What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Climate Change thread: UN Report: we need to take action (4 Viewers)

US reduction would be more if not for right wing resistance.  I find it interesting when the right takes credit for what the left does as a sign of reasonableness to prevent additional progress.  

When the Trump administration dismantles the EPA the right really has no leg to stand on.

With that said certainly the world should be putting more pressure on China and India to curb emissions and take economic sanction actions if they don’t.
IMHO the world should be putting more effort into making green business models the most profitable and sustainable - and watch them being copied and implemented all over the world, particularly in developing countries

 
US reduction would be more if not for right wing resistance.  I find it interesting when the right takes credit for what the left does as a sign of reasonableness to prevent additional progress.  

When the Trump administration dismantles the EPA the right really has no leg to stand on.

With that said certainly the world should be putting more pressure on China and India to curb emissions and take economic sanction actions if they don’t.
America is doing this, not the right or left.  I would argue we would be a lot better off if we focused a decade ago on building nuclear power plants.   The EPA is not the reason we have reduced green house gases.  Trump is not really the voice of the right.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
America is doing this, not the right or left.  I would argue we would be a lot better off if we focused a decade ago on building nuclear power plants.   The EPA is not the reason we have reduced green house gases.  Trump is not really the voice of the right.  
Could have fooled me. They fall in line lock-step with every idiotic thing that comes out of his mouth or twit account. Party over country. Way over.

 
And AOC speaks for everyone on the left.  Commie over country.  Am I right?  The lock-step/idiotic/anticountry/over generalization rhetoric is not what we want.  
As has been pointed out numerous times. AOC is very popular on the left - that is true. However, she was elected to represent 700,000 people in NYC. She got 100,000 people to vote for her. Donald Trump is the president of the United States and has near unanimous support from republicans across the country and has congress in his back pocket. So while there may be republicans like you that do not fall completetly in line, you are in the very tiny minority.

 
As has been pointed out numerous times. AOC is very popular on the left - that is true. However, she was elected to represent 700,000 people in NYC. She got 100,000 people to vote for her. Donald Trump is the president of the United States and has near unanimous support from republicans across the country and has congress in his back pocket. So while there may be republicans like you that do not fall completetly in line, you are in the very tiny minority.
Just one hour ago he thanked the Republicans for his 95% approval rating. On the other hand just 6 months ago a poll showed AOC with a 21% approval rating.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just one hour ago he thanked the Republicans for his 95% approval rating. On the other hand just 6 months ago a poll showed AOC with a 21% approval rating.  
Apparently 21% is enough support to indicate all the left falls in line lock-step with her views.....right? Such BS from the right. If just a few on the right would grow a freakin pair of balls.....seriously, man up and admit when DJT is way over the line.

 
Apparently 21% is enough support to indicate all the left falls in line lock-step with her views.....right? Such BS from the right. If just a few on the right would grow a freakin pair of balls.....seriously, man up and admit when DJT is way over the line.
Oh, they will, if he loses in 2020, it'll be like no one ever voted for him or supported anything

 
Just one hour ago he thanked the Republicans for his 95% approval rating. On the other hand just 6 months ago a poll showed AOC with a 21% approval rating.  
According to Snoopes there was no such poll which showed AOC at 21 percent.  And Trump has never been at 95 percent among Republicans.  Normally in the 80-90 range.  And Republicans and the right are not really the same thing.  But that was not the point.  The point was it was a terrible post which was neither productive or conducive to good discussion.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
According to Snoopes there was no such poll which showed AOC at 21 percent.  And Trump has never been at 95 percent among Republicans.  Normally in the 80-90 range.  And Republicans and the right are not really the same thing.  But that was not the point.  The point was it was a terrible post which was neither productive or conducive to good discussion.  
Actually there was and it was mentioned in the AOC thread several times (surprised you missed that!). IIRC it was done by a couple of college kids with a PAC who went door to door in her district. The sample size was small and unscientific (only people who were home and willing to participate) Also, the methodology left a lot to be desired.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/poll-aoc-unliked-untrusted-unwanted-in-her-own-ny-district

Poll: AOC disliked, distrusted, unwanted in her own NY district

She’s a star on the national political stage, but Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is viewed skeptically back in her Queens and Bronx 14th Congressional District, according to a new door-to-door survey.

It found that she has a low 21% favorability rating, that just 11% believe she has their best interests in mind, and that only 13% would vote to reelect her.

The survey of registered voters was conducted by the political action committee targeting her with a Federal Election Commission complaint, Stop The AOC PAC.

A previous survey by the group found that residents were upset with the lawmaker’s opposition to bringing an Amazon headquarters to the district. In part due to Ocasio-Cortez’s complaints, Amazon backed out of moving to her district.

[...]

 
Apparently 21% is enough support to indicate all the left falls in line lock-step with her views.....right? Such BS from the right. If just a few on the right would grow a freakin pair of balls.....seriously, man up and admit when DJT is way over the line.
Who needs to grow balls and what does that have to do with climate change?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apparently 21% is enough support to indicate all the left falls in line lock-step with her views.....right? Such BS from the right. If just a few on the right would grow a freakin pair of balls.....seriously, man up and admit when DJT is way over the line.
Who needs to grow balls and what does that have to do with climate change?
The answer to your first question is in the post you quoted. I have bolded it for you. HTH

 
We are supposed to get some sort of major storm this weekend..again...We shall see.  I don't mind a snow storm Friday night into Saturday.  If it's gonna snow, that's the time to do it

 
When the world's largest asset manager ($6 trillion) is compelled by their fiduciary duty to invest in climate change themes, it's time to officially put the climate deniers on the endangered species list.

It's been nice knowing ya...

22-Jan-2020 - LONDON (Reuters) A BlackRock-backed (BLK.N) group aims to raise an initial $500 million for a private equity fund that will invest in climate change-linked infrastructure upgrades in emerging markets.

In a recent annual letter to the thousands of companies in which BlackRock holds stakes, Chief Executive Officer Larry Fink said the need to act on climate was “particularly urgent” given many cities were not built to withstand “the new climate reality”.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-davos-meeting-blackrock/blackrock-partners-eye-initial-500-million-for-climate-fund-idUSKBN1ZL0N6

“Our research and the work we’ve done has shown climate risk is investment risk,” Deese said. 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-blackrock-decided-now-is-the-time-to-act-on-climate-change-200027615.html

 
Trump Removes Pollution Controls on Streams and Wetlands

"The new water rule will remove federal protections from more than half the nation’s wetlands, and hundreds of thousands of small waterways. That would for the first time in decades allow landowners and property developers to dump pollutants such as pesticides and fertilizers directly into many of those waterways, and to destroy or fill in wetlands for construction projects.

“This will be the biggest loss of clean water protection the country has ever seen,” said Blan Holman, a lawyer specializing in federal water policy at the Southern Environmental Law Center. “This puts drinking water for millions of Americans at risk of contamination from unregulated pollution. This is not just undoing the Obama rule. This is stripping away protections that were put in place in the ’70s and ’80s that Americans have relied on for their health.”

Mr. Holman also said that the new rule exemplifies how the Trump administration has dismissed or marginalized scientific evidence. Last month, a government advisory board of scientists, many of whom were handpicked by the Trump administration, wrote that the proposed water rule “neglects established science.”

 
Trump Removes Pollution Controls on Streams and Wetlands

"The new water rule will remove federal protections from more than half the nation’s wetlands, and hundreds of thousands of small waterways. That would for the first time in decades allow landowners and property developers to dump pollutants such as pesticides and fertilizers directly into many of those waterways, and to destroy or fill in wetlands for construction projects.

“This will be the biggest loss of clean water protection the country has ever seen,” said Blan Holman, a lawyer specializing in federal water policy at the Southern Environmental Law Center. “This puts drinking water for millions of Americans at risk of contamination from unregulated pollution. This is not just undoing the Obama rule. This is stripping away protections that were put in place in the ’70s and ’80s that Americans have relied on for their health.”

Mr. Holman also said that the new rule exemplifies how the Trump administration has dismissed or marginalized scientific evidence. Last month, a government advisory board of scientists, many of whom were handpicked by the Trump administration, wrote that the proposed water rule “neglects established science.”
God I hate this guy.  He won't be on this Earth much longer so screw future generations.  I only hope and pray this can get tied up in lawsuits until sanity is returned.

 
-29 in Nome, Alaska today.   
Remind me, is it normally warm in those parts at this time of year?

Are you saying that all the scientists who have spent their lives studying Antarctica are wrong to be alarmed?  This is a huge deal in the scientific community.  I am not sure it being cold in Alaska in February is probative of anything.

 
Its just so frustrating what this administration is doing to the environment. Just disregarding or throwing away years of progress.

The Wild West: How Washington is Bending Over Backward for Mining Companies in Nevada at the Expense of Environmental Rules.

On a cold, windy day in late October, in one of the most remote and least populated regions of the state, a half-dozen workers prepared to drill another test hole in the arid volcanic rock. They were looking for deposits of lithium, a metal that has become indispensable to smartphones and electric-vehicle batteries, and which geologists estimate is so abundant here that mining companies from around the world are vying for a chance to make the next big discovery. The workers doing the drilling were contracted by Ioneer, an Australian company that has already invested millions in exploring what it believes could be one of the largest lithium producers in the world with an estimated net value of nearly $2 billion.

Like almost all of the surrounding territory, this land is owned by the federal government and overseen by the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management. I had come here because I had learned that the Rhyolite Ridge project was threatening a rare wildflower called Tiehm’s buckwheat that is not known to grow anywhere else in the world. Standing with me on the ridgeline overlooking the work site was Patrick Donnelly, the state director of the Center for Biological Diversity, a conservation group that over the past three years has established itself as one of the most determined—and successful—foes of the Trump administration’s efforts to accelerate mining and development on public lands. The Rhyolite Ridge project boundary sits atop the plant’s tiny 21-acre habitat and from what Donnelly could see, the work was already having a damaging impact. Donnelly pointed to newly graded roads on the site, including a path that cut through two of the main populations of the flower. Three weeks before, Donnelly had filed a petition with federal and state officials to have the plant listed as an endangered species. Now, on a holiday weekend, the mine was buzzing and Donnelly was livid. He had seen nothing like this level of activity on three visits over the summer.

...

But according to a sweeping whistleblower complaint filed on October 4 by a five-year BLM employee and obtained by POLITICO and Type Investigations, the Battle Mountain office has repeatedly disregarded its own environmental rules and regulations to fast-track permits on public land. The historic antipathy toward federal oversight common to this region, combined with a presidential administration that has announced its hostility to decades of environmental law, has left public lands especially vulnerable.

“This ... is more than disagreement with the decisions of his superiors,” the attorney for Dan Patterson, the BLM whistleblower, wrote in the complaint, “but stems from a sincere belief that the laws of the United States are being disregarded for the professional expediency of his superiors and the benefit of private parties, and that a culture of lawlessness has been engendered.”

According to Patterson’s complaint, the BLM district office has, over the past several years, ignored longstanding requirements that stem from the 50-year-old National Environmental Policy Act; approved mines and drilling without adequate review, turning the region into a “clearinghouse for federal permits”; and taken personnel off mining inspections in order to expedite development. In one case, according to the complaint, a mining engineer was removed from the review of a high priority open pit gold mine after making a recommendation to mitigate the long-term effects of toxic wastewater, which the company opposed because of cost. In another case, a group of well-connected families had been allowed to build recreational cabins on public land under the guise that they are actively mining. The whistleblower’s complaint also alleges that a lithium mine in Silver Peak, on the other side of Rhyolite Ridge, has illegally expanded onto BLM land without obtaining the necessary permits. Since raising questions about the district’s conduct, Patterson says he has faced retribution from his supervisors and is now on leave without pay.

 
Trump Removes Pollution Controls on Streams and Wetlands

"The new water rule will remove federal protections from more than half the nation’s wetlands, and hundreds of thousands of small waterways. That would for the first time in decades allow landowners and property developers to dump pollutants such as pesticides and fertilizers directly into many of those waterways, and to destroy or fill in wetlands for construction projects.

“This will be the biggest loss of clean water protection the country has ever seen,” said Blan Holman, a lawyer specializing in federal water policy at the Southern Environmental Law Center. “This puts drinking water for millions of Americans at risk of contamination from unregulated pollution. This is not just undoing the Obama rule. This is stripping away protections that were put in place in the ’70s and ’80s that Americans have relied on for their health.”

Mr. Holman also said that the new rule exemplifies how the Trump administration has dismissed or marginalized scientific evidence. Last month, a government advisory board of scientists, many of whom were handpicked by the Trump administration, wrote that the proposed water rule “neglects established science.”
About time. I just dumped a truckload of half used paint cans and some other random garbage into a stream by my house. Now I have room to park my car in the garage. 

 
Another report uses NOAA data and easily debunks the global warming garbage promoted by the U.N. 

https://wryheat.wordpress.com/2014/11/19/evidence-that-co2-emissions-do-not-intensify-the-greenhouse-effect/

Climate alarmists need to educate themselves. Otherwise they’re just shills for their own demise.
How right you are!  I'd much rather get my info from a guy who spends as much time writing articles on "rock naming" and "edible desert plants" as he does on climate change...

...as opposed to a report that is the culmination of 30 years of continuous work involving 13 federal departments and agencies (that is then ignored by the President).

This report assessed information from several sources, including 1) technical input reports and scientific resources collected for the Third National Climate Assessment;1 2) the Climate Science Special Report2 and other U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) science assessments; 3) a literature database comprising over 1,000 original reports meeting IQA requirements, compiled by USGCRP staff and shared with authors; 4) a public request for information released by the U.S. Department of Commerce in 2016;3 5) expert awareness of the literature from authors; 6) information provided during Regional Engagement Workshops and other engagement events;4 and 7) chapter-specific submissions of technical resources and relevant literature to author teams.

https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/credits/

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top