shocked for you and pete tobfeel tjat way, many people feel that way. there are also many people who think god is everywhere. different strokes. doesn’t seem very tolerant, to mick her for feeling differently than you do...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Perhaps this might explain why I as a Christian am concerned about Trump and many of his policies.
I certainly do not think he was a gift from God and I shouldn't say he is the spawn of Satan, I wouldn't do that, would I?

As the president offers a sympathetic ear – and policies to match – critics see a de facto advisory committee, violating federal law

Jessica Glenza in The Guardian

The religious right ‘has a partnership at the highest level of government’, says the CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

The US health secretary sat for an interview with a man experts say is the leader of a hate group known for “defaming gays and lesbians”, just two days after Karen Pence, the US second lady, was criticized for teaching at a Christian school that bans homosexuality.

Alex Azar, secretary of health and human services, was interviewed by the Family Research Council President, Tony Perkins, at an anti-abortion event called ProLifeCon in mid-January.

“We are the department of life,” Azar told Perkins, “from conception until natural death, through all of our programs.” He then rattled off victories – new policies that make it difficult to obtain an abortion, including allowing healthcare workers to refuse to treat patients based on moral objections. “The right of conscience is as foundational as the right to life.”

Alex Azar, the US health secretary, called his department ‘the department of life’. Photograph: Michael Reynolds/EPA
Perkins has falsely claimed homosexuality is linked with pedophilia, advocated for parents’ rights to send children to harmful conversion therapy, and said about transgender people: “I mean, what’s to keep you from saying that you’re an animal?”

The interview is the latest example of how a narrow slice of the American right has gained unprecedented access to the White House, as defining Trump statements have emboldened the antisemitic far right and Trump administration policies put the brakes on Muslim immigration.

“It’s an ugly story about the politicization about one of America’s most sacred symbols: religious freedom,” said Laser. “It’s also a story about one narrow slice of America, the religious right, trying to hold on to their power in a country that is quickly becoming less white and less Christian. It is a true religious threat to Americans.”

you’re right, i don’t understand the point of this post. i presume the point is that it’s weird to think that gods will is reflected in the things that happen around us. i would not be shocked for you and pete tobfeel tjat way, many people feel that way. there are also many people who think god is everywhere. different strokes. doesn’t seem very tolerant, to mick her for feeling differently than you do...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
my point is Sarah Sanders is a representative of the United States do to her position as a spokesperson of President Trump

I take it issue of her using that position to suggest God has a higher power to solve the problems of the United States or that it was God’s intervention in some crazy way of that is the reason why Trump is president .

She’s free to believe in any god and pray for guidance for herself if she wants

I do have a issue with that when she is using that position to forward that message publicly

is not appropriate. For anyone reguardless of what they believe
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

my point is Sarah Sanders is a representative of the United States do to her position as a spokesperson of President Trump

I take it issue of her using that position to suggest God has a higher power to solve the problems of the United States or that it was God’s intervention in some crazy way of that is the reason why Trump is president .

She’s free to believe in any god and pray for guidance for herself if she wants

I do have a issue with that when she is using that position to forward that message publicly

is not appropriate. For anyone reguardless of what they believe
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

get a grip...

get a grip...

Says the man who obsesses over AOC
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Says the man who obsesses over AOC
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

don't get me started :hihi: