Bkk Brian

There's no reason why he could not have applied via the usual application process, that's what its there for and no country has been exempt. But then his word is about as credible as his statement that he had no intention of invading Ukraine, few days later, invasion.

Did you know Russia even tried to join NATO later, but were rejected? ???? There's a reason for that. He wanted special treatment. Putin wanted Russia to join Nato but did not want his country to have to go through the usual application process and stand in line “with a lot of countries that don’t matter”

The author does not have all the information but they do point out the inconsistencies in the forensics that even Marco Polo, headed by former Trump White House aide Garrett Ziegler published. At what point does it claim to be a product of the MAGA republicans?

4 weeks into the invasion: Zelensky: We won’t join NATO if that brings peace Now read up on Putin's Peter the Great Speech

Worth a read on the laptop analysis although its rather a deep dive: https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/07/18/wapo-is-suppressing-information-that-might-debunk-devlin-barretts-latest-spin/

I told you who you are, and yes wild threats. If Madonna or Kathy were posting on here I would probably respond to whoever they allegedly threatened.

"If the left want to avoid civil war they must get Garland and Wray out today and replace them with credible people" The resident Magadonian issuing his own wild threats. Read the article, its not talking about a civil war but lone acts by possibly mentally disturbed people or someone motivated by Trumps rhetoric.

The storming of the capitol was political persecution?

Its the highest levels of Carbon Dioxide for at least 2 million years not 10. There are a number of studies that have markers at 2 million years up, there are none that have it at 10 years up. Keep trolling

More than 1,000 people have been charged for federal crimes by the Department of Justice including 10 convictions for seditious conspiracy, so what was it then?

*Deleted post edited out* Is this guy funny as well, concentrations of Carbon dioxide are at the highest in at least 2 million years

There you go assuming I don't understand again. I understand what the facts tell us via evidence provided. I also understand that making predictions is variable as a direct result of policy actions taken in the future, solar activity is decreasing and the chart you referred to had the volcanic activity variables smoothed out. How Do We Know Climate Change Is Real? There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause. https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

I've already informed you why they are not exact because they are dependent on the outcomes of the policy makers.

Why? What's that got to do with policy makers decisions?

They do not control policy makers, this model is based predictions for the next 300 years based on what actions the policy makers put in place. The IPCC has no control over policy makers. That's the whole point of the report to give them the necessary information on what needs to be done and what will happen if they don't. IPCC report https://www.wri.org/insights/ipcc-climate-report

You give me one more chance? I'll ignore the idle remark and post the full graphic for you along with asking you, what do you find so strange, they have given different estimates based on how the world responds to climate change and what measures it puts in place. The SSP's differ due to policy decisions that will be taken by governments or not as the case may be.

Yes I read the link I just posted for you, that why I inserted in my post and he's correct the world is not going to end if it reaches an increase of 1.5%, your welcome. Regards the graph you posted earlier, its no longer in your post so its impossible to comment on it.

You can debate or troll, if you want to debate I'll be happy to do that, if you want to troll as above then carry on in your own little bubble

Of course he's optimistic, the main message from the IPCC report is to try and keep climate change below 1.5% increase with the policies its published. If the world can do that then its in a far better position to keep decreasing it but serious intervention is needed to achieve those targets and its impossible to say if all the worst polluting countries will contribute as they should. No one said the world would end. From the report: "Only with ambitious emissions cuts can the world keep global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees C, the limit scientists say is necessary for preventing the worst climate impacts. Under a high-emissions scenario, the IPCC finds the world may warm by 4.4 degrees C by 2100 — with catastrophic results." Here's the English version of your link without paywall. https://www.dw.com/en/climate-change-do-not-overstate-15-degrees-threat/a-66386523 Still waiting for the link to your graphic by the way.

Article 4: FINANCIAL INVOLVEMENT IN DRUG AND PROSTITUTION I predict it'll go as far as MTG's impeachment filing a couple of months ago, that is, nowhere. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene introduces articles of impeachment against Biden You may also want to check up on: House Republicans are starting to realize that they don't have the votes to impeach Biden's Cabinet or even launch an official inquiry into the president.

Why the need for migration then? The UN International Organization for Migration has cited estimates of as many as 1 billion environmental migrants in the next 30 years, while more recent projections point to 1.2 billion by 2050, and 1.4 billion by 2060. Report on the Impact of Climate Change on Migration (October 2021)

So tell me, what is it I don't understand about science that makes you make such a false statement?

No please don't bother to explain it, just provide the link to that particular report or download pdf, the link I gave you is to the full report, that full report has hundreds of sub links, one of which you screen grabbed. While I wait here's a summary:

Really? Can you give me the download links for those figures or better still with a screenshot, I presume you have noted their assessment are based on confidence levels, are both those predictions in the high confidence bracket?

Indeed, its not clear cut and backs up my previous statement