Is it right to deny the American people jobs because of your religion?

[Reverend Rick]

Now, Rev, you know people don't want to hear that.

LOL, no they don't. The thing is, all these global warming myths they love to promote just does not fly when you examine the facts.

This is exactly like religion. YEC have to face the facts the the planet is billions of years old and the green religion has to admit the planet has not got warmer since 2002 or the caribou where not affected by the pipeline to any detrimental affect.

Yet both religions still hold on to their beliefs so dearly.

 

[Magic Man]

I did not make false claims, Geeze!

You said an acre of solar panels couldn't power a factory. Do you have some support for that, then?

Back to this factory, There are times of high demand where the panels could not keep up, and even if you had enough panels to do this, if a cloud came by, you would be in trouble.

Bottom line, you can't run any building 24-7, 365 off grid on solar only even if you had an acre of panels.

Ah, there we go. Now all you have to do is support this. I saw some claims, but I don't see any evidence. I'd especially like you to support this nonsense about a cloud coming by ruining everything.

EDIT: I meant to add that even if you can't run a factory completely on solar, why is that the standard? Is it completely useless unless it is the only source of energy? Of course not. If you can get 50% of your power from solar, it's still very useful.

 

[Magic Man]

LOL, no they don't. The thing is, all these global warming myths they love to promote just does not fly when you examine the facts.

Which global warming myths might those be? You're not saying you deny the fact that the world is getting warmer, do you? It's precisely upon examining the facts that we come to the conclusions we do about global warming. I'm not sure what falsities you're using as facts.

This is exactly like religion. YEC have to face the facts the the planet is billions of years old and the green religion has to admit the planet has not got warmer since 2002 or the caribou where not affected by the pipeline to any detrimental affect.

Yet both religions still hold on to their beliefs so dearly.

And you wonder why you can't have a real discussion with anyone. If you cut out the nonsense like this, you'd be amazed at not only what you could learn, but the great conversations you could have. The first step is letting go of your bias and addiction to right-wing propaganda.

 

[Reverend Rick]

EDIT: I meant to add that even if you can't run a factory completely on solar, why is that the standard? Is it completely useless unless it is the only source of energy? Of course not. If you can get 50% of your power from solar, it's still very useful.

OK now we are getting somewhere. Yes solar can be useful but we still need to power a grid with natural gas, clean coal, or nuclear power source as well.

If we get the infastruture, wind could come on line. The thing is, the sun does not shine and the wind don't blow continuously.

All these green technologies cannot replace our current power sources completely.

This is why I have said we need to promote every power source we can get our hands on to be energy independent.

This is why we need the Keystone pipe line. It is a no-brainer. Private industry will fund the project at no expense to the government and create the jobs we desperately need.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Which global warming myths might those be? You're not saying you deny the fact that the world is getting warmer, do you? It's precisely upon examining the facts that we come to the conclusions we do about global warming. I'm not sure what falsities you're using as facts.

The facts are as I see it is the science community can't make up their mind if we are going into an ice age or the planet is going to get hotter.

And you wonder why you can't have a real discussion with anyone. If you cut out the nonsense like this, you'd be amazed at not only what you could learn, but the great conversations you could have. The first step is letting go of your bias and addiction to right-wing propaganda.

And your not biased Matt?

There are many folks on this forum who disagree with me but we still have great discussions. I have not gave up on you either.

You will most likely deny this but the real solutions are some where between what we both think should be done.

This country is so divided, we had better find some common ground if we want to move into the next period of prosperity.

I want old school while you want new school. You want to be like European countries, but cherry pick what you like and ignore what has to be done to achieve this.

Watch Europe Matt, their not funding themselves properly.

We can't be like a cherry picked Scandinavia and you know it. Even if we could, we would have to do all the things they do not just the parts you like about their system.

 

[Magic Man]

OK now we are getting somewhere. Yes solar can be useful but we still need to power a grid with natural gas, clean coal, or nuclear power source as well.

If we get the infastruture, wind could come on line. The thing is, the sun does not shine and the wind don't blow continuously.

All these green technologies cannot replace our current power sources completely.

This is why I have said we need to promote every power source we can get our hands on to be energy independent.

This is why we need the Keystone pipe line. It is a no-brainer. Private industry will fund the project at no expense to the government and create the jobs we desperately need.

1) I see I'm not going to get any support for your claims about solar.

2) You're still making one of the claims. You're pretending that a cloudy day or temporary lack of wind are significant problems for solar and wind energy. They're not.

3) Now I'll ask for support for why green energies cannot fully replace coal and oil. IS there some reason you make that claim?

4) We already went over the Keystone Pipeline. This is what I mentioned in my last post about you breaking free of your addiction to right-wing propaganda. It wouldn't create many jobs, and it might even cost us jobs according to some experts. At best it would create a couple thousand temporary jobs and maybe a couple hundred permanent ones. However, most of those could end up not even being in America. It could also have a very damaging effect on the environment. The main reason it was rejected was because it was a rushed proposal that left out some pretty important details like the exact location of the pipeline. It's like your wife coming to you asking for approval to buy a new car without saying what kind. You approve it, and then she comes home with a Lamborghini that you can't afford.

Jobs have thus become an important part of the case for Presidential approval of KXL. The data presented in this briefing paper should put this issue to rest. The industry’s capacity to frame the KXL decision as a jobs issue has been amply demonstrated in recent months, but decisionmakers should be absolutely clear that the industry’s job numbers are not based on reliable research; not informed by past experience; and completely fail to consider the large number of jobs that could be endangered by the construction of KXL.

Put simply, KXL’s job creation potential is relatively small, and could be completely
outweighed by the project’s potential to destroy jobs through rising fuel costs, spill
damage and clean up operations, air pollution and increased GHG emissions.

Link

 

[Magic Man]

The facts are as I see it is the science community can't make up their mind if we are going into an ice age or the planet is going to get hotter.

Oh, I see. So, so you just don't understand the scientific findings. It's pretty simple. Earth is getting hotter. That has many effects. Here are a couple articles to read to get you up to date:

Effects of Global Warming
How Global Warming May Cause the Next Ice Age

And your not biased Matt?

You could say I am, but I'm able to put my bias aside when making decisions on issues. I look at the facts and then come to a conclusion, rather than making anything I hear fit my pre-existing conclusion.

There are many folks on this forum who disagree with me but we still have great discussions. I have not gave up on you either.

It's impossible to have a good discussion when you spew nonsense like this. That's what I'm telling you.

You will most likely deny this but the real solutions are some where between what we both think should be done.

I will deny it because it's not true. This is an example of assuming that because your opinion is extreme, mine must be too. Just because we disagree doesn't mean the solution is in the middle somewhere. My solution is to continue to encourage green energies while realizing that it will take a while to move to them fully.

This country is so divided, we had better find some common ground if we want to move into the next period of prosperity.

That has to start with dropping the partisan talking points, including propaganda about things like the Keystone pipeline.

I want old school while you want new school. You want to be like European countries, but cherry pick what you like and ignore what has to be done to achieve this.

I want to be more like Europe. I want to adopt the policies that work well, while adjusting them in any ways necessary to work better here. I'm not ignoring anything.

Watch Europe Matt, their not funding themselves properly.

It depends. You're talking about it as if it's one big country. It's not. Some countries there are doing fine, like Sweden and Denmark. It's not a "Well, being more like them doesn't help us fund ourselves". It's a "some countries have instituted policies that work well and achieve the goals I want to achieve here, so we should try to adopt versions of them that could work here".

We can't be like a cherry picked Scandinavia and you know it. Even if we could, we would have to do all the things they do not just the parts you like about their system.

Why can't we? Why can't we look at what others do well, and try to be more like that?

 

[Reverend Rick]

Oh, I see. So, so you just don't understand the scientific findings. It's pretty simple. Earth is getting hotter. That has many effects. Here are a couple articles to read to get you up to date:

Effects of Global Warming
How Global Warming May Cause the Next Ice Age



You could say I am, but I'm able to put my bias aside when making decisions on issues. I look at the facts and then come to a conclusion, rather than making anything I hear fit my pre-existing conclusion.

You mean like the global warming crowd only looks at data that supports their pre-existing conclusion?

Climate-gate comes to mind

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...rst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html

It's impossible to have a good discussion when you spew nonsense like this. That's what I'm telling you.

Your biased conclusions seem equally ridiculous to me as well. Not everyone thinks like your region of the country. Have you ever asked yourself why people in different regions think so much differently? It is because your group reinforces each others conclusions to the point where you become full of yourselves.

I will deny it because it's not true. This is an example of assuming that because your opinion is extreme, mine must be too. Just because we disagree doesn't mean the solution is in the middle somewhere. My solution is to continue to encourage green energies while realizing that it will take a while to move to them fully.

And you have every right to your opinion as long as you don't force others to invest money in your follies. Solyndra is the perfect example of that.

That has to start with dropping the partisan talking points, including propaganda about things like the Keystone pipeline.

Obama would not know a good deal if it sat on his face and wiggled. :no:

I want to be more like Europe. I want to adopt the policies that work well, while adjusting them in any ways necessary to work better here. I'm not ignoring anything.

Your ignoring the fact that the States has a bunch of lazy stupid people with no work ethic unlike the Scandinavian countries. They don't have open borders where anyone can just walk into their hospitals and receive services.

If they did, I would vacation there.

It depends. You're talking about it as if it's one big country. It's not. Some countries there are doing fine, like Sweden and Denmark. It's not a "Well, being more like them doesn't help us fund ourselves". It's a "some countries have instituted policies that work well and achieve the goals I want to achieve here, so we should try to adopt versions of them that could work here".

But you cherry pick things. You want the advantages with out the heavy lifting necessary to make things happen. Do you think 50% of Swede's don't pay income tax?

Why can't we? Why can't we look at what others do well, and try to be more like that?

If you want to be exactly like that, you have to do exactly what they do. :slap:

 

[Reverend Rick]

1) I see I'm not going to get any support for your claims about solar.

I addressed that already.

2) You're still making one of the claims. You're pretending that a cloudy day or temporary lack of wind are significant problems for solar and wind energy. They're not.

I guess if you consider a temporary power outage a significant problem. Yes there are UPS systems, but they are limited and very expensive.

3) Now I'll ask for support for why green energies cannot fully replace coal and oil. IS there some reason you make that claim?

Because the wind and the sun are not constant you you need some form of alternate energy to keep the ball rolling. Energy has to be constantly produced because we have no technology to store energy in large capacities for very long.

4) We already went over the Keystone Pipeline. This is what I mentioned in my last post about you breaking free of your addiction to right-wing propaganda. It wouldn't create many jobs, and it might even cost us jobs according to some experts. At best it would create a couple thousand temporary jobs and maybe a couple hundred permanent ones. However, most of those could end up not even being in America. It could also have a very damaging effect on the environment. The main reason it was rejected was because it was a rushed proposal that left out some pretty important details like the exact location of the pipeline. It's like your wife coming to you asking for approval to buy a new car without saying what kind. You approve it, and then she comes home with a Lamborghini that you can't afford.

My wife can drive what ever she wants, she is partial to BMW's.

 

[Magic Man]

You mean like the global warming crowd only looks at data that supports their pre-existing conclusion?

Climate-gate comes to mind

Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation - Telegraph

Oh, for God's sake. You're still on that? Link

If you don't want to look at the facts, fine. But don't pretend you're the one looking at the facts, when all you're doing is falling for more right-wing propaganda. I know it's easier to just say "Hey, these people said some climate scientists lied, so we can't believe anything scientists say", but the better option is to read up on the whole story. If you did, you'd realize that "scandal" did nothing to refute the evidence for global warming.
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/...ails-explain-cherry-picked-phrases/?mobile=nc

Your biased conclusions seem equally ridiculous to me as well.

One wonders what you're talking about, since I've made no biased conclusions. For a conclusion to be biased, it has to ignore facts in a deliberate attempt to support a pre-existing idea.

Not everyone thinks like your region of the country. Have you ever asked yourself why people in different regions think so much differently? It is because your group reinforces each others conclusions to the point where you become full of yourselves.

Look, it's not hard. All you have to do is get all the facts and then come to a logical, reasonable conclusion. The reason people in different areas think so differently is because some areas have less baggage than others. Some areas aren't stuck in the past, and like to change with new information.

And you have every right to your opinion as long as you don't force others to invest money in your follies. Solyndra is the perfect example of that.

And this is the problem. Yes, Solyndra ended up not being a good investment. As a citizen, you're going to pay taxes. Those taxes are going to be used hopefully in an attempt to improve the whole country. That includes investing in some things you may disagree with. The idea is to encourage green technology. When you invest in up-and-coming industries like that, you're bound to have some failures. Obviously these should be minimized, but they should not be stopped completely.

Obama would not know a good deal if it sat on his face and wiggled. :no:

Wait, this is how you respond when I say you need to drop the partisan talking points? By providing a partisan talking point?

Your ignoring the fact that the States has a bunch of lazy stupid people with no work ethic unlike the Scandinavian countries. They don't have open borders where anyone can just walk into their hospitals and receive services.

I'm not ignoring anything. You're making wild assumptions based on a personal bias. Maybe our citizens do have a different mindset towards work, but I've seen nothing to support that. Do you have some kind of evidence? Don't worry, I don't actually expect you to provide any, based on your recent history when I've asked for some. This is what I mean. You make stuff up to support your beliefs. I look at facts to form my beliefs. If you can show me some evidence saying that as a country we are lazier and dumber than Danish people, I'd love to see it.

As for borders, so? See, what you're doing is trying to rationalize something. You don't want me to be right, so you make up objections that aren't based on anything. If you were truly interested in finding solutions, you'd take all of this into consideration. The objections you raise don't mean we can't or shouldn't adopt some policies similar to Denmark's. It just means we'd have to take into account factors that make our situation different.

But you cherry pick things. You want the advantages with out the heavy lifting necessary to make things happen. Do you think 50% of Swede's don't pay income tax?

Where do you get the idea I want the advantages without the hard work it would take to get there? Do you have any basis whatsoever for that claim? As I said, of course it would take some hard work to get there, and I'm fine with that.

As for the not paying taxes, come on. How many times does someone have to explain something to you? That 50% number you're using is only the number of Americans who don't pay federal income tax. They still pay state and local taxes, as well as Medicare/Medicaid, SS, sales tax and many others. And the reason they don't pay taxes is because they make so little. Sure, there are some people who should be paying taxes who aren't, and there are people who get money back who shouldn't. But they are not statistically relevant groups. When you're making $30,000 trying to support 2 kids and already paying 15% of your income in various taxes, it's no wonder you don't pay any federal income tax. That is not an indication that Americans are stupid and lazy. It's an indication that our economy and income distribution is majorly off. You'll notice that Sweden and Denmark have much more even wealth and income distribution. If we get that kind of equality here, then I guarantee you a much higher percentage of people would be paying taxes.

If you want to be exactly like that, you have to do exactly what they do. :slap:

Um...you're not serious, right? So, I can't just learn from my wife's ability to be supportive? I have to actually get a sex change and try to be more like her in every possible way? Come on. There's no reason we can't look at what works for them and find ways to apply it here. Obviously, as I've said to you hundreds of times, we have to take into account the factors that differentiate our two situations, but we don't have to be exactly like another country to get some of the same benefits.

 

[Reverend Rick]

It sounds to me like you want to model our country more like Greece than you do a Scandinavian country to me. :sorry1:

The first issue is, if we are going to give everyone something we need to decide who everyone is. What is the point of solving the problem on the uninsured if we cover everyone and then more people come into the country and they are uninsured? We have solved nothing unless you want to give every family that walks across the border a 25,000 dollar insurance policy.

We have income disparity because we have folks who are uneducated and hold no work skills. What makes it worse is they don't want to learn or work.

Education is the answer, but education has to actually teach folks how to make a living and they have to take responsibility to apply their knowledge in the work force.

Do you realise we have job openings unfilled in this country because no one is qualified to hold these positions? We have to bring people in from other countries to fill these high paid positions.

The biggest problem is in the last century we had stupid jobs for stupid people who did repetitive tasks. We have machines for that now.

There are no unskilled factory jobs any more and this is why people got left behind.

The thing is, we really need these people to work and support themselves and there is no way I can see how that is going to happen.

These folks want thousands of dollars in entitlements they have not earned and the rest of us are arguing who is going to pay for all these left behind people?

Even if we take care of all these folks, more people keep crossing the border and they are diluting our economy.

 

[Magic Man]

I addressed that already.

No, you didn't.

I guess if you consider a temporary power outage a significant problem.

This is exactly the kind of false claim I'm talking about. You'd think someone who has to deal with it for a living wouldn't make such ridiculous claims about solar.

Yes there are UPS systems, but they are limited and very expensive. Because the wind and the sun are not constant you you need some form of alternate energy to keep the ball rolling.

See comment above.

 

[Panda]

There are more polar bears on our earth RIGHT NOW than any time in history!

Proof of this please?

 

[Magic Man]

It sounds to me like you want to model our country more like Greece than you do a Scandinavian country to me. :sorry1:

I'm sure it does. That's more because of your conservative-colored glasses, though.

The first issue is, if we are going to give everyone something we need to decide who everyone is. What is the point of solving the problem on the uninsured if we cover everyone and then more people come into the country and they are uninsured? We have solved nothing unless you want to give every family that walks across the border a 25,000 dollar insurance policy.

These are two separate issues. We need universal healthcare. We also need to do something about immigration, whether that be to make becoming a citizen easier or harder.

We have income disparity because we have folks who are uneducated and hold no work skills. What makes it worse is they don't want to learn or work.

We have such huge income disparity because of our policies. 30 years ago we didn't have such exaggerated income disparity. This is what I mean. You need to look at the facts before coming to conclusions, rather than coming to conclusions and making the facts fit the conclusion. We have such horrible income inequality because in the past 30 years the government has catered to the rich and corporations to the detriment of the rest of the population.

Education is the answer, but education has to actually teach folks how to make a living and they have to take responsibility to apply their knowledge in the work force.

Yes, we agree that education is the answer. We do need to improve education, for sure.

Do you realise we have job openings unfilled in this country because no one is qualified to hold these positions? We have to bring people in from other countries to fill these high paid positions.

Examples?

The biggest problem is in the last century we had stupid jobs for stupid people who did repetitive tasks. We have machines for that now.

That's mighty Christian of you, calling people stupid.

There are no unskilled factory jobs any more and this is why people got left behind.

The thing is, we really need these people to work and support themselves and there is no way I can see how that is going to happen.

Then I guess we're screwed. Funny how other countries managed to get around this, but according to you we're incapable of it.

These folks want thousands of dollars in entitlements they have not earned and the rest of us are arguing who is going to pay for all these left behind people?

Who wants thousands of dollars in entitlements? People who are down on their luck want some help. People with disabilities want some help. The vast majority of people want to work. If we're leaving people behind, we need to figure out as a country how we're going to fix that. Just saying "Oh well, you're SOL, but don't expect us to help you" isn't going to solve anything.

Even if we take care of all these folks, more people keep crossing the border and they are diluting our economy.

How are they "diluting our economy"? If we let them become citizens, they could pay taxes and help our economy. Actually, they're helping now, considering they're doing jobs most Americans don't want to do.

 

[Reverend Rick]

What don't you understand about supplying a constant load with a interrupted source?

There are UPS systems that store energy for these events, but they can only give you a small power interruption coverage not to mention they are very expensive.

Cell phone towers use back up generators when regular power goes out but they run on fossil fuels.

We can back up solar with regular power, but ONCE AGAIN, these power plants run on coal, natural gas or nuclear.

Please don't ask me this again.

I feel like I am arguing with a two year old.

 

[Magic Man]

What don't you understand about supplying a constant load with a interrupted source?

There are UPS systems that store energy for these events, but they can only give you a small power interruption coverage not to mention they are very expensive.

Cell phone towers use back up generators when regular power goes out but they run on fossil fuels.

We can back up solar with regular power, but ONCE AGAIN, these power plants run on coal, natural gas or nuclear.

Please don't ask me this again.

I feel like I am arguing with a two year old.

In other words, you have nothing to back up your claims. Thanks anyway. You're right that it's like arguing with a two-year-old. I was hoping for something better.

 

[Panda]

What don't you understand about supplying a constant load with a interrupted source?

There are UPS systems that store energy for these events, but they can only give you a small power interruption coverage not to mention they are very expensive.

Cell phone towers use back up generators when regular power goes out but they run on fossil fuels.

We can back up solar with regular power, but ONCE AGAIN, these power plants run on coal, natural gas or nuclear.

Please don't ask me this again.

I feel like I am arguing with a two year old.

I can answer this one, it is my entire area of study. Firstly we have spacial separation of sites, then when we aggregate these sites together we get a fairly consistent power output (I can go into more detail if you like). Secondly we back up with other sources (renewable or not) to provide power, like you mentioned.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Proof of this please?

Ask and you shall receive.

Polar Bear Testimony Suppressed Due to 'Inconvenient' Truths | NewsBusters.org

 

[Reverend Rick]

I can answer this one, it is my entire area of study. Firstly we have spacial separation of sites, then when we aggregate these sites together we get a fairly consistent power output (I can go into more detail if you like). Secondly we back up with other sources (renewable or not) to provide power, like you mentioned.

Thank you for giving me some sanity. As far as solar goes, you can pretty much expect the sun to go down every night and it will get dark.

Solar is great as a supplemental source. It can make things cheaper.

Solar is great for remote areas where there is no power, but you will be on batteries only at night. Its not like you can run an air conditioner all night on a battery.

Not impossible, but a damn large bank of batteries.

I like solar, but it is not the end all be all but still pretty cool unless you have a hail storm.

 

[Magic Man]

Ask and you shall receive.

Hey! How come he asks and receives and I don't?

Polar Bear Testimony Suppressed Due to 'Inconvenient' Truths | NewsBusters.org

I'm sorry, but could you provide something not from a site with the subtitle "Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias", especially one with vocal supporters like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity?