Fayetteville Mayor Receives Award

[theWizard12]

Fayetteville is listed on those rankings because it’s the largest of the Big 4.

As far as quality and where to live:


Bentonville

Rogers




Fayetteville










Springdale

 

[gscottar]

I wish our green mayor could do something about fireworks being shot all hours of the night for ten days straight. It freaks my dogs out.

Bicyclists are allowed to ride their bikes in the middle of the street but no enforcement for fireworks?

 

[woodworth]

The climate is always changing.

So, a fruitless award for s fruity Mayor !

Yes, but never before has it changed as quickly as it is changing now. That’s why climate change is such a risk to human livelihood and the stability of our civilization.

 

[woodworth]

That’s actually not true. There’s been some false reporting on the topic. They are allowing legal residents (green card holders) to sit on local boards and commissions like the Active Transportation Committee, Parks and Rex Advisory Board, etc.

Non-Citizens still can’t be on City Council or run for Mayor.

Seems like a good way to engage new residents, add to your volunteer base, and retain talented newcomers to me.

But they don't even have to be a registered voter anymore to serve on a board. Ridiculous. Let's don't make it too hard for anyone to participate in municipal planning so lower the standards.

Let’s say you live in Fayetteville, and were born in the Marshall Islands. Your homeland is sinking into the ocean. The US conducted nuclear testing on your island for decades. You are a legal resident, but you’re not allowed to vote. Should you be allowed to volunteer your time to improve quality of life in the place you live? I say yes.

 

[rzrbk7777]

Let’s say you live in Fayetteville, and were born in the Marshall Islands. Your homeland is sinking into the ocean. The US conducted nuclear testing on your island for decades. You are a legal resident, but you’re not allowed to vote. Should you be allowed to volunteer your time to improve quality of life in the place you live? I say yes.

The environmental specialist for the United Nations has said that we have a maximum of ten years to reverse climate change or it will be the end of the world as we know it. He said it in 1989.

Had a guy tell me that Antarctica is the warmest it has been in 11,000 years. I asked him:

Who measured it back then?

What did they use to measure it?

How was it recorded?

And, what did they do to reverse it back then?

He said a few cuss words and walked away.

When you take scientists who need theoretical and/or hypothetical disasters to fund their livelihoods, and combine them with politicians and bureaucrats who crave power through government control, you are far less likely to get honest results than justification for their agenda.

The climate has been changing forever and will continue to do so. Man can't even conjure up a rainstorm in a dry spell or stop one in a flood. We can't divert a hurricane or stop a tornado. Global warming was adjusted to climate change b/c a few harsh winters and mild summers made global warming sound stupid. With climate change they can point at everything. There was lots of proven false data in the last big study. If it were real, there would be no need to make stuff up to sell it.

 

[Chuck Roper]

The environmental specialist for the United Nations has said that we have a maximum of ten years to reverse climate change or it will be the end of the world as we know it. He said it in 1989.

Had a guy tell me that Antarctica is the warmest it has been in 11,000 years. I asked him:

Who measured it back then?

What did they use to measure it?

How was it recorded?

And, what did they do to reverse it back then?

He said a few cuss words and walked away.

When you take scientists who need theoretical and/or hypothetical disasters to fund their livelihoods, and combine them with politicians and bureaucrats who crave power through government control, you are far less likely to get honest results than justification for their agenda.

The climate has been changing forever and will continue to do so. Man can't even conjure up a rainstorm in a dry spell or stop one in a flood. We can't divert a hurricane or stop a tornado. Global warming was adjusted to climate change b/c a few harsh winters and mild summers made global warming sound stupid. With climate change they can point at everything. There was lots of proven false data in the last big study. If it were real, there would be no need to make stuff up to sell it.

You should make friends with Kyrie Irving. He's a flat earth guy, too.

 

[hpharri1994]

The environmental specialist for the United Nations has said that we have a maximum of ten years to reverse climate change or it will be the end of the world as we know it. He said it in 1989.

Had a guy tell me that Antarctica is the warmest it has been in 11,000 years. I asked him:

Who measured it back then?

What did they use to measure it?

How was it recorded?

And, what did they do to reverse it back then?

He said a few cuss words and walked away.

When you take scientists who need theoretical and/or hypothetical disasters to fund their livelihoods, and combine them with politicians and bureaucrats who crave power through government control, you are far less likely to get honest results than justification for their agenda.

The climate has been changing forever and will continue to do so. Man can't even conjure up a rainstorm in a dry spell or stop one in a flood. We can't divert a hurricane or stop a tornado. Global warming was adjusted to climate change b/c a few harsh winters and mild summers made global warming sound stupid. With climate change they can point at everything. There was lots of proven false data in the last big study. If it were real, there would be no need to make stuff up to sell it.

 

[woodworth]

Let’s say you live in Fayetteville, and were born in the Marshall Islands. Your homeland is sinking into the ocean. The US conducted nuclear testing on your island for decades. You are a legal resident, but you’re not allowed to vote. Should you be allowed to volunteer your time to improve quality of life in the place you live? I say yes.

The environmental specialist for the United Nations has said that we have a maximum of ten years to reverse climate change or it will be the end of the world as we know it. He said it in 1989.

Had a guy tell me that Antarctica is the warmest it has been in 11,000 years. I asked him:

Who measured it back then?

What did they use to measure it?

How was it recorded?

And, what did they do to reverse it back then?

He said a few cuss words and walked away.

When you take scientists who need theoretical and/or hypothetical disasters to fund their livelihoods, and combine them with politicians and bureaucrats who crave power through government control, you are far less likely to get honest results than justification for their agenda.

The climate has been changing forever and will continue to do so. Man can't even conjure up a rainstorm in a dry spell or stop one in a flood. We can't divert a hurricane or stop a tornado. Global warming was adjusted to climate change b/c a few harsh winters and mild summers made global warming sound stupid. With climate change they can point at everything. There was lots of proven false data in the last big study. If it were real, there would be no need to make stuff up to sell it.

I will never change your mind on this topic and I’m not trying to, but your questions have answers, so I’ll answer them.

I agree with you that it’s silly to say that “the world will end in 10 years”. I don’t know who said that but I believe you that it was said. It’s hyperbole, and it’s just not true.

Historical temperatures are measured with ice core samples. They look at the molecular composition of the ice cores, and can deduce what the temperatures were.

I’m glad you mentioned incentives. Let’s have an honest discussion about that. Who has a bigger financial incentive - companies and individuals whose existence and livelihoods depend on climate change *not* existing and who collectively represent one of the largest industries in our global economy, or scientists who are subject to rigorous peer review processes? Hint: there are WAY more dollars involved for oil and gas companies than scientific researchers.

The “false data” you reference from 2010 ended up not being false at all. There have been dozens of studies since then, and they all say the same thing - the planet is warming, greenhouse gasses are causing most of the warming, and that warming makes storms more intense, makes floods larger and more frequent, makes droughts and forest fires longer and more intense, and is likely to lead to serious human suffering in the form of mass migrations, food/water shortages, and geopolitical instability.

Large oil and gas companies and nearly every country and scientific body on Earth now acknowledge the science of climate change. A recent survey by GOP pollster Frank Luntz showed that 69% of Republicans fear that the parties stance on climate change is hurting them with younger voters.

Not all solutions to climate change require government control. I favor a bipartisan bill in Congress called the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividends Act. It puts a price on pollution and lets market actors compete with certainty. And then it rebates the proceeds to American families, which means most people end up with extra disposable income each month.

Many predictions that climate scientists have made are coming true, and frighteningly, the changes are happening even faster than anticipated. Last month, June 2019, was the hottest month in recorded history.

It’s not about controlling the weather, it’s about reducing risk for ourselves and our children.

 

[Tejashog]

World overpopulation is the root problem.

 

[hawg 4 life]

I will never change your mind on this topic and I’m not trying to, but your questions have answers, so I’ll answer them.

I agree with you that it’s silly to say that “the world will end in 10 years”. I don’t know who said that but I believe you that it was said. It’s hyperbole, and it’s just not true.

Historical temperatures are measured with ice core samples. They look at the molecular composition of the ice cores, and can deduce what the temperatures were.

I’m glad you mentioned incentives. Let’s have an honest discussion about that. Who has a bigger financial incentive - companies and individuals whose existence and livelihoods depend on climate change *not* existing and who collectively represent one of the largest industries in our global economy, or scientists who are subject to rigorous peer review processes? Hint: there are WAY more dollars involved for oil and gas companies than scientific researchers.

The “false data” you reference from 2010 ended up not being false at all. There have been dozens of studies since then, and they all say the same thing - the planet is warming, greenhouse gasses are causing most of the warming, and that warming makes storms more intense, makes floods larger and more frequent, makes droughts and forest fires longer and more intense, and is likely to lead to serious human suffering in the form of mass migrations, food/water shortages, and geopolitical instability.

Large oil and gas companies and nearly every country and scientific body on Earth now acknowledge the science of climate change. A recent survey by GOP pollster Frank Luntz showed that 69% of Republicans fear that the parties stance on climate change is hurting them with younger voters.

Not all solutions to climate change require government control. I favor a bipartisan bill in Congress called the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividends Act. It puts a price on pollution and lets market actors compete with certainty. And then it rebates the proceeds to American families, which means most people end up with extra disposable income each month.

Many predictions that climate scientists have made are coming true, and frighteningly, the changes are happening even faster than anticipated. Last month, June 2019, was the hottest month in recorded history.

It’s not about controlling the weather, it’s about reducing risk for ourselves and our children.

 

[theWizard12]

World overpopulation is the root problem.

 

[mcflow]

The same city that now allow illegals to take local government offices?

ugh if only the hogs weren't in fayetteville. lol

I know...no politics...

It has nothing to do with undocumented persons. Read more closely.

 

[Chauvinist Pig]

I will never change your mind on this topic and I’m not trying to, but your questions have answers, so I’ll answer them.

I agree with you that it’s silly to say that “the world will end in 10 years”. I don’t know who said that but I believe you that it was said. It’s hyperbole, and it’s just not true.

Historical temperatures are measured with ice core samples. They look at the molecular composition of the ice cores, and can deduce what the temperatures were.

I’m glad you mentioned incentives. Let’s have an honest discussion about that. Who has a bigger financial incentive - companies and individuals whose existence and livelihoods depend on climate change *not* existing and who collectively represent one of the largest industries in our global economy, or scientists who are subject to rigorous peer review processes? Hint: there are WAY more dollars involved for oil and gas companies than scientific researchers.

The “false data” you reference from 2010 ended up not being false at all. There have been dozens of studies since then, and they all say the same thing - the planet is warming, greenhouse gasses are causing most of the warming, and that warming makes storms more intense, makes floods larger and more frequent, makes droughts and forest fires longer and more intense, and is likely to lead to serious human suffering in the form of mass migrations, food/water shortages, and geopolitical instability.

Large oil and gas companies and nearly every country and scientific body on Earth now acknowledge the science of climate change. A recent survey by GOP pollster Frank Luntz showed that 69% of Republicans fear that the parties stance on climate change is hurting them with younger voters.

Not all solutions to climate change require government control. I favor a bipartisan bill in Congress called the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividends Act. It puts a price on pollution and lets market actors compete with certainty. And then it rebates the proceeds to American families, which means most people end up with extra disposable income each month.

Many predictions that climate scientists have made are coming true, and frighteningly, the changes are happening even faster than anticipated. Last month, June 2019, was the hottest month in recorded history.

It’s not about controlling the weather, it’s about reducing risk for ourselves and our children.

I’m do not want to argue about this subject. You seem well versed in it. I would like to say that crying wolf is the biggest reason why the average adult is dubious about some of this. Having seen these pandering political characters wild claims, those claims cause doubt about the whole idea of climate change because the climate is and has always changed.

On a more serious note...

Do I believe that the massive industries around the world are causing problem environmentally. Yes I do. Is there an easy answer? No there is not.

I do know if you put a price on pollution in this country like you suggest then American companies will be hamstrung while trying to compete in a global market. Get China to play ball curbing their pollution to even the US standards of today and that will make a huge difference. In the last decade the US has lowered its carbon dioxide emissions 800 million tons while China had for a while a 2 Billion carbon dioxide emission increase per year. The entire Asian Pacific rim’s emissions are skyrocketing now per this article.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapie...-carbon-dioxide-than-the-u-s-and-eu-combined/

We can keep trying to be cleaner and should, but we can’t make the rest of the world do it and we can’t pay for them to do it like they want us to do.

I have seen that the US is responsible for roughly 15% of global Carbon dioxide emissions annually. What can we do about the other 85%?

 

[woodworth]

I will never change your mind on this topic and I’m not trying to, but your questions have answers, so I’ll answer them.

I agree with you that it’s silly to say that “the world will end in 10 years”. I don’t know who said that but I believe you that it was said. It’s hyperbole, and it’s just not true.

Historical temperatures are measured with ice core samples. They look at the molecular composition of the ice cores, and can deduce what the temperatures were.

I’m glad you mentioned incentives. Let’s have an honest discussion about that. Who has a bigger financial incentive - companies and individuals whose existence and livelihoods depend on climate change *not* existing and who collectively represent one of the largest industries in our global economy, or scientists who are subject to rigorous peer review processes? Hint: there are WAY more dollars involved for oil and gas companies than scientific researchers.

The “false data” you reference from 2010 ended up not being false at all. There have been dozens of studies since then, and they all say the same thing - the planet is warming, greenhouse gasses are causing most of the warming, and that warming makes storms more intense, makes floods larger and more frequent, makes droughts and forest fires longer and more intense, and is likely to lead to serious human suffering in the form of mass migrations, food/water shortages, and geopolitical instability.

Large oil and gas companies and nearly every country and scientific body on Earth now acknowledge the science of climate change. A recent survey by GOP pollster Frank Luntz showed that 69% of Republicans fear that the parties stance on climate change is hurting them with younger voters.

Not all solutions to climate change require government control. I favor a bipartisan bill in Congress called the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividends Act. It puts a price on pollution and lets market actors compete with certainty. And then it rebates the proceeds to American families, which means most people end up with extra disposable income each month.

Many predictions that climate scientists have made are coming true, and frighteningly, the changes are happening even faster than anticipated. Last month, June 2019, was the hottest month in recorded history.

It’s not about controlling the weather, it’s about reducing risk for ourselves and our children.

I’m do not want to argue about this subject. You seem well versed in it. I would like to say that crying wolf is the biggest reason why the average adult is dubious about some of this. Having seen these pandering political characters wild claims, those claims cause doubt about the whole idea of climate change because the climate is and has always changed.

On a more serious note...

Do I believe that the massive industries around the world are causing problem environmentally. Yes I do. Is there an easy answer? No there is not.

I do know if you put a price on pollution in this country like you suggest then American companies will be hamstrung while trying to compete in a global market. Get China to play ball curbing their pollution to even the US standards of today and that will make a huge difference. In the last decade the US has lowered its carbon dioxide emissions 800 million tons while China had for a while a 2 Billion carbon dioxide emission increase per year. The entire Asian Pacific rim’s emissions are skyrocketing now per this article.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapie...-carbon-dioxide-than-the-u-s-and-eu-combined/

We can keep trying to be cleaner and should, but we can’t make the rest of the world do it and we can’t pay for them to do it like they want us to do.

I have seen that the US is responsible for roughly 15% of global Carbon dioxide emissions annually. What can we do about the other 85%?

Fair points.

The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividends Act includes a “border adjustment” that would level the playing field for US manufacturers, as you suggest.

US-based exporters would receive a refund on carbon fees paid when their goods are exported. And imports from countries with no carbon policies would be taxed at the border.

More info: https://energyinnovationact.org/how-it-works/

It’s also important to acknowledge that while China and India are large contributors today, the US has contributed the largest share to historical emissions. Said another way, we have contributed the most to the problem, and have a responsibility to lead with solutions.

It’s a big global problem and the USA can’t solve it alone. The Energy Innovation Act creates a strong incentive for other countries to implement a similar price on carbon, to avoid being penalized by the border adjustment.

And as for the concern about wild claims, we agree there. It’s important that climate advocates don’t make wild claims, and it’s also important to acknowledge that some of the responses to those wild claims (like the Turning Point graphic you shared) are not fair either. Sea ice ebbs and flows throughout the year. By and large the ice caps are melting, if we don’t cherry pick the data.

 

[hawg 4 life]

I’m do not want to argue about this subject. You seem well versed in it. I would like to say that crying wolf is the biggest reason why the average adult is dubious about some of this. Having seen these pandering political characters wild claims, those claims cause doubt about the whole idea of climate change because the climate is and has always changed.

On a more serious note...

Do I believe that the massive industries around the world are causing problem environmentally. Yes I do. Is there an easy answer? No there is not.

I do know if you put a price on pollution in this country like you suggest then American companies will be hamstrung while trying to compete in a global market. Get China to play ball curbing their pollution to even the US standards of today and that will make a huge difference. In the last decade the US has lowered its carbon dioxide emissions 800 million tons while China had for a while a 2 Billion carbon dioxide emission increase per year. The entire Asian Pacific rim’s emissions are skyrocketing now per this article.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapie...-carbon-dioxide-than-the-u-s-and-eu-combined/

We can keep trying to be cleaner and should, but we can’t make the rest of the world do it and we can’t pay for them to do it like they want us to do.

I have seen that the US is responsible for roughly 15% of global Carbon dioxide emissions annually. What can we do about the other 85%?

I am all for combating climate change because there is no way humans are not having an effect on out climate. This is the best response to combat the overall climate situation that i have seen.

We just need to do our part. I agree that we should not pay for other countries to do it and neither do a majority of the scientists that actually study climate change. We have several friends that study/teach climate change and it’s potential effects including my wife. I assure you that they aren’t out there wanting to get rich off climate change. They are very passionate about their work.

 

[hogfan2005]

Wow... a political debate on a message board that is actually an intelligent discussion and not a bunch of name calling and shit posting.

You're all wrong and stupid.

 

[RazorbackFBfan]

Yet he can’t get the city to do any landscaping to our roads. I’ve filed several complaints it looks terrible when the medians have 4ft of weeds growing year round

 

[arkdog]

If it was not for the Razorbacks, no one would go to Fayetteville

 

[majprescott45]

If it was not for the Razorbacks, no one would go to Fayetteville

and if walmart didnt exist, noone would go to rogers, bentonville,

 

[majprescott45]

The City of Fayetteville has spent the last 20 years getting it's collective butts kicked by Rogers/Bentonville due to it's love for rules, regs, and desire to be like the west coast. Being a business owner or developer in Fville is ridiculously difficult and costly. When I moved to NWA, if you wanted to shop or dine, you went to Fayetteville. All of that has changed completely. If the UA weren't too entrenched to leave, they would have moved to Benton County too. Not surprised the mayor has garnered some meaningless award for doing nothing that mattered.

its too bad you wont be around in a 100 years or so, when New York, Miami, D.C, LA, are underwater,

 

[Chauvinist Pig]

Fair points.

The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividends Act includes a “border adjustment” that would level the playing field for US manufacturers, as you suggest.

US-based exporters would receive a refund on carbon fees paid when their goods are exported. And imports from countries with no carbon policies would be taxed at the border.

More info: https://energyinnovationact.org/how-it-works/

It’s also important to acknowledge that while China and India are large contributors today, the US has contributed the largest share to historical emissions. Said another way, we have contributed the most to the problem, and have a responsibility to lead with solutions.

It’s a big global problem and the USA can’t solve it alone. The Energy Innovation Act creates a strong incentive for other countries to implement a similar price on carbon, to avoid being penalized by the border adjustment.

And as for the concern about wild claims, we agree there. It’s important that climate advocates don’t make wild claims, and it’s also important to acknowledge that some of the responses to those wild claims (like the Turning Point graphic you shared) are not fair either. Sea ice ebbs and flows throughout the year. By and large the ice caps are melting, if we don’t cherry pick the data.

Good post. Enjoyed discussing it and reading your thoughts.

 

[arkdog]

and if walmart didnt exist, noone would go to rogers, bentonville,

Your point is taken, but my point is that I would not go to Fayetteville for what they have become. but would choose Bentonville, Rogers, and Springdale over them.

 

[rzrbk7777]

its too bad you wont be around in a 100 years or so, when New York, Miami, D.C, LA, are underwater,

I wasn't around for the great flood or the ice age either. What regulatory agencies fixed those? Maybe we can use them again.

 

[hogtoad]

I wasn't around for the great flood or the ice age either. What regulatory agencies fixed those? Maybe we can use them again.

When your grandchildren ask you if you were part of the generation that scoffed at the overwhelming scientific evidence that manmade pollutants were creating a global disaster for them and their children, and made great flood and ice age jokes like it wasn't real, I wonder what you will say. Oops kids, didn't see that coming, maybe? How someone wouldn't take this seriously for our grandkids is beyond my comprehension.

 

[Chauvinist Pig]

When your grandchildren ask you if you were part of the generation that scoffed at the overwhelming scientific evidence that manmade pollutants were creating a global disaster for them and their children, and made great flood and ice age jokes like it wasn't real, I wonder what you will say. Oops kids, didn't see that coming, maybe? How someone wouldn't take this seriously for our grandkids is beyond my comprehension.

We can all be serious AF and what can we do?

We, the US, are responsible for 15% of global carbon monoxide pollutants released annually. We can’t fix China. They don’t GAF.

Let’s hear your solution?

 

[rzrbk7777]

When your grandchildren ask you if you were part of the generation that scoffed at the overwhelming scientific evidence that manmade pollutants were creating a global disaster for them and their children, and made great flood and ice age jokes like it wasn't real, I wonder what you will say. Oops kids, didn't see that coming, maybe? How someone wouldn't take this seriously for our grandkids is beyond my comprehension.

My grandchildren spent the day with me today. It wasn't brought up.

You have no clue whether there is overwhelming evidence or not. The guru of of global warming who has made a fortune promoting it, Al Gore, trots around the globe on a Gulfstream jet that burns more fuel in a day than a 3 car family burns in a year. He heats and cools multiple giant homes too I would imagine. I'm going to guess he doesn't do his ground travel by public transportation or a Chevy Volt. If it was anywhere near what he lets on and he truly gave a crap, he would surely be setting an example in his own life. Him of all people. There are lots of rich and famous environmental activists that burn more fuel by themselves than the whole Duggar clan. That is pure BS. If they are that clueless as to what they are, they have no business advising me on what I should be.

For every piece of overwhelming evidence brought forth in support of handing the most crucial tool of modern life as we know it(energy), to the same bunch of bureaucrats and politicians who look for new ways to run more things through the government as a job description and a political philsosophy, there is just as much evidence by the other side that their findings are bought BS .

Studies financed by agenda driven political entities overwhelmingly have the single minded goal of finding something to feed that agenda. Big government proponents are never going to finance studies that find reasons to shrink government. Never. That is a huge reason to be very, very skeptical about studies paid for by people who have something to gain. Big government people love them. That should always be cause for concern.

Like I said in another post, the environment guru for the UN sternly warned that we have 10 years before we reach the point of the end of life as we know it w/o immediate and drastic action. In 1989. That was a guy who had access to the best information in the world and he spoke like it. He was full of crap. Had we given that much power to the UN back then, we would have never gotten it back. That's what happens whenever you hand the government more control over your life, you lose it and never get it back.

 

[woodworth]

When your grandchildren ask you if you were part of the generation that scoffed at the overwhelming scientific evidence that manmade pollutants were creating a global disaster for them and their children, and made great flood and ice age jokes like it wasn't real, I wonder what you will say. Oops kids, didn't see that coming, maybe? How someone wouldn't take this seriously for our grandkids is beyond my comprehension.

My grandchildren spent the day with me today. It wasn't brought up.

You have no clue whether there is overwhelming evidence or not. The guru of of global warming who has made a fortune promoting it, Al Gore, trots around the globe on a Gulfstream jet that burns more fuel in a day than a 3 car family burns in a year. He heats and cools multiple giant homes too I would imagine. I'm going to guess he doesn't do his ground travel by public transportation or a Chevy Volt. If it was anywhere near what he lets on and he truly gave a crap, he would surely be setting an example in his own life. Him of all people. There are lots of rich and famous environmental activists that burn more fuel by themselves than the whole Duggar clan. That is pure BS. If they are that clueless as to what they are, they have no business advising me on what I should be.

For every piece of overwhelming evidence brought forth in support of handing the most crucial tool of modern life as we know it(energy), to the same bunch of bureaucrats and politicians who look for new ways to run more things through the government as a job description and a political philsosophy, there is just as much evidence by the other side that their findings are bought BS .

Studies financed by agenda driven political entities overwhelmingly have the single minded goal of finding something to feed that agenda. Big government proponents are never going to finance studies that find reasons to shrink government. Never. That is a huge reason to be very, very skeptical about studies paid for by people who have something to gain. Big government people love them. That should always be cause for concern.

Like I said in another post, the environment guru for the UN sternly warned that we have 10 years before we reach the point of the end of life as we know it w/o immediate and drastic action. In 1989. That was a guy who had access to the best information in the world and he spoke like it. He was full of crap. Had we given that much power to the UN back then, we would have never gotten it back. That's what happens whenever you hand the government more control over your life, you lose it and never get it back.

I can totally understand how a rational person would be suspicious of self-interest, government (or any large organization) bureaucracy, and especially hypocrisy.

I am not an Al Gore fan. I think he has helped to politicize an issue that didn’t need to be politicized.

I wish I shared your optimism about future environmental conditions, but I do share your optimism in human ingenuity, innovation, the power of markets, and the power of cooperation and shared responsibility.

I do fear for human civilization in the 21st century, but I’m excited to see how we will rise to the challenges ahead, in the not so distant future.

 

[Chauvinist Pig]

I can totally understand how a rational person would be suspicious of self-interest, government (or any large organization) bureaucracy, and especially hypocrisy.

I am not an Al Gore fan. I think he has helped to politicize an issue that didn’t need to be politicized.

I wish I shared your optimism about future environmental conditions, but I do share your optimism in human ingenuity, innovation, the power of markets, and the power of cooperation and shared responsibility.

I do fear for human civilization in the 21st century, but I’m excited to see how we will rise to the challenges ahead, in the not so distant future.

You should run for office. Good luck.

 

[mcflow]

Can we afford to be wrong about the impact of pollution on our planet? People can deny climate change and mock global warming during a snowstorm or cold spell. Or they can recognize that our consumption of pollutants to power our every day life are having negative impact on our environment. Should we ignore the billowing smoke from manufacturing and power plants and vehicles and incomprehensible amount of pollutants in the oceans? How can people look at that and say “meh?” India has 3 times as many people, and we are worse than they are. But I guess we can say “thank goodness for china” bc we are not number one just like we say that for Mississippi bc their health and well being and education system is slightly worse than ours when in all actuality it is not funny.

 

[hawgn02]

Can we afford to be wrong about the impact of pollution on our planet? People can deny climate change and mock global warming during a snowstorm or cold spell. Or they can recognize that our consumption of pollutants to power our every day life are having negative impact on our environment. Should we ignore the billowing smoke from manufacturing and power plants and vehicles and incomprehensible amount of pollutants in the oceans? How can people look at that and say “meh?” India has 3 times as many people, and we are worse than they are. But I guess we can say “thank goodness for china” bc we are not number one just like we say that for Mississippi bc their health and well being and education system is slightly worse than ours when in all actuality it is not funny.

I’m not disagreeing with climate change but I find it absurd to think the govt is going to fix it with trillions of dollars. Nothing but a wealth transfer scheme. That’s where the argument begins and ends with me. Free market is the best way to approach climate change IMO.

 

[hogtoad]

We can all be serious AF and what can we do?

We, the US, are responsible for 15% of global carbon monoxide pollutants released annually. We can’t fix China. They don’t GAF.

Let’s hear your solution?

How can we ask China to GAF if we don't. Someone has to lead the way, and then we can demand more of others. I like your solution. Elect people like woodworth.

 

[rzrbk7777]

Can we afford to be wrong about the impact of pollution on our planet? People can deny climate change and mock global warming during a snowstorm or cold spell. Or they can recognize that our consumption of pollutants to power our every day life are having negative impact on our environment. Should we ignore the billowing smoke from manufacturing and power plants and vehicles and incomprehensible amount of pollutants in the oceans? How can people look at that and say “meh?” India has 3 times as many people, and we are worse than they are. But I guess we can say “thank goodness for china” bc we are not number one just like we say that for Mississippi bc their health and well being and education system is slightly worse than ours when in all actuality it is not funny.

I remember the fear of impending doom cast upon us in the 60's due to the man made hole in the ozone that was soon going to get big enough to allow the sun to fry us all to a grueling death. Scary stuff for a kid already sick with dread of the impending nuclear holocaust that had seemed only a matter of time since the 50's. And WE were the culprits. Modern technology created that hole of extinction.

That hole in the ozone virtually created the EPA, which imposed endless bans and countless regulations to anything considered even a little suspect in making that hole bigger. Cost untold amounts of money too. Made lots of scientists rich and created lots and lots of cush new jobs for bureaucrats for generations to come.

And then? Well, maybe the hole wasn't getting bigger after all. Maybe it had always been there. Maybe it actually helped by providing a means for the environment to expell pollutants out of our atmosphere. Never mind. But we didn't roll back any of those new rules and regs. We didn't shrink the EPA. We created a hungry monster that would keep growing and devouring for generations. A monster that would be used as an extremely useful tool for greedy and crooked politicians for generations to come.

The EPA has done much good, but it has also been a liar, a fraud, a henchman, a bully, and a way for dirty politicians to control and extort from private business as well as take power from the people and give it to themselves.

Global warming, renamed climate change when we went through an extended cool spell that made it look phoney, has been from the same playbook that was used for the hole in the ozone. We must act now just in case there is some truth to the theory that man is changing the climate. Nothing like the threat total impending doom to scare the commoners into submission and get those tax dollars rolling in for something that can't be proven right or wrong and will never be definitively fixed or finished. It is a one world government wet dream.

Nobody knows for sure if we are doing it, if nature does it ahem, naturally, or if it is really happening at all. Lots of researchers have created themselves lucrative careers w/o producing a product, lots of politicians have given themselves endless talking points for controlling the masses w/o restraint.

The thing that is different this time, is that there is a push to one world government that sees this as it's ticket to happening. That's why the UN is SO on board at the top. This is the vehicle to finally make it happen if enough people will believe. That's what scares me more than the earth warming 3 degrees over 100 years. We have had ice ages, world droughts, massive floods, etc. throughout history that WE had nothing to do with. The climate has always changed, and then changed again w/o any help from us.

We are in far greater danger of destruction from a giant volcanic eruption or getting struck by some huge projectile from space than we are from the ocean rising a few feet, but few people seem to be sounding alarms for that. Too cut and dried and too little speculation involved. No political power to be gained so screw it, I guess.

 

[ADJT]

My grandchildren spent the day with me today. It wasn't brought up.

You have no clue whether there is overwhelming evidence or not. The guru of of global warming who has made a fortune promoting it, Al Gore, trots around the globe on a Gulfstream jet that burns more fuel in a day than a 3 car family burns in a year. He heats and cools multiple giant homes too I would imagine. I'm going to guess he doesn't do his ground travel by public transportation or a Chevy Volt. If it was anywhere near what he lets on and he truly gave a crap, he would surely be setting an example in his own life. Him of all people. There are lots of rich and famous environmental activists that burn more fuel by themselves than the whole Duggar clan. That is pure BS. If they are that clueless as to what they are, they have no business advising me on what I should be.

For every piece of overwhelming evidence brought forth in support of handing the most crucial tool of modern life as we know it(energy), to the same bunch of bureaucrats and politicians who look for new ways to run more things through the government as a job description and a political philsosophy, there is just as much evidence by the other side that their findings are bought BS .

Studies financed by agenda driven political entities overwhelmingly have the single minded goal of finding something to feed that agenda. Big government proponents are never going to finance studies that find reasons to shrink government. Never. That is a huge reason to be very, very skeptical about studies paid for by people who have something to gain. Big government people love them. That should always be cause for concern.

Like I said in another post, the environment guru for the UN sternly warned that we have 10 years before we reach the point of the end of life as we know it w/o immediate and drastic action. In 1989. That was a guy who had access to the best information in the world and he spoke like it. He was full of crap. Had we given that much power to the UN back then, we would have never gotten it back. That's what happens whenever you hand the government more control over your life, you lose it and never get it back.

What about the studies from Exxon in the 1980s that confirmed climate change and were buried?

https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2018/04/05/climate-change-oil-companies-knew-shell-exxon/

 

[rzrbk7777]

What about the studies from Exxon in the 1980s that confirmed climate change and were buried?

https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2018/04/05/climate-change-oil-companies-knew-shell-exxon/

That must have been the study used by the UN guru in 1989 when he predicted we had ten years before it was too late. How did that work out? 30 years later and we're still here and folks are still shouting about impending doom in the future if we don't hand complete control to the government, who has always been a bastion of wisdom. At least they have gotten smart enough to kick the can far enough down the road so as not to look like frauds and idiots in their lifetime.

 

[Mr.Razorback]

Yes, but never before has it changed as quickly as it is changing now. That’s why climate change is such a risk to human livelihood and the stability of our civilization.

WE ALL GON' DIE!

 

[hawgn02]

How can we ask China to GAF if we don't. Someone has to lead the way, and then we can demand more of others. I like your solution. Elect people like woodworth.

I don’t think that’s how China works. US will not be demanding anything from them.

 

[rzrbk7777]

You should run for office. Good luck.

Never work. Too sincere and too much integrity. They would either corrupt him or destroy him.

 

[hog hogan]

Love how a certain political ideology can disregard science when it fits their narrative but when it comes to man made climate change there is no disputing it, it’s all matter of fact.

 

[rzrbk7777]

Love how a certain political ideology can disregard science when it fits their narrative but when it comes to man made climate change there is no disputing it, it’s all matter of fact.

Why, b/c you say so? Are you an environmental scientist specializing in climate change who has not only found irrefutable proof that the climate is doing something it has never done before, but proof that it is happening b/c of man? Can you pinpoint the cause and back it up with undeniable proof? Hint, undeniable means just that. You claim there is no disputing it. Have you successfully sorted through the myriad of studies, charts, opinions, agendas, facts, misinformation, credentials of researchers, potential bias, political goals, financial motives, etc., while sniffing out all the BS thrown out on both sides while successfully proving and disproving it with truth? If so, bring on your proof that cannot be disputed.

If not, is there any possibility that the political idealogy that you favor has fed you that take and like a good soldier, you swallowed it w/o checking the ingredients first?

Love it when a political ideology can disregard truth when it fits their narrative and can declare something as undeniably true w/o bringing a shred of fact to back it up. How did you prove you aren't doing exactly the same thing you are accusing the other side of doing? You sound like Al Gore, but he burns 2000 gallons of jet fuel at a time as a matter of lifestyle, so you know he's full of crap. What makes you the real deal that he isn't? Gonna take a pretty safe guess you are more parrot than wise old owl.

Other than taxing and regulating the crap out of the things that transport us, keep us warm and cool, build everything we use in life, feed us, allow us to communicate, and is basically the core ingredient to our world economy, what is your plan to fix it? Is there one?

Have you actually read the Paris Climate Accord? Have you seen the staggering costs of it? You do know that things like that always cost many times the original projection? You do know that the projected result of all of that money and sacrifice is is just a very, very slight change in temp over the course of many years don't you? You also realize that projections like that tend to run greatly optimistic compared to actual results? Simply, when the government projects, they always understate the price-by a lot, and overstate the benefit-by a lot. Sounds like a great plan and totally worthy of giving up our way of life over.

Please share your vast knowledge of the subject. I wish to be enlightened too.

 

[Chauvinist Pig]

Love how a certain political ideology can disregard science when it fits their narrative but when it comes to man made climate change there is no disputing it, it’s all matter of fact.

Why, b/c you say so? Are you an environmental scientist specializing in climate change who has not only found irrefutable proof that the climate is doing something it has never done before, but proof that it is happening b/c of man? Can you pinpoint the cause and back it up with undeniable proof? Hint, undeniable means just that. You claim there is no disputing it. Have you successfully sorted through the myriad of studies, charts, opinions, agendas, facts, misinformation, credentials of researchers, potential bias, political goals, financial motives, etc., while sniffing out all the BS thrown out on both sides while successfully proving and disproving it with truth? If so, bring on your proof that cannot be disputed.

If not, is there any possibility that the political idealogy that you favor has fed you that take and like a good soldier, you swallowed it w/o checking the ingredients first?

Love it when a political ideology can disregard truth when it fits their narrative and can declare something as undeniably true w/o bringing a shred of fact to back it up. How did you prove you aren't doing exactly the same thing you are accusing the other side of doing? You sound like Al Gore, but he burns 2000 gallons of jet fuel at a time as a matter of lifestyle, so you know he's full of crap. What makes you the real deal that he isn't? Gonna take a pretty safe guess you are more parrot than wise old owl.

Other than taxing and regulating the crap out of the things that transport us, keep us warm and cool, build everything we use in life, feed us, allow us to communicate, and is basically the core ingredient to our world economy, what is your plan to fix it? Is there one?

Have you actually read the Paris Climate Accord? Have you seen the staggering costs of it? You do know that things like that always cost many times the original projection? You do know that the projected result of all of that money and sacrifice is is just a very, very slight change in temp over the course of many years don't you? You also realize that projections like that tend to run greatly optimistic compared to actual results? Simply, when the government projects, they always understate the price-by a lot, and overstate the benefit-by a lot. Sounds like a great plan and totally worthy of giving up our way of life over.

Please share your vast knowledge of the subject. I wish to be enlightened too.

Or you could just have asked him how many genders there are considering his angle of science. Especially considering his insensitive term “man made” because we are talking about science after all right?