discussion comment
4 years ago
I'm not Indian; that' Spice's troll
discussion comment
4 years ago
I thought you were decades younger. Born in southern CA.
discussion comment
4 years ago
Early 50s
discussion comment
4 years ago
I'm clearly older than you -- so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
discussion comment
4 years ago
We're here to help with your low self-esteem, @OSU. Just try to identify the root cause. There's no shame in being "slow."
discussion comment
4 years ago
You called me liar and you got the facts wrong -- as usual.
discussion comment
4 years ago
You should try to identify the cause of your low self-esteem.
discussion comment
4 years ago
What do you think?
discussion comment
4 years ago
OSU, maybe that sense of shame is caused by being physically repulsive?
discussion comment
4 years ago
I'm just trying to help!
discussion comment
4 years ago
Or do you feel a sense of shame for something else?
discussion comment
4 years ago
@OSU- What do you think is the root cause of your low self-esteem? Were you mocked by the other little boys and girls for being "slow?"
discussion comment
4 years ago
No Mark, it's more like 55 years and @Windex called me a liar.
discussion comment
4 years ago
What's that awful stench? Did someone take a shit in this thread? Oh wait, that's the stench of @OSU's low self-esteem.
discussion comment
4 years ago
More like 55 years, idiot,
https://www.climatecentral.org/news/fifty-years-after-warning-climate-talks-19637
No @Meathead I don't have an engineering degree
discussion comment
4 years ago
@Mark-
It's a question of basic literacy: you seem incapable of being able to seek out legitimate information. You're mired in a bizarre world of conspiracy-theories and pseudo-science. Luckily the business world understands what we're up against, and acceptance of climate science is becoming far less partisan. There will be a lot of tough choices -- but people like yourself will fade away into the lunatic fringe.
discussion comment
4 years ago
Well, yes, keep posting links to your conspiracy theory and pseudo science sites. Lol, what a nutcase
discussion comment
4 years ago
What a bunch of nonsense. Why don't pick up a book? There's a short book by Michael Mann called the "Madhouse Effect."
discussion comment
4 years ago
@Mark94: "Experts used to predict warming, then cooling. Now, they just say change."
__________________
I don't know what you're talking about. This is not esoteric science, not superstring theory. Climate science has been around since the 1870s. C02 absorbs energy from the sun and the concentration of CO2 has increased by about 50% since the industrial age. The concentration of CO2 is easy to measure. Climate scientists have been trying to get everyone's attention for the past 50 years about a catastrophic increase in the Earth's temperature.
I did some quick research and couldn't find anything to suggest that logging could pay for the task of thinning the forests. Only mature trees are of any economic value -- but thinning the forests requires thinning smaller trees, brush, and dead trees. Former Gov Brown in California had proposed a budget of $200M per year. It's very complicated since (approx) 60% of the forests are owned by the Federal gov, 38% is privately owned and only 2% is owned by the state. Mechanical thinning is very expensive at about $1400 per acre (CA has 33 million acres). Controlled burning is $150 per acre but releases toxic smoke. It's going to be expensive if it can be done at all.
discussion comment
4 years ago
![]()
IceyI put your ATF on a winning team
Obvious cultural differences in perceived beauty.
discussion comment
4 years ago
This one's for you @Windex, you obnoxious little runt. It's from that left-wing rag, the WSJ. As I said, American businesses are now forced to accept the reality of climate change and they're starting to take action. Only cranks like yourself believe that climate science is a pseudo-science and a religion.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/business-shifts-from-resistance-to-action-on-climate-11600233503
"In a sign of how much corporate attitudes have changed, the Business Roundtable, one of the country’s most prominent business groups, is throwing its support behind broad-based measures to slash greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In a statement of principles to be released Wednesday, the Business Roundtable said it “supports a goal of reducing net U.S. GHG emissions by at least 80% from 2005 levels by 2050.” To achieve that, it endorses putting a price on carbon. It didn’t say whether that should be through a carbon tax or a system of tradable emissions permits.
The significance of the statement is that it shows how business is shifting from a source of resistance to a force for action on climate. The Business Roundtable statement represents the consensus of more than 200 members spanning every sector of the economy, from retail, finance and technology to health care, manufacturing and even oil and gas."
discussion comment
4 years ago
![]()
minnowAny place that interests me.
"Wear a tinfoil hat to improve reception."
__________
Lol! I wish I had said that.
discussion comment
4 years ago
As I said, @Warrior, I'm on a short fuse and less tolerant to the name-calling.
More than anyone else here, I've said consistently that sugaring is a benign form of prostitution. It's not a romantic experience in any way.
discussion comment
4 years ago
Tetra-
Notice that I posted that "I could be completely wrong."
A few hours ago @Meat told me that "everyone hates you" in a political thread about climate change. So you'll have to forgive me for the short fuse.
I didn't say that you're 60 and bald, now did I.
discussion comment
4 years ago
hear*