thats, at best, cherrypicked quotes by single individuals and not how climate models work at all. its not like you press a key and get results for 2013. its not even a single simulation, its many. i btw am quite sure, if you google the first claim like that its something like "simulations have shown that it MIGHT be ice free (whereas 'it' probably means arctic sea ice, not poles) as soon as 2013". and its not that far off ... http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ and we fucking better fucking fund fucking climate research, because industry has shit all interest in doing it. and if you still beleive in the "invisible hand of the market", you are delusional. hasnt 2007 shown how well it works? (admitably it worked well for a few selected)
Back then, Solar still wasn't viable. Now it is. Back then, Solar cost more to produce power than a coal plant, now it's reversed. The "Invisible" hand of the market will go to whatever is cheaper, and now that Solar is cheaper... yea they will move towards it.
climate research funding is only indirectly linked to the funding of "renewables", which is a political measure to reduce the influence of energy production on climate. and we hold ourselfs up with that (in public discussion) since its by far not the only contributor to climate change. one, at this point, can only imagine the outcry once we settled this and agricultural industry moves into the center of public focus.
Just noticed this reply. Again, I do think they will gradually move towards renewables and the fossil fuels are going to be phased out. It's an inevitability. However, since Solar is now extremely viable and I believe last I checked it was cheaper to produce power out of solar than it was oil or coal, the private sector who wants to save money will begin moving towards this.
But why do you think it's now cheaper than it was before? It needed investment from past governments in order for us to be in the position we are in now, right? And do you see the problem I have with climate 'skeptics' that want to pull funding from renewables. It's not just about them wanting to pull it this year, they've been wanting to do it for the past 8. Plus you don't pull the plug on something the moment it becomes viable. The whole point in research is to make continued improvements so that the technology can become even better than it is right now.
Well, if I recall correctly, I believe the solar panel was invented by Nasa and has been improved by them since then along with other methods. I don't think that the government should be funneling money into private companies to continue this research, if it continues at all, because of the blatant corruption that exists. Obama backed so many solar companies and a lot of them failed. Complete waste of money. Sad. But still, I think if we are going to continue this research it needs to not be some private industry which would take advantage of the government's wasteful spending. Corruption sucks.
you recall incorrectly but if i recall correctly, nasa, who was first to put solar power to practical application, is a federal agency? and i lied about the iirc, i actually took a minute to verify that.
I just want to bring this up to point out, are you seriously trying to paint Trump in a bad light for this? So Trump agrees to the "One China" policy that every other President has agreed to. Not only this, but you are now saying that China rewarded him for doing that, despite the fact that that he has been fighting for these rights for 10 YEARS. So, you don't think it's coincidental that China "awards" Trump a trademark after he basically says he wants a trade war with them? You don't think China is... idk... trying to raise some ethical concern? Point is, if he's been fighting for it for 10 years and agreed to an agreement that every other president has agreed to, I don't think you can "shame" him or even raise "ethical" questions. This is seriously China trying to fight back against Trump and get people to scream "OMG HE'S SO UNETHICAL!" because he is trying to undermine China.
you dont remember that he had talked to the taiwanese president, throwing concern about this whole policy? weird that a week after he decided to embrace the policy something good happened to his company in china he got something out of agreeing to honor the onechina policy. and it wasn't something that benefited the country, it was something that benefited himself
He received a call of congratulations from one of our biggest arms buyers, not even talking policy. It was literally a congratulatory phone call. They made it. Our guy didn't. The Chinese were actually mad at Taiwan for making the call, not Trump accepting the call. Wow. So surprising. Especially surprising after Trump has pretty much called a Trade war on them. That's weird why China would give him something for starting a trade war.
nah "only" something about 5%, which, considering its almost 20 trillion usd, is still a whole fucking lot of money.
We accept One China for multiple reasons but I can see that dissolving here soon if China keeps pressing it's claim into the South China sea and threatening US power and allies. Also, what Flasche said. Most of the debt is owed to the US citizens.
I don't really understand why you'd accept One China if you see it dissolving almost immediately. That literally makes no sense to me.
I didn't say immediately, I said I can see it in the future soon. China keeps pushing it, I wouldn't be surprised if it's far enough that we don't accept the policy anymore. Also, Is PewDiePie a fascist to you Space_Oddity? Is he? Another BIG example of how PC this stupid culture is in the US where they call everyone a fascist and racist, only this time on a massive scale. This is going to bring on something else like Gamergate I feel, which one COULD argue is what got Trump elected in terms of chain of events that lead up to outrage and outcry.
is disney required to keep him on their payroll if they think its conflicts with CSR? i dont know pewdiepie, so i cannot fit him in my neat little boxes i put everyone in (infact hes was in the "i dont know" box and now moved to the "and i dont really want to know either" box, yeh i got boxes for everything, nice isnt it?), but it at least was tasteless.
WSJ took videos from PewDiePie saying the Media takes his videos out of context, took the video out of context, and then labeled him an Anti-Semite in their article. They actually did this 8 different times. In one of the videos, he claimed that he wasn't racist and that the media took everything he did out of context to smear him so at the end of the video he dressed up as a soldier and jokingly watched a Hitler video. That piece got featured in their article, taken out of context. He also did a distasteful joke, but it was to show that a site can be used for bad and then WSJ pushed Disney and Youtube into dropping him as a star of their new series. PC culture is retarded, to an extent. The internet is now in an uproar, at least a lot of the youtube/gaming community who followed him or followed any of the big stars who supported him, and I can see this blowing up bigger than GamerGate.
Having never use the politics of fear and racism to exert power, obviously not. My first reaction was the idea of Disney trying to distract from their founder's antisemitism.
