.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Si Thea01
-
Posts
2,960 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Si Thea01
-
-
Volcanoes produce more CO2 than all the animals and humans on the planet. Let the GW's tell us of their plans that they will implement to overcome this. They can't, all they can do is put out spin and propaganda in order to put fear into the hearts of those who cannot think for themselves. If they and the nimbies want to return to medieval times, let's find an open space on some continent, build a wall around them and let them live the lifestyle they are trying to force onto others.
Freezing in the winter, excruciatingly hot in the summer, lack of food, the list is endless. Don't they understand the importance of CO2, which is a guardian of the pH of the blood, which is essential for survival? It is also interesting to note that many are now referring to it as carbon pollution, they really have no idea.
-
47 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:
Whether or not Trump opposes them, they are coming. Unfortunately, instead of putting them in less "in your face" places, the present situation allows the nimbys to impede progress.
Out to sea is obviously the best place for them, but probably costs more.
However, if every roof was converted to solar, with battery back up for night time, there would be no need for as many windmills.
If base load power was retained then we would all have cheap electricity, governments' would not have to subsidise solar and wind power. There would 1000's of birds still alive, people's health would not be affected, all caused by the latter. Wind power is the most expensive electricity, followed by solar.
What happens when the wind is too strong, the turbines shut down or no wind at all, no electricity produced. What happens when the sun doesn't shine? And of course those out to sea cost more to produce electricity. But don't worry, the poor old citizen will be taxed out of existence just to satisfy the greed of a few and the beliefs of the alarmists.
Who is conning who with all the spin about green power. If you want to go green, go nuclear or build more coal and gas power stations which, given today's technology, are a far cry from the old technology of 30 years ago and are exceptionally clean. But none of the GW alarmists want to give these options a go. Why, I'd like to know?
-
49 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:
Exactly.
I had my own opinion of GW even before big Al made his film.
They should have confined the whole lot to the cutting room floor. It is now being banned from a lot schools as it is being considered untruthful and straight out propaganda, and that is coming from the students.
-
49 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:
But you have to give him credit for his creativeness.
A Chinese Hoax?
Its a good one.
And at the very least China is also enjoying this since it moves production costs even higher amongst any competing industries in these countries that are going to invest 100's of millions to limit, scrub or capture these emissions.
Resulting in the Chinese manufactured goods being even more competitively priced to the consumer.
BTW, any idea how CC will impact the US? No one seems to know.
They won't to provide any answers for fear of looking more foolish than they are now.
And I didn't forget. -
15 minutes ago, Opl said:
The point of my post is not about my own belief - or knowledge - which is not relevant here .
The topic of this thread is " D. Trump sees climate change as a chines hoax", so :
- it's not a chinese hoax ( the process was initiated by the US Under Republican adminitration)
- and I repeat : Trump acknowledges climate change — at his golf course The billionaire, who called global warming a hoax, warns of its dire effects in his company's application to build a sea wall.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/donald-trump-climate-change-golf-course-223436
My answer is about D. Trump's facts distorsion, to manipulate those who listen to him.
That's all.
Just wondering and maybe you can answer, maybe not. Given that when scientists want a government handout in an effort to continue studies, regardless of what it may be, if they mention GW in their application for funds, they stand a bigger chance of getting those funds than if they made no mention at all.
Now, not knowing what the local council is like where the golf course is situated, but given what most are from the left and believe in GW, then he might just be playing smart and knows that if he mentions global warming then he will have a much bigger chance of being allowed to build the wall, were he not to make any mention at all.
Playing one of against the other, I don't know, but if I were in his shoes, I certainly would, wouldn't you? So just because he mentions it and has a sign means absolutely nothing and you should not assume, it may well be just to appease others. I have to disagree with you at this time in so far as his trying to manipulate others who listen to him, he has stated what he has, which he in entitled to, however, many of us had our own opinions on GW long before Mr Trump made his feelings known.
-
8 minutes ago, stevenl said:
You have sunk really low by trying to make this about left and right.
I really cannot understand why you are saying "someone has sunk really low" when all they are doing is voicing their opinion. I see nothing about the right, maybe you are assuming, he could well be from the Centre. Now if you check with those who have been mentioned, those alarmists, you will find they will admit they are of the left, so how is this sinking low?
-
3 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:
You aren't suggesting they have such strong opinions and don't even have a clue as to what impact it will have on different regions of the world?
Is it possible that GW will actually result in an environmental benefit to some regions with increased rainfall or better climates for agriculture? Perhaps bring up the temps so not as much energy needs to be used heating living spaces, or conversely, cool down some regions so not as much energy need be generated to cool living spaces?
It seems that jumping on the Climate Change/Carbon Tax bandwagon is not much different from passing Obamacare.
Nobody actually takes the time to study it, they just hop on board.
No, I wouldn't dare do that. That would be so unkind.
-
30 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:
Still hoping for some answers.
Come on Clutch, your really expecting a lot given the talent on here.
-
1 hour ago, kamahele said:
Yes, Global Warming is real. It is a fact . Yes, this particular global warming is caused by human activity. Again this is a fact. It is not a scam. Follow the science. Follow the facts.
Maybe if you followed the money you would have a better insight into just how the Scam works.
-
1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:
Of course you have to offer a solution. I have offered many solutions.
Of course there is a simple solution- reduce the population to early 20th century levels.
No one is stopping everyone from doing the things you say. The fact that they don't says much to the fact they either don't know or don't care.
A simple solution, which one will it be, homicide of genocide?
-
7 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:
What is the impending disaster to the US?
How will the continued release of Greenhouse Gasses into the atmosphere impact the US?
Thanks
Can't wait for those to be answered.
-
2 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:
And do you believe that the Washington Post is a credible source in order to highlight that someone else is ignorant?
-
27 minutes ago, claffey said:
Can you present some statistics to back this claim up? Surely the air pollution in China and India is more horrific than in the US? Delhi recently had to close down for three days because of it...
Actually, according to a list on Wikipedia China is the biggest polluter, followed by America, The European Union, then India. Here's the link for comparison on countries, worldwide, as of 2014.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions
-
Just now, daveAustin said:
Folk who say our actions, including the removal of great forests, are not affecting the earth may want to gen themselves up a bit. Whether the earth was cooler or warmer in the past and nature doing its own thing are immaterial. Trump is very wrong on this.
I do not for once believe any intelligent person, from either persuasion, would disagree with you on the deforestation of the world, after all it is the trees and plants that provide most of the necessities for the survival of the human race, the most notable being the taking in of carbon dioxide and the emitting of oxygen.
if you believe that the earth being cooler or warmer in the past and that Earths natural climate control doing its thing are immaterial, then I am afraid sir, it is you who are wrong, not the President-Elect.
-
22 minutes ago, Mansell said:
Attack the messenger and ignore the message.
If they're phonies and full of spin then yes, they're fair game. If they don't want to be criticised then don't get involved. I think dear Leonardo is looking for another Oscar nomination but believe me, he won't even get a mention with the load of rubbish he dealt up.
-
Ah, the purveyors of doom. We all know what side they butter their bread on and if the majority of the so called Climate Change scientists weren't given grants by various governments to tell them what they want to hear, then they'd be like they want the rest of to be, living in the dark, freezing our butts off and scraping by to get enough food to survive, while they live the high life. Why do they have to rely on modelling and not scientific facts? Is it because if they did a little true scientific research they'd realise that what they are on about is pure alarmism, scaring the tripe out of the uneducated in order to indoctrinate them into their new order religion. In other words, total crap.
A prime example of scaremongering. Professor Tim Flannery, a few years ago predicted that Australia, which was in the middle of a drought and water shortage, (1997-2009) would never see rain again, at least in substantial quantities but if it did, then the earth would be so parched it would just run off and never soak into the soil and our dams would remain empty. He conned the idiots in government to build desalination plants and guess what happened, the drought broke, all our dams filled, as they are today, and the desalination plants have been moth balled, in fact, the one in Melbourne was flooded.
Now, they're all mothballed and costing government half a billion each, each year to maintain. Well not the government, the poor old suckered Aussie taxpayer. And this clown was made the Australian of the Year, and Climate Change Commissioner. Oh, another of his fallacies, he said that the sea level would rise but up to 6 metres, we're still waiting but where did he build his mansion, on low lying land, right on the Hawkesbury River, only a few kilometres from where it runs into the Pacific Ocean.
Given that this fool is held up to be part of the climate change elite, no wonder people do not believe the spin being proffered by him, Al Gore, Barrack Obama, Leonardo DiCaprio and the other Hollywood leftist elites, governments world wide and their phoney paid scientists and that great corrupt body, the UN, all of whom wouldn't know if someone was up them.
-
The new religion of the elite, a hoax and money making scam. I don't know if China implemented it although it seems to have got onboard despite building new coal fired power stations quicker than you can say "Jack Robinson" And taking money and redistributing it can change the climate. Yeah, right.
Just look at who are promoting the hoax and from what side of politics they're from. And who are those who have made billions and nothing has changed, other than most of their predictions falling in heap. And why is it that everything they predict is mostly 30 to 50 years into the future. Probably because most of them and many of us won't be around to tell them that they were full of spin.
-
11 hours ago, jacko45k said:
While they were shooting downwards at tyres the likelihood of bystanders being hit is probably much less than if they shot at him. It was a poorly executed attempt at arrest.
You are dead set right there. If I was the copper I be calling him out, they didn't, and I would have taken him out from the front of the vehicle. given the way he was driving, a copper at the front of the vehicle would have been justified in doing so.
-
On 19/11/2016 at 2:53 PM, NCC1701A said:
Love at first sight of the "girlfriend" for the BIB in that photo.
I will post bail. :)
The only problem there is she's probably tarnished (drugs) given the hoon she was hanging around with.
-
On 19/11/2016 at 0:01 PM, geriatrickid said:
Wouldn't a normal fuse prevent such a tragedy?
No.
-
1 hour ago, stevenl said:
Can't do that via the TV app. But easy, just go to your own link and post the part where it says that many disagree with the existence of reversed racism.
Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
If I show you a courtesy, then please do be so rude as to tell me what I should or should not do. I can read and I know what is written by the other side but I dismissed it, as many others have, as total BS.
If you don't believe me then check on the African Americans who agree that there is reverse racism, and are quite vocal about it. It you have trouble with the TV app, then maybe you should use another source to reply. And I do really enjoy how you state the obvious with such a sense of discovery.
-
4 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:
I do not think we are dealing with an adult mind here.
I will take your puerile response as a concession that you cannot dispute the argument presented.
I've been called worse things by better people. Are you done.
-
14 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:
You posted a definition, not the definition. And the core of your argument is that because someone went to the trouble of writing that paragraph then this is sufficient to demonstrate that something exists.
Wikipedia is useful but it is also a tool for intellectual shallowness.
There are many reasons to demonstrate why Reverse Racism is not a thing. Here's one. It's a big one - individual racial prejudice is not racism. It is not racism because a prejudicial comment against a white person by a non white person is rarely associated with the power to influence that person's life. Racism involves power.
I believe you posted a link to an article that claimed that a number of African Americans were racist, including Barack Obama and Martin Luther King - demonstrating that some people just don't have a clue.
For those evolved enough to listen to a minority voice explain the issue:
Promotion of the fallacy of reverse racism aids and abets the perpetuation of oppression and inequality. It plays into the hands of the Supremacists and needs to be exposed and challenged.
Well I would agree with you but then we'd both be wrong.
-
50 minutes ago, stevenl said:
Thanks, noticed you left out 'details' that don't suit your point of view.
Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
Instead of posting baseless and non-substance one liners, please show the details that were left out to suit my point of view. I now understand why we have warning labels on everything.
And I didn't forget. 
Donald J Trump sees Climate change as a Chinese hoax
in World News
Posted
Another trustworthy and reliable news source I see. Did you read the story, it relates to chemical plants and other factories and a paper mill flushing chemicals in to the Yangtze river, the water and fish source for the village. It makes a mention of white smoke being emitted from a power plant but what is seen being emitted is normally water vapour not chemicals that pollute the water. So your point is what, considering this thread relates to Donald Trump believing that GW is a Chinese hoax ?
I hope you are not just putting this out as spin, hoping no one will read what you have introduced. Makes for great sensational headlines but falls short as there is no mention of GW. Going off track a little but hey, who cares as long as it looks good, who cares about the content and that it has nothing to do with GW, just that many chemicals are causing cancer. So where's the logic in introducing this aspect?