Time to call it quits?

The United States: Salvageable or Too Far Gone?

  • Our nation is strong, we will get through this together and work past our differences.

    Votes: 10 55.6%
  • Our divisions are too deep, best to dissolve the Union peacefully while we still can.

    Votes: 8 44.4%

  • Total voters
    18

theotherwaldo

Well-known member
I've been watching these "climate scientists" build their case.
When you have to re-write the past to support your theories then your theories are wrong.
So far, they've tried to eliminate the Dust Bowl, The Little Ice Age, The Medieval Warming Period and a number of other inconvenient truths... .
By the way, I got my Bachelor's in teaching history... .
 

WrongHanded

Active member
I've been watching these "climate scientists" build their case.
When you have to re-write the past to support your theories then your theories are wrong.
So far, they've tried to eliminate the Dust Bowl, The Little Ice Age, The Medieval Warming Period and a number of other inconvenient truths... .
By the way, I got my Bachelor's in teaching history... .
If you're interested in discussing these things, meet me on the climate change thread.
 

Howland937

Active member
It is like gambling. If we might lose $500 on a roll of dice, that is one thing, but if we might lose our houses, that is another. The stakes of failing to respond to climate change are pretty big.
I had to re-read the rest of your post to remember it was about climate change. By the time I got to the bottom, I thought you were talking about our everlasting salvation.
 

NIGHTLORD40K

Active member
The West can sign all the pretty climate accords, hamstring their energy production industries, kill jobs, and force EVs and mass transit on people all they want. The CCP, and by extension the PRC, doesnt care and their smog-spewing manufactory hives will continue churning at full throttle.
 
if the entire population of the USA died tomorrow and the entire country was wiped from existence the effect on global CO2 emission would be a reduction of less than 15%
carbonemissions.PNG


and don't even get me started on "climate scientists" who say we're in a runaway global warming period. The temperature is anomalously LOW for the peak of a warming cycle and we're going into an ICE AGE

tempgraph.png

Temperature_Interglacials.gif
 

Magnum

Well-known member
Science does not speak of facts, only data, hypotheses, and theories.

The unmentioned factor is the stakes. If we are wrong about global warming one one side (if we err on the side of responding to something that is not there), we have made a few unnecessary accommodations, and maybe lose some jobs. If we fail to respond to something that is there, we face a major catastrophic ecological disaster with the potential for millions of deaths.

It is like gambling. If we might lose $500 on a roll of dice, that is one thing, but if we might lose our houses, that is another. The stakes of failing to respond to climate change are pretty big.
That's not a valid argument. "A few unnecessary accomodations" = a complete dismantling of our energy sources . the burden of proof is on those making the claims. We've been over all this on the other thread . solar and wind can't keep up with our energy demands by a long shot and where do you think they get the materials for such equipment ? What's the environmental impact of producing the equipment? Where does it go when it wears out? Ever seen a lithium mine? Flat out, there is no free lunch. I'd want some evidence that not biased of something that's changed, but it hasn't . at all.
 

WrongHanded

Active member
if the entire population of the USA died tomorrow and the entire country was wiped from existence the effect on global CO2 emission would be a reduction of less than 15%
View attachment 1140

and don't even get me started on "climate scientists" who say we're in a runaway global warming period. The temperature is anomalously LOW for the peak of a warming cycle and we're going into an ICE AGE

View attachment 1138
View attachment 1139

Oh jeez! How many thousands of years have Homo Sapiens existed? How many thousands of years have Homo Sapiens had any kind of society, language, written history, established agriculture, etc? You think that the global average temperature being higher over 100,000 years ago really has any relevance of the stability of the life on this planet today? What a thoughtless argument.

Take it to the climate change thread!
 

theotherwaldo

Well-known member
Well, when I stumbled upon the Mule Creek site on the Rogue River (active 12,000 to 10,000 years ago, according to the team from the University of Oregon research team), Homo Sapiens was pretty much what it is today and the environment was quite different than it is today. The sea level was nearly 60 feet lower, for example.
All those camp fires must have caused the temperature to rise... .
 

WrongHanded

Active member
Well, when I stumbled upon the Mule Creek site on the Rogue River (active 12,000 to 10,000 years ago, according to the team from the University of Oregon research team), Homo Sapiens was pretty much what it is today and the environment was quite different than it is today. The sea level was nearly 60 feet lower, for example.
All those camp fires must have caused the temperature to rise... .
Again, if you want to discuss it, I'll happily join you on the climate change thread.
 

Magnum

Well-known member
What? You mean climate change? Your kids, or their kids, and their kids, will find out.
I like you a lot, I think you're an intelligent and reasonable person. On this matter, we're going to have to agree to disagree. No bad feelings or insults to each others brain power , we just see the world in different ways. We reached an impasse on the other thread and we'll certainly reach the same here.

If anyone wants to see my full stance on the matter, I put it out as thoroughly as I'm capable of doing on the other thread.
 

Selena

Member
This is ridiculous. There will not be another Civil War, there will be no dissolution of the Union. Where would the boundaries and battle lines be? What would be the sides? And what would be the reason for it?
They could always use Lincoln's method and any "sympathizers" within the stated boundaries be "deported."
 
Top