Originally posted by @finneganWow. I'm amazed that I'm still surprised by Trump doing things that are totally in line with who he is as a person. Thanks for this link.
Let's decide to limit our interest to the concept of risk. Risk does not require definitive certainty and so can tolerate scepticism. Ignoring risk is just plain stupid. How does Trump approach the risk of climate change where it matters - in his own investment strategies? Well, e.g.The New York billionaire is applying for permission to erect ...[text shortened]...
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/donald-trump-climate-change-golf-course-223436
Originally posted by @vivifyEnvironmental policies will slash the value of carbon - oil, coal - and destroy much of the fictional wealth in the portfolios of people like the Koch family. The value of their assets is based on their future revenue streams which, if we stop using oil, will reduce to a dribble.
To be clear, the danger isn't just what his beliefs are regarding climate. Trump put as head of the EPA a climate-change denier, which (due to corporate interests), resulted in in the EPA reversing laws banning coal from being dumped in our waters, and the approval of a pesticide found to give children brain cancer.
Since corporate interests are at the ...[text shortened]... c.), there's no telling how this politician will use NASA to advance the wishes of Big Business.
However, all that Trump is achieving is to ensure that China and others reap the benefits from alternative energy sources leaving American manufacturers at a disadvantage.
It's not as simple as rich versus poor - it is a state in the possession of vested interests. Quite often it is one wealthy group screwing another. The people are not in the picture.
Originally posted by @vivifyYou mean Jim Krane is an alarmist who thinks the opposite is true. All sorts of writers express all sorts of opinions on Forbes.
From the same Forbes site you post from about climate change:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rodadams/2017/04/30/climate-change-politics-trump-evidence-based-action-using-co2-free-nuclear-energy/#4cebc3f06c15
"Any future damage will come from burning more fossil fuels".
And here's an article from Forbes calling for a tax on carbon emissions to fight c ...[text shortened]... e it seem like Forbes doesn't agree with human-caused climate change, when the opposite is true.
A carbon tax will do no nothing since the climate is warming because of mostly natural causes. You can't fight what CO2 is NOT causing.
1 edit
Originally posted by @freakykbhThe traitor continues to spew bullshyte. Notice how there aren't any Russians or Chinese accusing NASA of lying or never having gone to the moon. If Russia was the one who first put a man on the moon and some assswipe like the Freak started BS saying they never did that, how long would he live? Yet here we have a traitor right in our midst and he gets away with it time after time. He should be in jail talking on a jail pulpit and maybe he could convince his fellow prisoners of his traitorous ways as truth. I can't tell you the proper words to describe this cretin.
You say that as though you are unaware that NASA has been doctoring images, faking reality and generally been lying to the public since, well, ever.
For one who prides themselves on understanding the world around them and the issues of the day, you are woefully and unforgivably ignorant.
You probably smell funny, too.
Originally posted by @finnegan100% certifiable whack job.
....streams which, if we stop using oil, will reduce to a dribble......
Every human on this planet benefits from oil (except a handful who wish they did).
"if we stop using oil" there would be untold death, starvation and suffering. Every thing on your desk, the keyboard you type on, the screen you look at, the power that drives it, every aspect of the food you eat, the roof over your head, everything, and I mean everything, is there as a result of oil.
"if we stop using oil" jeeeezuuussssssss spare me the idjits 🙄
Originally posted by @wajomaEr, you do realize when they say 'when we stop using oil' that means using oil for transportation fuel don't you? Of course there will still be oil used for all those products and lubrication products too but transport accounts for about 75% of airborne pollution and THAT we can control with proper technology. If we use green energy to the fullest, we will need very little of that precious oil for transport and almost all for products. It is going to happen, several countries are now planning to ban the production of internal combustion engines for vehicles in a few years and go 100% electric. It is the wave of the future and nothing can be done to stop it. The main issue is the loss of oil revenue and the economic problems that will cause for oil producers like Saudi, the US, Russia and so forth. It will require a massive re-education of millions of people out of oil and into green.
100% certifiable whack job.
Every human on this planet benefits from oil (except a handful who wish they did).
"if we stop using oil" there would be untold death, starvation and suffering. Every thing on your desk, the keyboard you type on, the screen you look at, the power that drives it, every aspect of the food you eat, the roof over your ...[text shortened]... e as a result of oil.
"if we stop using oil" jeeeezuuussssssss spare me the idjits 🙄
1 edit
Originally posted by @sonhouseYep, heard about the new battery powered A380, can take 5 passengers after it's loaded with batteries and can fly 12 miles.
Er, you do realize when they say 'when we stop using oil' that means using oil for transportation fuel don't you? Of course there will still be oil used for all those products and lubrication products too but transport accounts for about 75% of airborne pollution and THAT we can control with proper technology. If we use green energy to the fullest, we will ...[text shortened]... o forth. It will require a massive re-education of millions of people out of oil and into green.
BTW apart from being a miracle source for energy, oil is used for a lot more than lubrication.
Originally posted by @wajomaAll of the uses for oil we have (and there are many) have alternatives - renewable/nuclear power for electricity and transport, and biofuels for plastics, chemicals, etc. That's not to say it is a good idea to stop using oil immediately, and producing sufficient biofuels prevents environmental challenges of its own, but it's also a little bit overdramatic to suggest we cannot go without.
100% certifiable whack job.
Every human on this planet benefits from oil (except a handful who wish they did).
"if we stop using oil" there would be untold death, starvation and suffering. Every thing on your desk, the keyboard you type on, the screen you look at, the power that drives it, every aspect of the food you eat, the roof over your ...[text shortened]... e as a result of oil.
"if we stop using oil" jeeeezuuussssssss spare me the idjits 🙄
Originally posted by @wajomaI already acknowledged that but you don't read too well do you?
Yep, heard about the new battery powered A380, can take 5 passengers after it's loaded with batteries and can fly 12 miles.
BTW apart from being a miracle source for energy, oil is used for a lot more than lubrication.