The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[litesong]

Originally Posted by sendler

Unfortunately AOC hasn't studied climate science nearly as much..... as Greta.

Yeah, AOC & Greta only have 100+ times more AGW savvy than "don'T rump" & re-pubic-lick-uns. I would say "1000 times more", but there might be one re-pubic-lick-un who had a little AGW info, before "don'T rump" told it to get behind the master.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Thunberg and both her parents in Antifa tee-shirts.

She a smart girl, hopefully she'll get up to speed on the science.

Unfortuneately for AOC, she totally lost her self-confidence when Saikat Chakrabarti was demoted to her reelection campaign.

Jimmy Carter is our next to the last good president.

Antifa is troubling to me because their name is an oxymoron, and their methods tend toward senseless violence, destruction, and disruption. Perhaps there are just bad actors within the group, but it's up to the group to police themselves to keep the bad actors from being representative of the whole. If not policing the individuals, at least clearly stating that the actions of the bad actors are condemnable. Otherwise they are just an angry and destructive mob deserving of any amount of tear gas required to send them home.

AOC has a good grasp of speech and language, which itself is an indicator of superior intellect. That said, her knowledge of science and economics appears to be lacking, among other things. I expect her to be a flash in the pan.

I've mostly stopped thinking of presidents as good or bad, and instead thinking in terms of having taken some good actions, and taken some bad actions. While I wouldn't call Clinton "good", I'd characterize some of his service as president as good. Hard for me not to think in terms of good and bad presidents though, as Regan was a very likable character.

I guess what it really comes down to with regards to good and bad presidents, is if their commitment is to the American people, or to their political constituents and power.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by litesong

If you sent this thread to Ms. Thunberg, she would cancel your endorsement of her. She has raised a vital, rallying cry to her peers, & struck & is striking ringing,dissonant chords of anger against us oldies.

Some of the material on human cognition speaks to our evolutionary selection towards outcomputing competitors and predators,and recognizing potential threat,as a purely survival function.We're wired this way.
Ms.Thunberg said she first learned of climate change in school,then pursued it further on her own initiative.
Anyone with critical thinking skills/perspicacity,will no doubt arrive at the conclusion that somethings rotten somewhere.
If there's overwhelming evidence that we're at risk,it's not surprising that folks might get bent.They are rightfully considering their own security,or lack of it.I'm kinda bent.I compensate with ice cream.And I've got the blood pressure readings to prove it!
There's been a recent business round table,and there are rumblings that CEOs want to do something as a united front to address these issues,without any single entity being taken aside and chastised by their shareholders.
Everybody I read,whether Right,Left,or Center all talk about better education.
I think the 4-million protesters were just trying to evoke a serious conversation.
I believe that the Vietnam War protests motivated President Nixon to rethink America's role in that quagmire,leading to our departure.A burr under the saddle.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Regarding an article sender linked to pages back, which I haven't gotten through yet, a main theme to the article was divesting from petroleum stocks. That struck me as odd, because a company isn't harmed by plummeting stocks; the investors are. The company already profited from the 1-time cash infusion from selling stocks. Once that's done, the risk is borne by the investors.

I believe that long-term contracts are used as accounts receivable,with respect to commercial loans.If J.P.Morgan Chase or Chemical Bank,for instance,see's your business falling off,and you'd hoped to borrow for capital improvements,or something,the outcome might not turn out so well.It might not be the stock value per se,but associated aspect of your valuation,and ability to repay might be reflected in it.
But I think you're spot on with respect to the IPO.You'll get 80-cents on the dollar after underwriting fees and after that it is all about the shareholders.The flip side though,if you don't control 51% of your stock,it's not your company.

[redpoint5]

It's a total misuse of the public education system to be promoting a particular political agenda, and especially supporting protest during classroom time. Those teachers and administrators should be fired. I'd demand a refund in the taxes paid to educate the children when instead they are wasting time. The money could come from the pensions not paid to those dismissed in disgrace.

Presenting arguments surrounding an issue and even expressing personal bias is perfectly acceptable and to be encouraged. What isn't acceptable is to push personal agenda at the expense of classroom time. We're supposed to be making our children smarter and more informed, not angry and depressed.

I remember a school walkout one time when I was a kid. No idea what it was about; I just hated being in school. It was a total waste, but at least it was sunny outside and I got to socialize and probably make fart jokes or something equally amusing and immature.

[sendler]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

divesting from petroleum stocks.

Hagens gets beat up for saying this but his first masters was finance and he was VP at Lehman and at Solomon before opening his own firm in the 90's so I think he probably knows what he is talking about. Divesting from fossil fuels just lets someone else buy more of the stock back at a cheaper price, probably already rich board members, to make even more money on the dividends. Most of the big majors are fully funded and can do any future development without outside private investors bidding up the stock price.
.
To make fossil fuel companies quit producing, the demand has to end.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Antifa is troubling to me because their name is an oxymoron, and their methods tend toward senseless violence, destruction, and disruption. Perhaps there are just bad actors within the group, but it's up to the group to police themselves to keep the bad actors from being representative of the whole. If not policing the individuals, at least clearly stating that the actions of the bad actors are condemnable. Otherwise they are just an angry and destructive mob deserving of any amount of tear gas required to send them home.

AOC has a good grasp of speech and language, which itself is an indicator of superior intellect. That said, her knowledge of science and economics appears to be lacking, among other things. I expect her to be a flash in the pan.

I've mostly stopped thinking of presidents as good or bad, and instead thinking in terms of having taken some good actions, and taken some bad actions. While I wouldn't call Clinton "good", I'd characterize some of his service as president as good. Hard for me not to think in terms of good and bad presidents though, as Regan was a very likable character.

I guess what it really comes down to with regards to good and bad presidents, is if their commitment is to the American people, or to their political constituents and power.

I'm not really up to speed on that sort of thing.In the past though,the FBI has infiltrated organizations,and during public activities,agent provocateurs have initiated behaviors unbecoming of the organization in order to to sully their public reputation and deflect attention away from their core messaging.When any large group of people assemble there's always the potential for 'incidents.' The government may just be diffusing a situation before it becomes a situation.People need to keep their cool.Stay out of emotion and into reason.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

It's a total misuse of the public education system to be promoting a particular political agenda, and especially supporting protest during classroom time. Those teachers and administrators should be fired. I'd demand a refund in the taxes paid to educate the children when instead they are wasting time. The money could come from the pensions not paid to those dismissed in disgrace.

Presenting arguments surrounding an issue and even expressing personal bias is perfectly acceptable and to be encouraged. What isn't acceptable is to push personal agenda at the expense of classroom time. We're supposed to be making our children smarter and more informed, not angry and depressed.

I remember a school walkout one time when I was a kid. No idea what it was about; I just hated being in school. It was a total waste, but at least it was sunny outside and I got to socialize and probably make fart jokes or something equally amusing and immature.

If it's all about the science,then science is politically agnostic.It's just the mathematization of a phenomena,observation,measurement,data acquisition,reduction,interpretation,conclusion,co rroboration,elimination of errors and presentation.It's up to the policymakers to do something with it.And they belong to us.
If it has anything to do with teaching critical thinking,then the long-term upshot of that is incalculable.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

Neither is claiming to be expert - they are leading based on reality, and facts.

Who's your expert?

To the casual observer they appear to be the spokes people behind the more sensational fact less hyperbole going around.
For example around september 14 AOC said "Miami will be gone in a few years" has no basis reality.
I say let her talk she drives more reasonable believers away than any denier could ever could.

My experts are the ones in the ipcc who say they world isn't going to end in 12 years.

[redneck]

.

Need some help.

I’m having a hard time finding when Greta is scheduled to go to the #1
CO2 and pollution generating country in the world, China...

If and when Greta goes to China, I’m sure Xi will welcome her with open arms and will televise her visit to his fellow countryman as she lectures and admonishes him, the government, and the Chinese people for being the worst polluters in the world with no end in sight.

Oh, and while your at it.

I need the dates for the #2 polluting country India as well...

Thanks...







>