Nicker on 14/7/2023 at 15:56
Noooooo... Tocky! We are all godless communists up here and we eat babies. Stay away!
Tocky on 14/7/2023 at 20:14
Mmmmmmmmm... babies.
heywood on 14/7/2023 at 20:58
[video=youtube;EnRMj0buli4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnRMj0buli4[/video]
Nicker on 16/7/2023 at 06:12
Sorry, Tocky. It's not all baby back ribs here either.
Canada talks a good green game but Justin Trudeau thought he could buy favour in Alberta, by dropping over five-billion on a rusted out pipeline to ship bitumen from the TAR-SANDS (don't call them OIL-sands you turd eating, stubble jumping fucks). Justin, you brainless twat, there is not enough money in the whole world to redeem the name Trudeau in Oilberta.
And in my adopted province of British Columbia, our last Premier, John Horgan, wore the green proudly while shilling for fracked natural gas, the above mentioned pipeline and building an enormous hydroelectric damn in the middle of nowhere, on a fucking earthquake fault line. He retired last year and now he works for the coal industry. His old seat hadn't even been filled before he sold out - publicly.
Even if you vote for green government the crooks and vultures are always waiting.
I recommend the jalapeno-maple glaze, BTW.
uncadonego on 17/7/2023 at 08:46
Quote Posted by Nicker
Canada talks a good green game but Justin Trudeau thought he could buy favour in Alberta, by dropping over five-billion on a rusted out pipeline to ship bitumen from the TAR-SANDS (don't call them OIL-sands you turd eating, stubble jumping fucks).
Don't even call it that. Call it what it is. It is ripping out a Boreal forest the size of Florida, then planting little saplings. This destroys the environment, and will never grow back properly, ever.
National Geographic reports " this is the world's most destructive oil operation—and it's growing...", while that sell out Patrick Moore calls it: "the greatest environmental clean-up in history".
bjack on 18/7/2023 at 00:15
Drastic technology implementation may result in unexpected counter-intuitive results. Reverse feedback may come into play, or an unintended run away cool down.
I don't think mankind has the ability to pull off such a bone headed move yet, but with the power of AI in a few years or decades we may be able to destroy ourselves yet. Considering we're still alive in the nuke age, maybe cool heads will prevail in the attempt to cool the planet. There are just too many unknown variables,
I think it's a fools game to try to reverse climate change at this point; however, cleaning up after one's self (i.e CO2 scrubbers) is a good thing. We clean up our own contributions and hope for the best; meanwhile spending our time and resources on protecting our lives and nature as much as we can. I suggest a humble approach, not a satanic "know it all" one.
Now for the nutty idea :joke: : This global climate change is all on purpose. The Earth is getting warmer for the lizard people that come from a star east of Lyra, northwest from Pegasus. We are being prepped for slavery. We will all be eating crickets (actually, they are kind of tasty if fried and properly seasoned). Biden is actually a lizard himself. He loves to eat young children. Num Num Num. Blackface Trudeau will be caught in bed with a 4 year old German Sheppard male who identifies as a fish. Trump is actually the resurrected soul of Phyllis Diller. Never mind she died in 2012 and was contemporary with Trump. Logic doesn't matter here! There're pangolins that need to spread disease via bats and all of this is at stake! Rise up!
On a serious note, I think it is better to help people prepare for the coming storm, than to spend all energies in preventing a storm 150 years in the future. The future storm is important, yes... but, it is less important that the immediate issues for those effected in the meantime. Just my viewpoint. Other's have different views. We all need to agree on which is the most important. Unfortunately, that results in politics and so it goes to the trash heap.
heywood on 18/7/2023 at 00:29
Quote Posted by bjack
On a serious note, I think it is better to help people prepare for the coming storm, than to spend all energies in preventing a storm 150 years in the future. The future storm is important, yes... but, it is less important that the immediate issues for those effected in the meantime. Just my viewpoint. Other's have different views. We all need to agree on which is the most important. Unfortunately, that results in politics and so it goes to the trash heap.
I'm not sure which bush you're beating around. Policies that make the climate better suited for us in the long term also improve the situation in the short term, and vice-versa.
bjack on 18/7/2023 at 00:56
Examples please.
heywood on 18/7/2023 at 01:49
Examples of what? I literally don't know what you're talking about. What coming storm? What storm 150 years in the future?
bjack on 18/7/2023 at 02:16
I'm asking what you meant by your last sentence. Long term climate policies that also have improvements in the short term? Examples of these policies that have, or will have, positive impact short term, as well as the long?
