All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

[Cunt]

Faking a hate crime is a hate crime? That's a new one.

I think it is.

When he deliberately tries to vilify a race, by paying (by cheque lol) some people to attack him, and pretend they are doing it to perform a hate crime, it seems as much a hate crime as attacking someone simply for being a certain race.

[JimC]

Falsifiable claim which supports, or refutes the claims made by climate change.

The most useful one would be 'with the new taxes, rainbows will appear every thursday noon'. Then, if the rainbows don't appear, the new taxes weren't effective.

Of course, it is tougher to make a clear claim, and any examination of the claims brings a chorus of 'climate change denier', but nevermind. I doubt you or I know enough to understand the claims, or how to assess them. We should just shut up and accept our taxes, like the peaceful Frenchmen.

one staged hate crime

Only the wilfully blind, or the genuinely stupid, could think it was one.

http://www.fakehatecrimes.org/

You are confusing two separate issues. Most rational people see that man-made climate change is occurring - in fact, it is not a theory, but an accepted fact.

What you are alluding to are the measures that have been suggested to mitigate climate change - clearly you are concerned about tax or price rises etc. Here, there is room for political debate as to which measures are best, but hopefully not whether some form of action is needed to combat future temperature extremes.

[Tero]

I don’t think so. He’s just trolling. Standard procedure: your theory is no good if you can’t disprove it. Etc etc.

He can’t be that dumb, just trolling.

I used to get the same shit from cretionists back in the day. When I still bothered debating.

[pErvinalia]

Faking a hate crime is a hate crime? That's a new one.

I think it is.

I think you're off your meds, or something.

[Cunt]

I asked how much was caused by men. Some fucking lunatic said 100%

Which totally discounts the effects of the invasive Canadian beavers fucking up Alaska.

So that lunatic is full of shit.

Now about the claims - what ARE they? Humans affected climate change? OK, with you so far.

Some countries agreeing to build better houses can save the earth? Well, I would have to ask, are you in the business of selling those 'better houses'?

See, I get suspicious when the moral majority starts insisting that heresy be stamped out. I haven't heard much debate accepted, even about the debatable items.

So if paying more tax, and fucking up the French, is going to help, how is it going to help? Is there some way we can see that it IS making progress, or maybe more importantly that it is NOT making progress, and we need a better intervention?

I think Asimov was still right, it is changing, and there is little to be done about it. My take is that we should prepare for a changed world, not expect we will be able to change it.

For instance, are banks getting out of the business of covering mortgages in coastal areas? If climate change predictions are true, we should see heaps of big money absolutely FLEEING the coasts everywhere...but I don't see that happening.

[pErvinalia]

The most obvious way to see if something is working is to track the output of CO2.

[Tero]

Troll. Just tax him. No need to justify.

[Cunt]

So France, with their drastic measures, should have greatly reduced co2, and the US, with it's refusal to sign, should have maintained or increased co2, by that logic.

If those things aren't true, is your theory still true?

[Tero]

There were no drastic measures. Nobody did shit. Well, maybe Denmark.

[Cunt]

The French protesters paint a different picture about 'drastic', but you do you.

[Hermit]

So France, with their drastic measures, should have greatly reduced co2...

Do you mean the fuel tax rise Macron announced last November? It was supposed to start being imposed with the 2019 budget. Macron scrapped it in December 2018.

Not only was the tax increase never implemented, but the yellow-vest protesters never described the tax as drastic either. They protested against it because, being a flat tax, it was unfair to low-income earners.

[Brian Peacock]

I wish the climate change proponents would offer a clear, short-term falsifiable claim to support their view of things. Everything is so vague...like it would be tough to tell if France has made the world better off...they certainly have made their country worse off, so how do we know what impact their sacrifice has made to climate change...?

It is, of course, haram to question or criticize climate change claims, so there probably won't be falsifiable short term claims offered...

Global warming can be falsified by global temperatures remaining static or going down over time and thus not rising in an experimentally verified and direct relationship to the ppm amount of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Further accomplishment: Installing another industry lobbyist to dismantle horrible wealth-decreasing environmental protections. The horizon is the next few years' profits; we're unable to see beyond that and those who claim to are merely conspirators in a worldwide socialist plot!

'Documents detail multimillion-dollar ties involving EPA official, secretive industry group'

The nation’s biggest coal-burning power companies paid a top lobbying firm millions of dollars to fight a wide range of Obama-era environmental rules, documents obtained by POLITICO reveal — shortly before one of the firm’s partners became President Donald Trump’s top air pollution regulator.

Now that ex-partner, Bill Wehrum, is aggressively working to undo many of those same regulations at the EPA, where he is an assistant administrator in charge of issues including climate change, smog and power plants’ mercury pollution.

Wehrum’s past role as a utility lobbyist is well-known, but the documents reveal never-before-disclosed details of how extensively his old firm, formerly called Hunton & Williams, worked to coordinate the power industry’s strategy against the Obama administration’s regulations. Twenty-five power companies and six industry trade groups agreed to pay the firm a total of $8.2 million in 2017 alone, according to an internal summary prepared in June of that year — less than three months before Trump tapped Wehrum for his EPA post.

[Cunt]

I wish the climate change proponents would offer a clear, short-term falsifiable claim to support their view of things. Everything is so vague...like it would be tough to tell if France has made the world better off...they certainly have made their country worse off, so how do we know what impact their sacrifice has made to climate change...?

It is, of course, haram to question or criticize climate change claims, so there probably won't be falsifiable short term claims offered...

Global warming can be falsified by global temperatures remaining static or going down over time and thus not rising in an experimentally verified and direct relationship to the ppm amount of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Your a lot closer to understanding me.

Lets pretend you all are going to try valiantly, and fail to affect the needed change.

How would we know?

It's certain that at the point we know that, we should shift all effort to dealing with a new climate, but until then, turning things around is the best goal.

So how do we know if, or when it's working?

Or is it like feminism, where there is NEVER enough 'progress'?

[Brian Peacock]

Look, I answered your question completely. What are going to do with that information? You'll be wanting me to jump through a hoop of real fire made with a kleenex wrapped around a coat-hang wire next, and you'll still be thinking up the new and apparently pressing "But what ifs...?" even then.

Now you want to know how we could falsify the effectiveness of this or that policy? When the ppm CO2 in the atmosphere reduces then we'll know its working.