Dems and the environment?

[shmogie]

To do that you would need someone capable of leadership.

You aren't?

 

[Twilight Hue]

I too am completely solar...I refinanced my home and spent $30,000 to buy panels...but not before I sat down, analyzed my energy consumption (which is a bunch larger than 'normal' because I have elderly parents living with me and we all need medical equipment and air conditioning that goes beyond 'normal'), and found out that it will have paid for itself in seven years flat. Now *I* may not live long enough to see that, but my kids, who will inherit the house, will.

Is solar expensive? It can be, but there are quite a few options out there that allow homeowners to have solar energy systems AND lower their electric bills without coming up with thirty grand up front. It might not return energy costs quite as completely, or as soon, as if one DOES pay for the system up front, but 'rent a roof,' financing and leasing are still pretty good options.

What the socialist Democrats won't tell you as well is they will actually penalize you if you go off the grid. A dirty little secret wrapped in the veneer of encouraging pro environmentally friendly alternatives for people.

They are a bunch of two faced liars. Ban this and that, and when you do, they suddenly want 'their' money and tell you not to do it.

Is Living Off the Grid now a Crime?

So what's an average person to do who wants to live a cheap or free environmentally friendly lifestyle, gets encouraged to do so, and then blackjacked on the back of the head afterwards?

It can't be done, because they won't let you unless they get their continual kick up to the big government crime bosses.

 

[dianaiad]

What the socialist Democrats won't tell you as well is they will actually penalize you if you go off the grid. A dirty little secret wrapped in the veneer of encouraging pro environmentally friendly alternatives for people.

They are a bunch of two faced liars. Ban this and that, and when you do, they suddenly want 'their' money and tell you not to do it.

Is Living Off the Grid now a Crime?

So what's an average person to do who wants to live a cheap or free environmentally friendly lifestyle, gets encouraged to do so, and then blackjacked on the back of the head afterwards?

It can't be done, because they won't let you unless they get their continual kick up to the big government crime bosses.

Huh. Well, I live in the high desert of Los Angeles County, in a city which was the first city in the USA to 'go solar.' That is, our city actually has it in the zoning laws that all new construction must have a certain number of solar panels per square foot. They don't necessarily have to have panels on the individual houses, but they must have at least a solar 'farm' of sorts that supplies the development, or a portion of it. In fact, the city works with homeowners who want to make 'substantial' changes to their homes to help them get solar panels.

I know more than one farmer over this way who have been 'living off the grid' for quite some time. Their own wells, Propane, solar panels, septic systems, hauling their own trash to the dump. They don't have, and have never had, any problems.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Huh. Well, I live in the high desert of Los Angeles County, in a city which was the first city in the USA to 'go solar.' That is, our city actually has it in the zoning laws that all new construction must have a certain number of solar panels per square foot. They don't necessarily have to have panels on the individual houses, but they must have at least a solar 'farm' of sorts that supplies the development, or a portion of it. In fact, the city works with homeowners who want to make 'substantial' changes to their homes to help them get solar panels.

I know more than one farmer over this way who have been 'living off the grid' for quite some time. Their own wells, Propane, solar panels, septic systems, hauling their own trash to the dump. They don't have, and have never had, any problems.

I'm willing to bet the proverbial farm that if/when more and more people do this in the future, they are going to end up like those people that have already gone to jail solely because they wanted to live off the grid.

It's not like this hasn't already started , it has. It's just not everywhere yet.

 

[fantome profane]

You aren't?

touché

 

[Wandering Monk]

We also now have the Amazon rain forests which are burning down in record time.
I think were doomed, i give it 10 years maybe less. I hope that Mother nature shakes herself free from us is we are to die and maybe eventually evolution can start over and the animals will come come back and be alive again.

Do you have children?

 

[shmogie]

What the socialist Democrats won't tell you as well is they will actually penalize you if you go off the grid. A dirty little secret wrapped in the veneer of encouraging pro environmentally friendly alternatives for people.

They are a bunch of two faced liars. Ban this and that, and when you do, they suddenly want 'their' money and tell you not to do it.

Is Living Off the Grid now a Crime?

So what's an average person to do who wants to live a cheap or free environmentally friendly lifestyle, gets encouraged to do so, and then blackjacked on the back of the head afterwards?

It can't be done, because they won't let you unless they get their continual kick up to the big government crime bosses.

Are you off the grid ? If you are and have all the batteries, etc. you got a great deal for 30 grand.

Your cite shows clearly, once again, how government wants to control every aspect of our life.

I learned a long time ago that you never own your home or land. It belongs to the government, and you rent it. The rent you pay is called property taxes, don´t pay it and the government takes the property.

You are right in that the liberal desire is for more and more government control.

Individualism is to be eradicated and everyone is to be part of a politically homogeneous society watched over closely by the nanny government.

 

[e.r.m.]

Do you think that a President of the USA is going to get the real polluters in the world to stop ? Noooooo.

Even if we destroy our economy trying to prevent the end, it will mean little, because the others, again, will do nothing.

So, if the bartender is right, we are all going to fry.

She isn´t right though.

Is this going to be today's global warming deniers mantra in the near future? Oh well, I guess we were wrong, too late. Let's not focus on the climate sins of the past (how we lied and said all the information is not yet in, how we spent money on campaigns to influence public opinion, how we made global warming a political issue and a conspiracy theory) when we could have done something before it was too late, now let's just focus on surviving as long as we can.

 

[shmogie]

Is this going to be today's global warming deniers mantra in the near future? Oh well, I guess we were wrong, too late. Let's not focus on the climate sins of the past (how we lied and said all the information is not yet in, how we spent money on campaigns to influence public opinion, how we made global warming a political issue and a conspiracy theory) when we could have done something before it was too late, now let's just focus on surviving as long as we can.

I am not a global warming denier. Why do you think that ?

I am simply pragmatically stating the obvious. We cannot and will not significantly alter the earths climate in ten years So, if her prediction is correct, we can kiss our fannies goodbye.

The US has already done more than most nations in curtailing green house gasses. Of course more can be done.

If we and Western Europe are the only ones who accomplish anything, and the biggest polluters and the rest of the world do virtually nothing, we are simply rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Fact.

The past is gone, worrying about it is a waste of time.

Doing something, because something needs to be done, in a state of panic, is exactly how a massive project should not be done.

So, we should do our best in a reasonable fashion, and try and bring the rest of the world on board.

We should also establish worst case plans for our people.

I am dead set against massive takeovers by the government, and giving the government new and more intrusive powers. If this issue becomes more clearly a political ploy to fit a specific agenda, there will be little hope to change anything.

Or, it is possible that the whole thing is simply a natural weather change that we can do nothing about.

 

[Riders]

Do you have children?

No

 

[Riders]

I hope mother nature just frees herself of us have evolution start over again and the animals come back eventually humans will and I hope next time we do a better job.

 

[Wandering Monk]

I hope mother nature just frees herself of us have evolution start over again and the animals come back eventually humans will and I hope next time we do a better job.

What do you suggest? We all kill ourselves?

All it would take is for an entire generation not to have kids and humans would be extinct within a century.

 

[e.r.m.]

I am not a global warming denier. Why do you think that ?

I wasn't thinking of you as a denier.

I am simply pragmatically stating the obvious. We cannot and will not significantly alter the earths climate in ten years So, if her prediction is correct, we can kiss our fannies goodbye.

Scientists think we can "mitigate" the effects to some degree. I don't believe in the "Oh well, let's not do anything then."

The US has already done more than most nations in curtailing green house gasses. Of course more can be done.

Unfortunately, more needs to be done. As much as we've done, it wasn't enough and it increases the burden for those who come after. Had "W" taken it seriously, we'd have less to do now.

If we and Western Europe are the only ones who accomplish anything, and the biggest polluters and the rest of the world do virtually nothing, we are simply rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Fact.

Nice analogy. But I have heard that China is getting on board and making efforts, so we need keep moving. Due to our size as a nation, we are still a major carbon emitter. Smaller nations have lesser of a burden to carry, as they emit less (obviously China is huge).

The past is gone, worrying about it is a waste of time.

In the present, many in power are still resisting. They need to stop resisting.

Doing something, because something needs to be done, in a state of panic, is exactly how a massive project should not be done.

It should not be done in a state of panic. Doing something in a state of panic is not the only way to do something. But the massive project should be done. We have the data enough to do it with forethought and prescence of mind, but that doesn't detract from it being an emergency due to neglect. Trained emergency workers don't run around like the proverbial headless chickens, they're professionals. We need to handle this emergency in like fashion.

So, we should do our best in a reasonable fashion, and try and bring the rest of the world on board.

As we have been, such as the pressure we've been putting on Brazil.

We should also establish worst case plans for our people.

Unfortunately, yes.

I am dead set against massive takeovers by the government, and giving the government new and more intrusive powers.

I don't care how it gets done. We certainly can't rely on certain administrations' help. If we're left with no choice but to make it a completely grass roots effort, then I guess we have no choice, but it could go much faster If they were on board.

If this issue becomes more clearly a political ploy to fit a specific agenda, there will be little hope to change anything.

Conspiracy theories don't help either. I understand it's hard to let go of mistrust, but we gotta try. If there's doubt, there's plenty of evidence to refer back to, and you can keep them accountable. But we should keep moving.

Or, it is possible that the whole thing is simply a natural weather change that we can do nothing about.

After so much data on the matter, that's not possible. They've already accounted for the effects of the sun, volcanism, etc. The only thing that can account for C02 and heat rising so fast is the burning of fossil fuels. C02 has been higher in the geologic past, but it is never risen so fast.

 

[shmogie]

I wasn't thinking of you as a denier.

Scientists think we can "mitigate" the effects to some degree. I don't believe in the "Oh well, let's not do anything then."

Unfortunately, more needs to be done. As much as we've done, it wasn't enough and it increases the burden for those who come after. Had "W" taken it seriously, we'd have less to do now.

Nice analogy. But I have heard that China is getting on board and making efforts, so we need keep moving. Due to our size as a nation, we are still a major carbon emitter. Smaller nations have lesser of a burden to carry, as they emit less (obviously China is huge).

In the present, many in power are still resisting. They need to stop resisting.

It should not be done in a state of panic. Doing something in a state of panic is not the only way to do something. But the massive project should be done. We have the data enough to do it with forethought and prescence of mind, but that doesn't detract from it being an emergency due to neglect. Trained emergency workers don't run around like the proverbial headless chickens, they're professionals. We need to handle this emergency in like fashion.

As we have been, such as the pressure we've been putting on Brazil.

Unfortunately, yes.

I don't care how it gets done. We certainly can't rely on certain administrations' help. If we're left with no choice but to make it a completely grass roots effort, then I guess we have no choice, but it could go much faster If they were on board.

Conspiracy theories don't help either. I understand it's hard to let go of mistrust, but we gotta try. If there's doubt, there's plenty of evidence to refer back to, and you can keep them accountable. But we should keep moving.

After so much data on the matter, that's not possible. They've already accounted for the effects of the sun, volcanism, etc. The only thing that can account for C02 and heat rising so fast is the burning of fossil fuels. C02 has been higher in the geologic past, but it is never risen so fast.

Yet there are respected climate scientists who say that man made Co2 is not the problem.

 

[e.r.m.]

Yet there are respected climate scientists who say that man made Co2 is not the problem.

If 97% of oncologists said that you needed to remove a tumor, would you go with the 3% that said it's fine leave it alone?

Again, although CO2 levels have been higher in the past, the natural forces at work had never risen them at the pace they have risen. since we started burning fossil fuels. That is an explicit demarcation between nature and man.

 

[shmogie]

If 97% of oncologists said that you needed to remove a tumor, would you go with the 3% that said it's fine leave it alone?

Again, although CO2 levels have been higher in the past, the natural forces at work had never risen them at the pace they have risen. since we started burning fossil fuels. That is an explicit demarcation between nature and man.

The 97% number is bogus. First, a large number of scientists know no more about climate change than I do. Biologists, geologists, chemists, etc., etc,. etc.

Second, I am quite sure that 97% of scientists were not solicited for their view on climate change.

I

 

[fantome profane]

although CO2 levels have been higher in the past,

Not during the age of humans.

 

[e.r.m.]

Not during the age of humans.

We're talking a long time before man, like the PETM, in which case it took thousands of years to raise the C02 level the amount we've done in over 100 years.

 

[Riders]

What do you suggest? We all kill ourselves?

All it would take is for an entire generation not to have kids and humans would be extinct within a century.

NO but there are things we can be doing that Trump wont ever get done.

 

[tytlyf]

The very fact that scientists are making time frames in the first place doesn't do much when they aren't very useful. Why even bother? Don't do it then.

And they wonder why people don't take them very seriously. It comes across as agenda-driven rather than a legitimate warning.

Because you can predict the incremental increases in water level each year. Multiply that by a certain amount of years and you can make predictions.
People take the problem seriously, people who think Big Oil are honest aren't taking the problem seriously.