End of the American Century

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:You can not turn this ship around. The political system is unable to govern. It gives veto to rural Americans which are disproportionately old, less wealthy and don’t care about anyone but themselves. Foreign interest clearly have corrupted our lobbying system to the detriment of our country. Look at Israel, Saudi, Russia and China.

The supreme Court only takes political cases, overturning years of legal presidents and in effect over the rule of laws. The house has not increased its size in almost 100 years. Add in the filibuster, gerrymandering, foreign control of media- Fox News, WSJ, twitter, etc and there is no hope of the US addressing issues to make this country competitive in the next decade.


And the woke liberals are hyperventilating that they aren't getting everything they want.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You can not turn this ship around. The political system is unable to govern. It gives veto to rural Americans which are disproportionately old, less wealthy and don’t care about anyone but themselves. Foreign interest clearly have corrupted our lobbying system to the detriment of our country. Look at Israel, Saudi, Russia and China.

The supreme Court only takes political cases, overturning years of legal presidents and in effect over the rule of laws. The house has not increased its size in almost 100 years. Add in the filibuster, gerrymandering, foreign control of media- Fox News, WSJ, twitter, etc and there is no hope of the US addressing issues to make this country competitive in the next decade.


And the woke liberals are hyperventilating that they aren't getting everything they want.


And the brain trust of mega world is posting on a mommy’s board.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If it wasn't dead before it will be with four more years of trump.



You also told us back in 2000 that the earth would be uninhabitable by 2025


No one said that.

DP.

In 2006, former vice-president Al Gore projected that unless drastic measures were implemented, the planet would hit an irreversible “point of no return” by 2016. Game over.

Rajendra Pachauri, head of the UN Climate Panel, one-upped Gore in 2007, insisting 2012 was the year of irreversibility. “If there is no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.”

In April 2008, media mogul Ted Turner provided far more detail than either Gore or Pachauri, emphasizing the consequences of climate inaction. “Not doing it will be catastrophic. We’ll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not 10 but 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals. Civilization will have broken down. The few people left will be living in a failed state like Somalia or Sudan, and living conditions will be intolerable. The droughts will be so bad there’ll be no more corn growing.”

The acclaimed godfather of global warming, James Hansen, drew a line in the sand testifying before Congress in June 2008, on the dangers of greenhouse gases: “We’re toast if we don’t get on a very different path. This is the last chance.”

A year later, in July 2009, then-Prince Charles chimed in, asserting the planet had 96 months to avoid decimation: “…irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it.”

Only three months later, UK prime minister Gordon Brown urged nations to pull a historical handbrake ahead of a climate conference: “There are now fewer than 50 days to set the course of the next 50 years and more. If we do not reach a deal at this time, let us be in no doubt: once the damage from unchecked emissions growth is done, no retrospective global agreement, in some future period, can undo that choice. By then, it will be irretrievably too late.”

In 2014, French foreign minister Laurent Fabius upped Brown’s 50 days to 500. “We have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

Twelve years to 2031. In January 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez put her chips on 2031 as the potential end of days. “Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: ‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it? And, like, this is the war—this is our World War ll.”

Eleven years to 2030. Echoing Ocasio-Cortez in March 2019, but shaving off a year, UN General Assembly President Maria Garces declared an 11-year window to escape catastrophe: “We are the last generation that can prevent irreparable damage to our planet.”

In June 2019, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden threw his support behind Ocasio-Cortez’s dozen-year projection: “Science tells us that how we act or fail to act in the next 12 years will determine the very livability of our planet.”

Full circle back to 2023, and the UN’s latest “time-bomb,” released March 20, as described by the Associated Press: “Humanity still has a chance close to the last to prevent the worst of climate change’s future harms…”

In step with near annual UN declarations from the past 50 years, Secretary-General Guterres once again sounded the alarm: “The climate time-bomb is ticking.”

But therein lies the beauty of doomsday predictions: When one fails, make another.

https://www.agweb.com/opinion/doomsday-addiction-celebrating-50-years-failed-climate-predictions


We know you know how to cut and paste a word salad.

But do you know how science works? I assume not given how colossally stupid your post is. Science is. It static and changes with variability. So even if I took what you say as true, there are MANY variables in climate and in the diff global attempts to change it. So ofc predictions will change. Dumba$$.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If it wasn't dead before it will be with four more years of trump.



You also told us back in 2000 that the earth would be uninhabitable by 2025


No one said that.

DP.

In 2006, former vice-president Al Gore projected that unless drastic measures were implemented, the planet would hit an irreversible “point of no return” by 2016. Game over.

Rajendra Pachauri, head of the UN Climate Panel, one-upped Gore in 2007, insisting 2012 was the year of irreversibility. “If there is no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.”

In April 2008, media mogul Ted Turner provided far more detail than either Gore or Pachauri, emphasizing the consequences of climate inaction. “Not doing it will be catastrophic. We’ll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not 10 but 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals. Civilization will have broken down. The few people left will be living in a failed state like Somalia or Sudan, and living conditions will be intolerable. The droughts will be so bad there’ll be no more corn growing.”

The acclaimed godfather of global warming, James Hansen, drew a line in the sand testifying before Congress in June 2008, on the dangers of greenhouse gases: “We’re toast if we don’t get on a very different path. This is the last chance.”

A year later, in July 2009, then-Prince Charles chimed in, asserting the planet had 96 months to avoid decimation: “…irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it.”

Only three months later, UK prime minister Gordon Brown urged nations to pull a historical handbrake ahead of a climate conference: “There are now fewer than 50 days to set the course of the next 50 years and more. If we do not reach a deal at this time, let us be in no doubt: once the damage from unchecked emissions growth is done, no retrospective global agreement, in some future period, can undo that choice. By then, it will be irretrievably too late.”

In 2014, French foreign minister Laurent Fabius upped Brown’s 50 days to 500. “We have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

Twelve years to 2031. In January 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez put her chips on 2031 as the potential end of days. “Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: ‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it? And, like, this is the war—this is our World War ll.”

Eleven years to 2030. Echoing Ocasio-Cortez in March 2019, but shaving off a year, UN General Assembly President Maria Garces declared an 11-year window to escape catastrophe: “We are the last generation that can prevent irreparable damage to our planet.”

In June 2019, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden threw his support behind Ocasio-Cortez’s dozen-year projection: “Science tells us that how we act or fail to act in the next 12 years will determine the very livability of our planet.”

Full circle back to 2023, and the UN’s latest “time-bomb,” released March 20, as described by the Associated Press: “Humanity still has a chance close to the last to prevent the worst of climate change’s future harms…”

In step with near annual UN declarations from the past 50 years, Secretary-General Guterres once again sounded the alarm: “The climate time-bomb is ticking.”

But therein lies the beauty of doomsday predictions: When one fails, make another.

https://www.agweb.com/opinion/doomsday-addiction-celebrating-50-years-failed-climate-predictions


We know you know how to cut and paste a word salad.

But do you know how science works? I assume not given how colossally stupid your post is. Science is. It static and changes with variability. So even if I took what you say as true, there are MANY variables in climate and in the diff global attempts to change it. So ofc predictions will change. Dumba$$.


When you're wrong THAT MANY TIMES I would think you'd be a little more humble about how good you are at science. The errors always seem to keep going in one direction.

You remind me of Jehovah's witnesses. They predict the second coming of christ and when that days comes and goes, they predict a different date and say they got the math wrong.
Nobody expects prophets to be that good at math but you'd think scientists would be better at it.

Is there a chance that meteorologists were exaggerating this issue to make themselves seem more important?
I mean who the fk ever wanted to be a meteorologist back in the 1970s.

Were these guys the ethnic studies majors of the science world back then.
post reply Forum Index » Political Discussion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: