Sarah Sanders of her rocker

[wdmso]

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.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

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

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

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

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

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

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

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

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

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

wrapped in a nice little package

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

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

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

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

[scottw]

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

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

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

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

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

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

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

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

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

[wdmso]

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 ...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

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.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

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

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

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

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

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

[PaulS]

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

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

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

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

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

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

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.

[Pete F.]

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.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

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

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

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

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

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

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

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

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

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

[Pete F.]

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.or...newable-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/...e-environment/

Leading by example on Immigration would be a good start for the current President
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...d-workers.html

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

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.or...newable-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/...e-environment/

Leading by example on Immigration would be a good start for the current President
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...d-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.

[Pete F.]

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

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

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?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

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.