What are the real issues in the U.S.?

[Dittohead not!]

You really don't see just how absolutely stupid you look every time you completely butcher the science? Moving on

Well, according to you anyway, I have a lot of company: NASA, NOAA, and CERN are three. Are they completely "butchering" the science as well?

Facts, they are stubborn little things, particularly when they counter your cherished beliefs. But, anyway, as you say, moving on: Just what are the real issues? It's not like we're going to do anything about global warming anyway.

 

[Kurmugeon]

Correct. There is always energy loss, typically through heat, in every conversion of energy from one form to another.

First, a 10 KW wind mill runs upwards of of $60,000. You can buy a heck of a lot of regular gas for that much. …

10 KW Wind Turbine System With 12M Tower 10KW Wind Turbine Generator - Pacific Tool Co - 310.497.7374 [FD8.0-10000] - $25,000.00 : Pacific Tool Company, - Alternative Energy In Motion - Diesel Generators, Wind Turbines and Solar Power

A 10 KW wind turbine for $25K. The mast is 12M tall. Most houses are 60 M wide and 80M long.

The price of a wind turbine will get allot lower if/when they go into mass production.

Assume it produces 4 liters of fuel a day, and the cost of a liter of fuel is the current European standard of $2.05 / liter or $7.76 / Gallon.
365 days a year * 4 * 2.05 = $2993 worth of fuel per year.

The Wind Generator pays for itself in 8 years. Assuming the cost of the fuel synthesizer is approximately the same as the cost of the generator ( my goal ), in 16 years the system pays for itself.

The expected lifetime of the system, if well maintained, is over 40 years.


And No One has to be Sterilized or Executed.

 

[Sparkles]

Well, according to you anyway, I have a lot of company: NASA, NOAA, and CERN are three. Are they completely "butchering" the science as well?

Facts, they are stubborn little things, particularly when they counter your cherished beliefs. But, anyway, as you say, moving on: Just what are the real issues? It's not like we're going to do anything about global warming anyway.

You don't have any real facts. You don't even realize that the source of the 390 PPM of CO2 is unknown. You assume it's from human activity? Why? To fit your screwed up political belief system? Again, only 3.2% of all CO2 is made by humans, and yet you want to moronically claim that all of the increase in the atmosphere is due to that 3.2%? That's something an idiot that doesn't think, would claim, or someone who can't think for himself and blindly believes 'the consensus'.

That's my whole point. None of you are acting intelligent enough to even question the opinions you are spewing about. And you think I'm going to dignify your posts as being on my level when clearly they are not? Come back when you can think for yourself, or just don't.

No no, post another "consensus says" post of idiocy. Be my guest. We all know truth in left-ard land is determined by consensus. I bet you still think that's "evidence" in the world of science, don't you?

 

[Dittohead not!]

You don't have any real facts. You don't even realize that the source of the 390 PPM of CO2 is unknown. You assume it's from human activity? Why? To fit your screwed up political belief system? Again, only 3.2% of all CO2 is made by humans, and yet you want to moronically claim that all of the increase in the atmosphere is due to that 3.2%? That's something an idiot that doesn't think, would claim, or someone who can't think for himself and blindly believes 'the consensus'.

That's my whole point. None of you are acting intelligent enough to even question the opinions you are spewing about. And you think I'm going to dignify your posts as being on my level when clearly they are not? Come back when you can think for yourself, or just don't.

No no, post another "consensus says" post of idiocy. Be my guest. We all know truth in left-ard land is determined by consensus. I bet you still think that's "evidence" in the world of science, don't you?

I see. No argument other than an ad hominim attack. Well, enjoy your little conspiracy theory idea, since it really doesn't matter anyway. You've mastered all of the talking points so well!

 

[Sparkles]

I see. No argument other than an ad hominim attack. Well, enjoy your little conspiracy theory idea, since it really doesn't matter anyway. You've mastered all of the talking points so well!

And you still don't have a point to your post. It isn't an attack if it's the truth. It's simply pointing out the truth. If the truth hurts, try having a valid argument for once.

 

[tecoyah]

Everything you just posted I already responded to. It wasn't valid then, and it isn't now. Are you trying to tell me that NOT ONE of the leftists on this entire forum can post something valid?

None of you can? There isn't one thinking leftist on here? All of you can only rely on the opinions of others? Wow, this is much more sad than I had anticipated.

As a simple point, IF you dismiss the NY Times, Stanford University, and 1300 + scientists who believe it or not, know more about climate than you do. Then act all nasty to everyone who tries to point out the error of doing so....you sir, have not just lost a debate you have made something of a fool of yourself to many.

 

[Kurmugeon]

It is amazing to watch how much time and effort are going into a false AGW issue.

It may be a small issue of many issues in the 2012 election, but there are technological advances sitting on the near horizon which will END the AGW issue permanently. All it will take is time, investment, and freedom from government interference.

Finding the self-discipline and motivation to do something substantial about the countries Fiscal Mess is allot more immediate!

Additionally, bankrupt and destitute people/countries don’t CARE about the environment.

If you want to “Save the Earth”, Limit Government!

 

[Sparkles]

As a simple point, IF you dismiss the NY Times, Stanford University, and 1300 + scientists who believe it or not, know more about climate than you do. Then act all nasty to everyone who tries to point out the error of doing so....you sir, have not just lost a debate you have made something of a fool of yourself to many.

Yes the appeal to a higher power fallacy.

I thought I would find at least one thinking leftist on the forum, but none so far. Not one who can think for themselves. Well, by all means, be a lemming to the opinion of others. I will never be so idiotic. If that makes me a fool to you, great. When the people acting foolish think your the fool, you are obviously doing something right. That's the best compliment you could give me.

 

[LizardofOz]

Well I posted something in a similar thread:

-Jersey Shore
-Octomom
-Paris Hilton
-Niki Minaj
-American Idol


Essentially what I am getting at, is that most of us are totally skull fu.cked by entertainment that when something serious happens we don't care at all. Our politicians by way of lobbyist make sure it is this way. In America, no matter how poor, rich, healthy or unhealthy we are, most of us don't care as long as we have something entertaining us. Eventually, we will end up like the people in the movie WALL*E lol.

Just an (kind of extreme) example, look at Iran. In Iran, there is far less entertainment and advertising is forbidden other than propaganda against America and it's allies. Iran also has one of the world's youngest populations thanks to the Iran-Iraq War. A majority of the citizens of Iran are fully understanding of other countries policies, what really is going on, and do not like their leaders. Anytime they try to vote them out in a "election" it never comes to pass. We also look at news in a totally stupid way. Why is Dick Clark dying breaking news? Why does it deserve a shiny graphic?

In close, the 1st amendment is both our blessing and our curse. More and more, it seems that common decency means less and more and more stupid garbage gets into our media that is supposed to be both entertaining, and informative.

If a billion Americans got all their entertainment and news from a handful of websites, PBS, and their local newspaper within 5 years I guarantee you more would get done.

With that said, after that issue my top issues that I think are honestly the real ones and so many do as well would be:
-Unemployment
-Welfare spending/efficiency
-Warfare spending/efficiency
-Infrastructure
-Energy independence, new energy
-healthcare

To me all of those issues are equally important.

 

[Matt Foley]

I love how you indict global warming as a "fabricated issue" and then go on to rant about free trade.

.....which is thee real issue. Just cause the corporate fat cats brainwashed you into thinking it wasn't an issue, and that Global Warming is, doesn't make it so.

 

[Matt Foley]

Poll: What's worse, Ronulans hijacking a topic or Global Warming nuts hijacking a topic?

A) Ronulans

B) Green nuttos

 

[Kurmugeon]

.....which is thee real issue. Just cause the corporate fat cats brainwashed you into thinking it wasn't an issue, and that Global Warming is, doesn't make it so.

Anthropogenic Global Warming IS an issue for the 2012 Election in the same way that President Obama's Black Ethnicity and Candidate Romney’s Mormon Religion are a 2012 Election issues; it matters a great deal to a few voters for ugly reasons.

 

[Dittohead not!]

And you still don't have a point to your post. It isn't an attack if it's the truth. It's simply pointing out the truth. If the truth hurts, try having a valid argument for once.

There is no argument that will sway a true believer in the great conspiracy, but here's one to chew on, one that will make sense to open minds:

The fact that there is a 100% total consensus does not prove that AGW is real, that is correct. The fact that AGW is real is why there is a total 100% consensus. Cause and effect, you see.

As for the CO2, the facts are the facts, and the figures I cited are actual measurements. You can try to spin them around and make them fit the WCT, but facts are what they are.

 

[presluc]

I came across this article the other day and I have read a few others similar to it:
Distractions from the Real Issues « Political G-Force

I think it pretty much sums up where we are today. We see the msm constantly distract us from the real issues - the national debt, unemployment, the undeclared & unconstitutional wars..etc...These are problems that will not solve themselves and they cannot be ignored. Instead the msm tries to tell us gay marriage and other dumb social issues are important when at the end of the day they're not going to determine whether or not there's going to be an America that we recognize.

I have also watched a great video about the national debt here:
Funding Government by the Minute | Republic Broadcasting Network

We have to realize at this point it is mathematically impossible to repay the debt so I think we have to rethink the possibility of even paying it back because it's not going to happen in our lifetimes. What's your opinion on the real issues? What are the real issues to you?

Is this the new norm in America?
To make a debt so high it is mathematically impossible to repay so you can rethink the possibility of even paying it back at all.

If the nation does this then the American people should be able to do the same, but they can't.

Cause out here in the real world they have a little thing called foreclosures and debt collectors, and credit checks.
You don't pay your bills out here you lose your house, your land, you ability to get untilities or credit.

As far as the real issue , the real issue has not went away it is a domino effect of bad economy , bad balance on imports and exports and a bad situation for America.

The real issue is America's dependency on foreign nations , like a junkie on smack.
America depends on foreign nations for fuel and energy so gas prices go up or down at foreign nations leisure
America depends on foreign nation for labor while Americans look for work, and ask why aren't there more tax revenue
America depends on foreign nations for more imported products while American corporations get bailouts cause their profits are low.
When America has yet another problem the politicians of D.C. play the "blame game shuffle and the not my fault dance"
You wanted issues here is but a few.
One more would be an issue missing in American politics today "RESPONSIBILITY".eace

 

[Dittohead not!]

The national debt, as a percentage of GDP, was higher right after WWII than it is now. While it was never paid off, it was paid down quite ba lot in the years that followed.

Perhaps we should look back at what happened in the '50s and '60s that helped pay down the debt.

 

[Sparkles]

There is no argument that will sway a true believer in the great conspiracy, but here's one to chew on, one that will make sense to open minds:

The fact that there is a 100% total consensus does not prove that AGW is real, that is correct. The fact that AGW is real is why there is a total 100% consensus. Cause and effect, you see.

As for the CO2, the facts are the facts, and the figures I cited are actual measurements. You can try to spin them around and make them fit the WCT, but facts are what they are.

Yeah, there's no argument, especially when not one of you has presented an argument. I can't help it that you fail. There is nothing I can do, to fix your consistent failure. Just look at your circular logic here? This is proof that you are one giant posting failure.

Consensus, doesn't prove AGW is real. But AGW being real, results in consensus. Implication: AGW must be real because there is a consensus. Then you babble about spin, which is most ironic.

You really doesn't see, that your whole post was one massive fail fest? And then you wonder why I don't join you lemmings in running over your cliff.... really? If this is the level of logic you have, then you have no logic at all. I might as well go debate at an elementary school, if this is the level of stupidity you have to debate with.

There is no 100% consensus. Get over it. There are tens of thousands of people who disagree with the 'consensus' and have good reasons. You just shut your eyes and pretend they don't exist.

 

[Sparkles]

The national debt, as a percentage of GDP, was higher right after WWII than it is now. While it was never paid off, it was paid down quite ba lot in the years that followed.

Perhaps we should look back at what happened in the '50s and '60s that helped pay down the debt.

Absolutely. If you want to go back to the spending levels of the 50s and 60s, I'll be the first to support such an idea.

 

[Sparkles]

The real issue is America's dependency on foreign nations , like a junkie on smack.
America depends on foreign nations for fuel and energy so gas prices go up or down at foreign nations leisure
America depends on foreign nation for labor while Americans look for work, and ask why aren't there more tax revenue
America depends on foreign nations for more imported products while American corporations get bailouts cause their profits are low.
When America has yet another problem the politicians of D.C. play the "blame game shuffle and the not my fault dance"
You wanted issues here is but a few.
One more would be an issue missing in American politics today "RESPONSIBILITY".eace

If we didn't import oil, the price of gas would be 10 times higher than it is now.
Generally the types of jobs immigrant workers are taking, are the types of jobs Americans are trying to escape from. That's not really an issue.
Assuming you are referring to GM and Chrysler, the problem there was Unions. Restricting imports would not have changed anything in that regard.

I agree we have problems, but we generally don't agree on the solution. That's where the problem is. The wrong solution, will be worse than the original problem.

 

[Matt Foley]

Anthropogenic Global Warming IS an issue for the 2012 Election in the same way that President Obama's Black Ethnicity and Candidate Romney’s Mormon Religion are a 2012 Election issues; it matters a great deal to a few voters for ugly reasons.

Sure, Global Warming is an issue just like Emmanual Goldstein is a problem that needs to be addressed.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Absolutely. If you want to go back to the spending levels of the 50s and 60s, I'll be the first to support such an idea.

Me too. We wouldn't have to cut back all that much, but some. Further, if we had the same tax structure, we could possibly begin to attack that enormous debt.

 

[Dittohead not!]

If we didn't import oil, the price of gas would be 10 times higher than it is now.

at least!

Generally the types of jobs immigrant workers are taking, are the types of jobs Americans are trying to escape from. That's not really an issue.

as long as those immigrants are legal.

Assuming you are referring to GM and Chrysler, the problem there was Unions. Restricting imports would not have changed anything in that regard.

The problem was cars that were less reliable and less fuel efficient, therefore, not as competitive. Protect the automakers from competition, and sure, they'd have done better.

I agree we have problems, but we generally don't agree on the solution. That's where the problem is. The wrong solution, will be worse than the original problem.

can't argue with that one.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Yeah, there's no argument, especially when not one of you has presented an argument. I can't help it that you fail. There is nothing I can do, to fix your consistent failure. Just look at your circular logic here? This is proof that you are one giant posting failure.

Consensus, doesn't prove AGW is real. But AGW being real, results in consensus. Implication: AGW must be real because there is a consensus. Then you babble about spin, which is most ironic.

You really doesn't see, that your whole post was one massive fail fest? And then you wonder why I don't join you lemmings in running over your cliff.... really? If this is the level of logic you have, then you have no logic at all. I might as well go debate at an elementary school, if this is the level of stupidity you have to debate with.

There is no 100% consensus. Get over it. There are tens of thousands of people who disagree with the 'consensus' and have good reasons. You just shut your eyes and pretend they don't exist.

Oh, I'm aware that there are thousands, probably millions of Americans who don't think that the scientific organizations are right about global warming. The problem is, those millions ignore the facts, just as you ignored the facts that I already posted.



I'm also aware that for some reason or other, those millions are somehow committed to the idea that science is wrong and the pundits are right.

Why that is, I have no idea. It seems to be rooted in some sort of idea of "left wing" vs. "right wing" or some such nonsense.

Now, back to those facts: The percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased nearly 21%. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Water vapor is also a powerful greenhouse gas. The warmer the temperature, the more water vapor there will be in the atmosphere on average. The average temperature of the Earth has increased about 1 degree C, which isn't very much at all as a percentage. Historically, ice ages have been accompanied by lower concentrations of CO2. Rush Limbaugh says that global warming is a liberal hoax. Glaciers are melting all over the world. Extreme weather is becoming more common. When someone runs out of real arguments, they resort to ad hominim attacks, thus proving that they have no real arguments. We are posting on what amounts to a huge bull session in which no one judges "debates" objectively.

Now, those are facts, all facts, no opinions at all. You can have your opinions, of course, everyone does.

But an opinion not supported by facts is worthless (IMO, of course).

OK, pick out your facts.

 

[Kurmugeon]

Oh, I'm aware that there are thousands, probably millions of Americans who don't think that the scientific organizations are right about global warming. The problem is, those millions ignore the facts, just as you ignored the facts that I already posted.



I'm also aware that for some reason or other, those millions are somehow committed to the idea that science is wrong and the pundits are right.

Why that is, I have no idea. It seems to be rooted in some sort of idea of "left wing" vs. "right wing" or some such nonsense.

Now, back to those facts: The percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased nearly 21%. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Water vapor is also a powerful greenhouse gas. The warmer the temperature, the more water vapor there will be in the atmosphere on average. The average temperature of the Earth has increased about 1 degree C, which isn't very much at all as a percentage. Historically, ice ages have been accompanied by lower concentrations of CO2. Rush Limbaugh says that global warming is a liberal hoax. Glaciers are melting all over the world. Extreme weather is becoming more common. When someone runs out of real arguments, they resort to ad hominim attacks, thus proving that they have no real arguments. We are posting on what amounts to a huge bull session in which no one judges "debates" objectively.

Now, those are facts, all facts, no opinions at all. You can have your opinions, of course, everyone does.

But an opinion not supported by facts is worthless (IMO, of course).

OK, pick out your facts.

You haven't presented any scientifically sound data in this entire thread!

I could easily find scientific absurdities in every single "Fact" you've quoted!

Exact measures atmospheric CO2 levels and Global Temperatures going back 400000 Years?! Its Laughable.

Funny, All around me I find plenty of HARD Facts that cannot be faked, manipulated, falsified or hidden which show that large scale changes in global climate has, is and will continue to happen pretty much without regard to anything humans are doing.

I am scientifically trained, experienced and equipped. I am surrounded by others with similar backgrounds, knowledge and equipment, and only about a third of the community expresses anything like belief in the AGW theories.

The vast majority of the government science lab community, outside of the Global Warming Funded Groups, believe that humans are at best a low order influence on the situation, and that the Solar Flux and Solar Spectrum absorption factors are the best candidates for the primary independent variables.

Sorry, but this mythical Consensus you keep propagandizing about just doesn't exist.

But isn’t it a surprise that the science issue, of all the potential science issues which threaten our society, the one thing the lefties focus on, and the means they propose to “Fix” the problem, would give the very same Liberals control over $Trillions of dollars and just about every facet of our lives…

I am afraid that like anti-Semitism, abusing Eco-disaster Mongering has been played out as a source of social political motivation.

 

[Kurmugeon]

Sure, Global Warming is an issue just like Emmanual Goldstein is a problem that needs to be addressed.

Yes, you're analysis of the situation is accurate...

And then again not.

You see, the gig is up, the man behind the curtain has been exposed, Oz is revealed as a cheap fake.

AGW will be an issue in the 2012 election, although a small one, but not in the way the Liberals want or expect.

Anyone still selling that snake oil will be run out of office covered in tar and feathers and painfully balanced on the rail of economic anger backlash.

 

[Matt Foley]

Yes, you're analysis of the situation is accurate...

And then again not.

You see, the gig is up, the man behind the curtain has been exposed, Oz is revealed as a cheap fake.

AGW will be an issue in the 2012 election, although a small one, but not in the way the Liberals want or expect.

Anyone still selling that snake oil will be run out of office covered in tar and feathers and painfully balanced on the rail of economic anger backlash.

It's bigger than you think. I'd guestimate Global Warming gets the Democratic Party at least 25% of their votes. Without Global Warming Democrats would be in the permanent super-minority, and in a 2 party system that's bad mmmkay. Actually it really doesn't matter in a 2 party system, I just wanted to say mmmmmkay, mmmmkay.