Start

Done.

done

Alternative Fact used as they have been in the last 100+ days are propaganda. "My crowds were huge, biggest ever" Labeled an Alternative Fact. It was a lie, propaganda, call it what you will. I did not disagree with any hypotheses you put forth. I claimed that an Alternative Fact is a lie. You can not have an Alternative Fact. Facts are simple, they can be proven. An Alternative to a proven fact is a lie, canard, misdirection, propaganda. Put forth to persuade others to believe in a fiction for their political or financial gain.

Done

lk911 trickle down economics is another name for tax policy that favors the top 1% and unearned income over wage earners and wages. It cuts taxes dramatically on capital gains and the very wealthy. The theory is that the less you tax the top the more money will enter the economy and trickle down to everyone else through growth. It has yet to actually work.

At the risk of being accused of claiming final judgement I would point out that TallMike's indictment of the Climate Science predictions sound suspiciously similar to extraction industry's denial propaganda.

very easy, but a fun one

I'm not sure what you mean TallMike about wild predictions of natural disaster, but maybe you are just unaware of the disasters already happening to the barrier reef, disappearing icecaps, islands that will soon be under water, more frequent and extreme weather events - we've had more than our fair share down under. Coal is a massive polluter and clean coal is not clean, it's mildly less dirty. Fortunately most countries are realising there are alternatives that if invested in will be cheaper and cheaper the more they are used. Solar being an obvious one.

don't need to burn fossil fuels to make our base load power. Battery storage is coming in stream and developing rapidly to name but one.

Economically too we don't need coal or the other disaster that is fracking. You only have to look at your own Elon Musk to see how new industries can thrive on innovation and new technology while at the same time provide new jobs and wealth but not at the expense of the one thing we can't replace, our planet.

Protectionism too is a disaster, always has been and always will be. It's a false market and will only make those industries uncompetitive.

Start

ding

Tuco...I have trouble confusing the social system in which we operate and this "other worldly" system which some propose but does not exist. For example, is it reasonable to propose disincentives to production and wealth creation? Answer. No. The efforts of each of the 1,000 or so attempts across history, prior to on or about 1770, all? Failed. From the Inca's to the current failed state of NKorea. All failed to generate this social utopia which is perfectly balanced in terms of public provision of services and personal sustainability. Why is this? There are many reasons, the most fundamental utopian social construct does not exist is because...such a construct exists in no other realm in nature...not in the ocean, the rainforest, the vast plains of the Serengeti. It's UN-natural for a system to exist. Second, with this fact out of the way, then we must ask "what is the possibility that all humans will be satisfied with the same or even relatively same conditions of existence?". Answer: Zero. This is impossible not because we are all different which is certainly the case, but rather, it ALSO results in a hierarchy of differentiation in the populace. At first, the proletariat buys in by holding to the fantasy of utopia, this "hope" is alive until such time the true nature of (at least) a "two class" hierarchy is exposed and whatever system was put in place to "provide equal to all" crumbles. Every time. Which pretty much brings us to...today. There is only one system which has the capacity to deliver anything remotely close to this utopian fantasy which is widely conceived as a possible a social structure. Inside the only system where all parties can participate and do so with the chance the good fortunes of The Universe will smile on them as they trek along to their ultimate destiny, death. Most systems, as you have proposed, go against the manner of nature and human animals. I would caution against this practice. Humans optimize their life for the benefit of their self first, their close kin second and their neighbor third. They don't go top, what's good the longevity of the universe, then for the Sun and then the ozone layer, then the whales and then the beach and then my community...if you plan on creating a system I would suggest "flowing with at least a few consistencies in the "natural order" of the universe...

EZPZ 10.

done

go

dng

tuco, now that you have asserted the right of you and your friends to command words and phrases to your bidding and have them take on new meaning and to announce the time from which the transmogrification has taken effect, and your assertion has gone unchallenged, you have become invincible in debate and should henceforth be known as the Supreme Ruler of the Chatterbox.

Phil, you slightly misquoted me. Here's what I actually said: "There have also been many wildly inaccurate forecasts of climate disaster." Here are a few examples:

1970 prediction: Imminent onset of ice age caused by smokestack emissions and deforestation. (United Nations)

1970 prediction: Eleven degrees colder by year 2000, start of ice age. (University of California)

and then, only 19 years later, an opposite prediction:

1989: Entire nations to be wiped off face of earth by rising sea levels if global warming not reversed by year 2000. (United Nations Environment Program)

Here's another example, a real classic:

2005 prediction: Man-made global warming to cause rising sea levels, more and larger hurricanes, and food shortages. Predicted result: 50 million "climate refugees" by year 2010 in areas indicated on published map. Factually, predicted phenomena did not occur and population of all of the most threatened areas increased rather than decreased during the reference period. Map was removed from UNEP website and significance of failed forecast was downplayed by UNEP in early 2011. (United Nations Environment Program)

Phil, I am well aware of the recent disasters you mentioned. You described them as "already happening" as if they are something new. However, similar events and processes have happened throughout recorded history. The key questions are whether they are happening more now than in the past, on a worldwide basis, and if so, why. Both of those questions are difficult to research for many reasons including the huge physical scale and complexity of the phenomena and the need to study the more distant past as well as as the recent past and the present.

You might find it interesting to take a quick look (or longer if you choose) at an example of a report from a climate change panel. I just discovered how to access one. It happens to be from 2007 and is therefore out of date but I still found it fascinating to see how much information is packed into it. I did a search for ar4_syr-2.pdf and opened the item called Synthesis Report - IPCC. I expect the same method will work for you. Cheers.

Oh my, did someone say the sky is falling?

B.T.W. computer models are not science! That is the sum total of the evidence for global warming.