Posts made by Frederick

@cteavin:

@Frederick:

As long as the population continues to grow exponentially, any measures taken to try and reduce carbon emissions are futile.  I have one amusing and true story about that.  In some places there is a carbon emission tax put on cattle because they fart so much!

That's demonstrably false. Energy-related carbon emissions are falling across the globe, notably in developed countries and China (and I believe India, if not, they've been fast at work putting the infrastructure in place to do so).

You might be thinking of poverty. Macron said as much, that there can be no answer for poverty as long as undeveloped nations continue to spew out more people.

The most recent data I could find is from 2015.. but the data shows clearly that CO2 emissions = CHINA

also…
Trying to debunk theories that higher CO2 levels cause warming, he cites studies that show CO2 levels following temperature spikes, prompting him to back other scientists who say that global warming is caused by solar activity.

In taking on lawmakers pushing for a cap-and-trade plan to deal with emissions, Steward tells Whispers that he's worried that the legislation will result in huge and unneeded taxes. Worse, if CO2 levels are cut, he warns, food production will slow because plants grown at higher CO2 levels make larger fruit and vegetables and also use less water. He also said that higher CO2 levels are not harmful to humans. As an example, he said that Earth's atmosphere currently has about 338 parts per million of CO2 and that in Navy subs, the danger level for carbon dioxide isn't reached until the air has 8,000 parts per million of CO2.

@cteavin:

@Frederick:

It's not unusual for the vast majority of people to be wrong about something.  I've given a couple of examples of this several months ago.  One example of that which will be revealed in the future is a man fraudulently convicted of murder in which I would say 99.9% of people are convinced he is guilty.. because almost all the information they have been given about the case is false.  (he was framed).  I know who framed him, I can prove he was framed, and the evidence I have to prove he was framed was given to me by the person who basically confessed to the crime to me in several chat sessions.  He committed suicide a few months later.  The jury were not even told that the man who did it existed.  His suicide was never even reported.  At the time, I thought the man was a nut, but the things he confided to me turned out to all be 100% true when the trial took place 2.5 years after he told me what really happened.

As for climate change… the climate is always changing in cycles.  There have been many ice ages, etc.  The rate of change is incredibly slow.. and it's not a result of CO2 emissions but because of other factors.  If people want to bitch about something real.. bitch about pollution, overpopulation, and the fact that the oceans are becoming barren wastelands due to pollution and overfishing.    Many countries dump their raw sewage and garbage right into the ocean.

Ninety-seven percent of the world’s scientists” say no such thing. There are multiple relevant questions: (1) Has the earth generally warmed since 1800? (An overwhelming majority of scientists assent to this.) (2) Has that warming been caused primarily by human activity? And, if (1) and (2), is anthropogenic global warming a problem so significant that we ought to take action?

A personal account of a single case is hardly a good demonstration that the majority can be wrong. Here we're talking about scientists from across the planet, 97% of them, who say that climate change is real. 97%. How often do you get that much agreement?

The better argument against large numbers of people agreeing is religion. There is no god, there is no afterlife so pretty much 99.9% of the planets 8 billion people are wrong. Were there to be an afterlife than only a very small portion of those people would be right. Either way, the majority is wrong.

The difference is that the majority are not learned people. The average person who doesn't believe in climate change is the layperson commenting on their day to day. The few scientist who remain, well, they might have a point but it doesn't mean they're right. It also doesn't mean that we, as a global people, can't course correct. Look at what India and Pakistan did in planting several million trees. If we continue to do that while decrease carbon emissions the naysayers might be proven right – there is no climate change -- becasue we stopped it.

Whether you belive or not, cleaner air is a boon we can all enjoy.

As long as the population continues to grow exponentially, any measures taken to try and reduce carbon emissions are futile.  I have one amusing and true story about that.  In some places there is a carbon emission tax put on cattle because they fart so much!

@cteavin:

@Frederick:

@raphjd:

There are 2 types of conservatives, but in this case I think we're talking about religious conservatives.

I think it's a crock of shit (hypocritical) that they want to have their freedoms, while denying others the same rights.   It's the same thing we see with modern liberals.  They want to have their right to free speech, while denying it to those they disagree with.

I'm not so sure that religious conservatives are REALLY conservatives.  It's possible that they pretend to be conservative only because conservatives are against abortion.  It would be interesting to know who they actually vote for.

I think Religious Conservatives (RC) are genuinely conservative in that they want to preserve their idea of what the US is supposed to be based on, Christian Law. Unfortunately, most RCs cherry picks from the bible without any consideration to context. For example, there was no such thing as a gay person in the biblical era, not as we understand it today. Sex was one way to pray to the pagan gods and many of the prohibitions to sex come from prohibitions against worshiping a pagan god, these rituals and their related customs.

Here's a question for you: RCs want to preserve and enforce ancient biblical laws which require us to reinterpret them for our modern times. The Supreme Court has to do with with the Constitution. Do you want more or less of the Justice Scalia brand of literal interpretation?

(Footnote: Trump has already put into the Judiciary 150+ justices, three times Obama, around the country, many take a literal interpretation of the Constitution.)

In regards to gay stuff in the bible…
There are various references of possible gay behavior with Jesus and John, Jesus and Judas, Jesus and some naked guy who was stalking him, and Noah's own sons raping their daddy.   
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuality_of_Jesus
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2012/apr/20/was-jesus-gay-probably
http://www.evidenceunseen.com/bible-difficulties-2/ot-difficulties/genesis-deuteronomy/gen-921-25-did-ham-rape-noah/

Then there is the practice of rabbis to this day which I won't describe because nobody would believe me.. instead, read about it yourselves…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dzs-09Of99I
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2304793/Two-babies-stricken-HERPES-ritual-oral-blood-sucking-circumcision-New-York-City.html

@cteavin:

@Frederick:

@raphjd:

There are 2 types of conservatives, but in this case I think we're talking about religious conservatives.

I think it's a crock of shit (hypocritical) that they want to have their freedoms, while denying others the same rights.   It's the same thing we see with modern liberals.  They want to have their right to free speech, while denying it to those they disagree with.

I'm not so sure that religious conservatives are REALLY conservatives.  It's possible that they pretend to be conservative only because conservatives are against abortion.  It would be interesting to know who they actually vote for.

I think Religious Conservatives (RC) are genuinely conservative in that they want to preserve their idea of what the US is supposed to be based on, Christian Law. Unfortunately, most RCs cherry picks from the bible without any consideration to context. For example, there was no such thing as a gay person in the biblical era, not as we understand it today. Sex was one way to pray to the pagan gods and many of the prohibitions to sex come from prohibitions against worshiping a pagan god, these rituals and their related customs.

Here's a question for you: RCs want to preserve and enforce ancient biblical laws which require us to reinterpret them for our modern times. The Supreme Court has to do with with the Constitution. Do you want more or less of the Justice Scalia brand of literal interpretation?

(Footnote: Trump has already put into the Judiciary 150+ justices, three times Obama, around the country, many take a literal interpretation of the Constitution.)

I find that painting with a broad brush always leads to disaster.  For instance.. computers are great when used as tools.. but then a computer becomes the draconian authority, or when humans emulate a computer by applying a rigid, literal interpretation of rules..  bad things happen.

Kim Jung Un is destined to incur the wrath of Godzilla!

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/10/03/north-korea-promises-to-bring-nuclear-clouds-to-japan-mocks-pm-as-headless-chicken.html

@raphjd:

There are 2 types of conservatives, but in this case I think we're talking about religious conservatives.

I think it's a crock of shit (hypocritical) that they want to have their freedoms, while denying others the same rights.   It's the same thing we see with modern liberals.  They want to have their right to free speech, while denying it to those they disagree with.

I'm not so sure that religious conservatives are REALLY conservatives.  It's possible that they pretend to be conservative only because conservatives are against abortion.  It would be interesting to know who they actually vote for.

@spam17:

@Frederick:

@aadam101:

Nobody receives Hospice services for 15 years. Medicare actually caps it at six months (which is a long time for this service) and it's rather difficult to continue with the services via Medicare. Hospice is for end of life care. It's basically when treatment has stopped and you are just trying to make the patient comfortable until they die.

People rarely die when they are expected to.  They also don't die when their insurance coverage runs out (although sometimes I wonder…).

Just in my very limited personal experience:
My aunt was diagnosed with terminal breast cancer that had gotten to her lymph nodes.  She was told she would be gone within 3 months.  She lasted over a year.
My dad's 2nd wife's mother had all sorts of medical problems including severe dementia, heart problems, diabetes, legs swollen up like tree trunks.. could not walk, could not even operate her wheelchair.. and lingered like that for 15 years.
My grandfather had rheumatism as a child which gave him what is called a "rheumatic heart" that is like a time bomb.  He was told several times that he needed heart surgery to fix some problem, but he refused.   But then, when he was quite frail and weak, he consented to the heart surgery.  Unfortunately, by the time he consented to the surgery, they told him he was too frail and weak to survive the surgery and they would not do it.  He was in a wheelchair that he could not operate, and in a motorized hospital bed at home, and wearing an oxygen mask for over 2 years before dying. 
My sister in law had severe multiple sclerosis, attempted suicide with an intentional fall - leaving her a quadraplegic with broken vertebrae in her neck.  That left her head fused at a 30% angle.  She couldn't talk, the pupils of her eyes were unresponsive, on a feeding tube, and looked like a corpse for over 15 years before her heart gave out.  My idiot brother fought to keep her alive so he could continue to collect her benefits.   He kept her in a vegetative state of hell just so he could live off the income of wher benefits.

Your straight brorher?

;D

My oldest brother is one of those few people that are 100% straight.  He doesn't care what a woman looks like, nor how obnoxious they are.  If they have a source of income (benefits) and can tolerate him, he is goo goo gaa gaa in love with them.  He is also ultra liberal.

@cteavin:

Meanwhile, is Seoul.

Youtube Video

@spam17:

@Frederick:

@cteavin:

@Frederick:

Youtube Video

To a point I agree with you: That's life. If the life choices you've made lead to a place where you're grossly obese and you're heart can't take the strain, or you have type two diabetes, etc. When someone is born with a birth defect that in previous times would have meant they die, or that life would only be physical suffering then I understand your sentiment, that's life.

But in today's America and Europe it's still possible to get the common cold and die.

There's that famous footage from Michael Moore's documentary, Sicko, where a man had to choose between one of two fingers after an accident because of the cost.

This is a philosophical topic otherwise it becomes a long branching road that leads to Sarah Palin's death panels.

There is a mystery about fat / obesity.   Some people eat like pigs.. and are quite thin, while other people eat like pigs and are 600 pounds of unidentifiable flesh.   I don't eat much.. and don't eat junk food or candy.. and eat healthy stuff.  I don't have any external flab.  My blood work is perfect.  My heart is perfect.  I'm surprisingly strong considering I don't work out at all (a tall, very butch neighbor found that out the hard way last month).  However, I have what is called "visceral" abdominal / internal fat that I can't get rid of.  It's a genetic thing from my Norwegian ancestry.   In Norway, there were many famines.  People without stores of body fat did not survive the famines.  Those built like Hagar The Horrible did survive.  I think it is related to having a slow metabolism.  My family members typically live into their 90's unless they were severe alcoholics and smoked all day long.

Decades ago, there was a cocktail medication known as "PhenFen" which effectively caused people to lose weight.. but like always.. some people took WAY more of the medication than they were supposed to and died of heart attacks, so that combination of medications is no longer available for weight loss.

The drug combination fenfluramine/phentermine, usually called fen-phen, was an anti-obesity treatment that utilized two anorectics.

Fenfluramine was marketed by American Home Products (later known as Wyeth) as Pondimin, but was shown to cause potentially fatal pulmonary hypertension and heart valve problems, which eventually led to its withdrawal and legal damages of over $13 billion!

>:D

That is true, but it was actually a good drug combination.  The problem was that people were abusing it… taking far more than the recommended dosage.  One can die from drinking too much water or breathing pure oxygen.

@cteavin:

@Frederick:

@cteavin:

I like to discuss/argue. This comes from a friend on my FB feed.

Thoughts?

• How can we have a constructive conversation about our energy policy when the Right doesn’t believe that human use of fossil fuels is causing climate change?

• Many liberals are willing to compromise on fossil fuels for the sake of more jobs, energy independence, and/or because pipelines are safer for oil transport than the trucks and trains we’re using now. But conservatives refuse to compromise on anything.

The amazing thing about the climate is how LITTLE it changes.  While using fossil fuels do significantly affect pollution, it does not have any significant affect upon the climate.  Solar power is not a viable source of power.  Try to find an anti-fossil fuel liberal who gives up their car.  The only viable alternative to fossil fuels is nuclear power, and the liberals are even more against that.   Liberals are full of complaints, with no solutions.  Solar power is so absurd, that the energy used to make the solar panels combined with the cost of purchasing and maintaining them makes them a less than worthless option.

Ah, by substituting liberal for moonbats your meaning has become clear.

Your first statement says fossil fuels do not have any significant effect on climate. What do you say to the 99% of professional scientists and researchers who use data to say otherwise?   
   
Liberals (and some conservatives) have not given up their cars en mass but they have pushed forth legislation phasing out gasoline-powered automobiles forcing car companies to come up with greener alternatives.

The environmental costs in making nuclear power plants is exponentially more damaging to the environmental costs that the pollution costs in making the solar panels. Over time, the carbon footprint from manufacturing solar panels decreases while the waste from nuclear power plants multiplies over time. (Footnote: There is an isotope that is far safer than the current fuels being used but the technology is already in place for the other type.)

It's not unusual for the vast majority of people to be wrong about something.  I've given a couple of examples of this several months ago.  One example of that which will be revealed in the future is a man fraudulently convicted of murder in which I would say 99.9% of people are convinced he is guilty.. because almost all the information they have been given about the case is false.  (he was framed).  I know who framed him, I can prove he was framed, and the evidence I have to prove he was framed was given to me by the person who basically confessed to the crime to me in several chat sessions.  He committed suicide a few months later.  The jury were not even told that the man who did it existed.  His suicide was never even reported.  At the time, I thought the man was a nut, but the things he confided to me turned out to all be 100% true when the trial took place 2.5 years after he told me what really happened.

As for climate change… the climate is always changing in cycles.  There have been many ice ages, etc.  The rate of change is incredibly slow.. and it's not a result of CO2 emissions but because of other factors.  If people want to bitch about something real.. bitch about pollution, overpopulation, and the fact that the oceans are becoming barren wastelands due to pollution and overfishing.    Many countries dump their raw sewage and garbage right into the ocean.

Ninety-seven percent of the world’s scientists” say no such thing. There are multiple relevant questions: (1) Has the earth generally warmed since 1800? (An overwhelming majority of scientists assent to this.) (2) Has that warming been caused primarily by human activity? And, if (1) and (2), is anthropogenic global warming a problem so significant that we ought to take action?

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425232/97-percent-solution-ian-tuttle

and

Youtube Video

and

Youtube Video

and

Youtube Video

@cteavin:

@Frederick:

@cteavin:

I like to debate/argue. This is part of an argument from my wall. Thoughts, comments, differnet point of view?

"How can we come to any resolution on unwanted pregnancies, abortion, and women’s healthcare funding when our opponents also oppose sex ed in school and access to birth control (the most effective means for preventing abortions)?"

If I was a woman, I would be highly pissed that "women's healthcare funding" gets hijacked by the abortion people.  That was a huge scandal a few years ago when it was revealed that the money that was being raised to fight breast cancer was actually being used to fund planned parenthood.

Sex education basically focuses on getting guys to wear condoms for various reasons.  The problem with that is,  people who use condoms don't use them consistently or properly.   There are a staggering number of pregnancies resulting from girls lying about using birth control or condoms either not being used - or being pricked with a pin to result in a pregnancy which will either force a relationship or a trip to an abortion clinic.    Schools are not competent to be teaching sex ed.   Here's an idea for sex ed.. supply porn to guys so that they have something to jack off with instead of bothering with females.  Supply dildos, ohmibods, and lovense products to both males and females to reduce the humping.

If your sex ed classes said just that, they were not on par with what I got in Los Angeles. We learned about all forms of birth control. We were also divided, by sex, into a special auditorium and shown a video of the male and female anatomy and a live birth.

Actually, if you look at the statistics you'll see a correlation between in the discussion of birth control, sex ed in school, The Pill and unwanted pregnancies to the crime rate. The number of unwanted pregnancies is way down from, say, the 50's and with fewer people growing up in orphanages, fewer young families living in poverty the crime rate took a nose dive.

Here in Japan birth control is largely seen as the man's responsibility. Condom sales are robust. The number of women on The Pill is in the low single digits and sex ed is taught in Jr. high school.

That is true.. here are the favored condoms in Japan… 
https://www.google.com/search?q=condom+hello+kitty&tbm=isch&source=iu&pf=m&ictx=1&fir=FIUvnPkuFKrXnM%253A%252CaM9f-73iSIvDXM%252C_&usg=__ykD1sgA0g4y2QpP2mW5G9XbQQ3E%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjHufnb3N_WAhXn5YMKHUzACw0Q9QEILDAB#imgrc=FIUvnPkuFKrXnM:

@cteavin:

@Frederick:

@cteavin:

Women do have the freedom to choose whether or not to have children.  It's called keeping their legs together.  Here's one idea… to qualify for a taxpayer subsidized abortion, the woman must consent to have their tubes tied.

You're saying that women should take responsibility for getting pregnant. By a very large degree, I agree with you but the opposing view is that men have too much power in deciding when a woman should have sex (which is why we have all this conversation on consent and rape, atm). Here's where I disagree with you, the man also has responsibility. I'd say it's 50/50.

Look up kabedon (it's hard to explain). Women love this. They often say something which translated means the man is being the man. This is what Western women talk about in that the power is different.

It can't be 50/50 if the man is gone.  How many relationships are still intact 9 months after the conception?  Quite a few women never see the man again that got them pregnant 9 HOURS after the deed.

I was going to post that meme here!

The version I found said "We used to rule one third of the World.. now WE are ruled by third world countries!"

She said she has no sympathy for the Las Vegas victims because country music fans are often republicans.

I wonder if she would have sympathy for a folk music festival.

People get all upset whenever they can find racial undertones in anything, yet it's perfectly acceptable to bash Trump, republicans, etc.
If the left protest something (such as defacing and destroying monuments), it's protected by "freedom of speech".
If the right protest something.. it's RACISM or MISOGYNY.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/10/02/top-cbs-lawyer-no-sympathy-for-vegas-vics-probably-republicans.html#

@cteavin:

I like to debate/argue. This is part of an argument from my wall. Thoughts, comments, differnet point of view?

"How can we come to any resolution on unwanted pregnancies, abortion, and women’s healthcare funding when our opponents also oppose sex ed in school and access to birth control (the most effective means for preventing abortions)?"

If I was a woman, I would be highly pissed that "women's healthcare funding" gets hijacked by the abortion people.  That was a huge scandal a few years ago when it was revealed that the money that was being raised to fight breast cancer was actually being used to fund planned parenthood.

Sex education basically focuses on getting guys to wear condoms for various reasons.  The problem with that is,  people who use condoms don't use them consistently or properly.  There are a staggering number of pregnancies resulting from girls lying about using birth control or condoms either not being used - or being pricked with a pin to result in a pregnancy which will either force a relationship or a trip to an abortion clinic.    Schools are not competent to be teaching sex ed.  Here's an idea for sex ed.. supply porn to guys so that they have something to jack off with instead of bothering with females.  Supply dildos, ohmibods, and lovense products to both males and females to reduce the humping.

@cteavin:

From a Facebook conversation I've been having.

"How can we agree on funding for public programs when the GOP insists that we don’t have enough money to fund them? How can they seriously believe there’s no money? There is money, we just spend much of it on the US military and tax breaks for corporations and the rich. Now, if we agreed on how much money goes to the Pentagon and tax breaks vs. food stamps and other forms of welfare, we maybe figure out something, BUT…"

That question is too broad.  What public program is not getting enough money?  It sounds to me like someone is bitching that they are not getting their abortion program funded.

@cteavin:

Again, from a Facebook conversation I've been having. Thoughts? Answers? Insight?

"Why do conservatives keep talking about how much they value freedom but refuse to accept women’s freedom to choose whether or not to have children, LGBT people’s freedom to love who they love and be who they are, workers’ rights to unionize, and people of color’s freedom to not be arrested, jailed, and/or murdered without due process?

"Why do so many on the Right resent the government for encroaching on individual rights…yet they’re fine with the monopolistic invasiveness of huge global corporations?"

Women do have the freedom to choose whether or not to have children.  It's called keeping their legs together.  Here's one idea… to qualify for a taxpayer subsidized abortion, the woman must consent to have their tubes tied.

@cteavin:

I like to discuss/argue. This comes from a friend on my FB feed.

Thoughts?

• How can we have a constructive conversation about our energy policy when the Right doesn’t believe that human use of fossil fuels is causing climate change?

• Many liberals are willing to compromise on fossil fuels for the sake of more jobs, energy independence, and/or because pipelines are safer for oil transport than the trucks and trains we’re using now. But conservatives refuse to compromise on anything.

The amazing thing about the climate is how LITTLE it changes.  While using fossil fuels do significantly affect pollution, it does not have any significant affect upon the climate.  Solar power is not a viable source of power.  Try to find an anti-fossil fuel moonbat who gives up their car.  The only viable alternative to fossil fuels is nuclear power, and the moonbats are even more against that.  Moonbats are full of complaints, with no solutions.  Solar power is so absurd, that the energy used to make the solar panels combined with the cost of purchasing and maintaining them makes them a less than worthless option.

I posted about this bitch before.. and now it looks like she might be going to jail!    :crazy2:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/06/uc-student-who-stole-maga-hat-in-viral-video-could-face-felony-charges.html

I have a new neighbor who is renting the house across the street from me.  He has the delusion that he is the boss of the block, and thought he could intimidate me.  He has been doing minor things to annoy me for months.  Last month, he came onto my property and moved something blocking my front door so that I could not open it.  Apparently he did this to force me into a confrontation.  When I went out to move it, he came charging over, waving his arms and shouting at me.  When I shouted back, he put his hand on my shoulder in an attempt to dominate the altercation.  I shocked him senseless by punching him in his ear.  He caved in like a pussy bitch and that is the last word that he has spoken to me, and frankly, I haven't even seen him come outside of his house since.  He used to be outside every day.

Anyway..  just today I noticed something.  That moron spends a fortune on keeping his yard in perfect condition. He usually hires gardeners and tree services to do the work for him.  It occurred to me that this is very nice when I look out my windows and see this manicured lawn, etc.  It then occurred to me how to teach him that there are consequences to pissing me off… by making my house look terrible.  When I look out my windows, I see a pleasant view.  When he looks out his windows, he is going to see a disaster!

This is the same concept as Disney World uses in their rides.  In Disney World, the Tiki Room attraction is near the Haunted Mansion.  One might expect that the sides facing each other would have a Tiki motif for the Tiki room, and a Haunted Mansion motif for the Haunted Mansion.. in fact.. it is the OPPOSITE.. so that when you are at the Tiki Room and look at the Haunted Mansion.. you see a Tiki motif... and when at the Haunted Mansion and look at the Tiki Room, you don't see a Tiki motif, but a haunted mansion motif!  CLEVER!