Comment deleted by Site Moderator

What an obtuse comment. A perfect lemming.

------------

That is his goal though, there are those who are heavily against him no matter what he does they would still find reasons to hate. Same goes the other way of course with both parties, that's what politics has become more than ever

comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 9 hours, 12 minutes ago
There were dozens, Sir D.

I stopped watching after a short while, but tuned in and out intermittently.

Some in particular were the lies about oil and gas production, and energy exports. Both were first achieved under Obama, one even SEVEN years ago, yet he still keeps claiming he's responsible. It's just bizarrely comical.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

How is that even possible when Obama's put the shackles on many E&P and midstream companies domestically? No arctic drilling, no pipelines, etc.

His policy is why I couldn't move LPG out into West Coast and into eventually into the Asian Pacific market.

You were on the right path until you gave credit to Obama. It was during Bush's tenure when we had horizontal drilling and the whole 9 yards that came with it (uptick in production).

comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 7 hours, 16 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted about 3 hours ago
comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 1 minute ago
I read that he's demonstrably lied 8,000 times in two year as President. Just insane...

Eric Blair would be so proud hehehe
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Which is why it's hard to believe anything he says. Also that he purposefully obfuscates weather and climate change to further his fossil fuel agenda.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The weather/climate farce is possibly the most damaging deed he's done.

I've been thinking to write a "Dear Stretty" article in honour of the exasperating "debates" we had with him before he was banned. I think updating him on the Armageddon-like weather events heavily linked to MMCC in Oz this last summer would be beneficial.to those of a similar mind as him as sadly he isn't alone on here.

History will be look damningly upon Trump and other climate deniers in future.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do write the article.

Trump has taken credit for so much that had nothing to do with him, and lied about nearly everything else. Sadly some Americans just lap up his utter lies.

I’m looking forward to the movies ‘the reluctant president’ and ‘fire and fury’, possibly ‘national lampoons presidency’ when they are made post tenure.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Freedom seems to be an intelligent and educated poster, but it’s surprising how many Americans are hoodwinked by that orange idiot. I blame the media, the foxes of the world slanting news heavily one way. Thankfully we still have some impartial outlets here.

That the majority of people in the free developed world are still failing to recognise that climate change, habitat change and the wider deterioration of the environment is the single most important political issue facing all of us right now is completely stunning. I cannot wrap my head around it. People appear to be willfully blind to devastating developments we are seeing in report after report after report.

Unless we are to ignore a now near perfect consensus of scientific experts across disciplines, it is actually pretty clearly the single most important political issue that has ever faced humanity.

And it's still for many a topic to be de-prioritised or marginalised.

We've probably got a generation, at most, before we see, one way or another (because we're working on undermining the foundations of a number of pillars of the global ecosystem simultaneously) complete and catastrophic system failure.

And yet we are consuming more dirty energy every year. We are producing more plastic every year. We are producing more concrete every year. We are racking up more air miles every year. We are losing more and more woodland to deforestation. We are producing more motor vehicles every year...

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 32 minutes ago
That the majority of people in the free developed world are still failing to recognise that climate change, habitat change and the wider deterioration of the environment is the single most important political issue facing all of us right now is completely stunning. I cannot wrap my head around it. People appear to be willfully blind to devastating developments we are seeing in report after report after report.

Unless we are to ignore a now near perfect consensus of scientific experts across disciplines, it is actually pretty clearly the single most important political issue that has ever faced humanity.

And it's still for many a topic to be de-prioritised or marginalised.

We've probably got a generation, at most, before we see, one way or another (because we're working on undermining the foundations of a number of pillars of the global ecosystem simultaneously) complete and catastrophic system failure.

And yet we are consuming more dirty energy every year. We are producing more plastic every year. We are producing more concrete every year. We are racking up more air miles every year. We are losing more and more woodland to deforestation. We are producing more motor vehicles every year...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If this was caused by literally anything other than ourselves you know the whole of the human race would come together to fix it

comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 13 minutes ago
Rosso, I have an intellectual man-crush on you...

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Haha. I am scared though, Dave, I really am.

As much about the collective cognitive dissonance and the resulting inevitability of it all as about what is already happening in terms of the impact on the hundreds of thousands of species of life on the planet.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 13 minutes ago
Rosso, I have an intellectual man-crush on you...

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Haha. I am scared though, Dave, I really am.

As much about the collective cognitive dissonance and the resulting inevitability of it all as about what is already happening in terms of the impact on the hundreds of thousands of species of life on the planet.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So am I. I'm terrified.

You know why I make what are perceived as outlandish proposals about killing most of us, we need to go.

I'm actually genuinely a bit reticent about having children with my partner. They'll really suffer.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Completely fair POV. What's happening now, what we're doing and not doing is paving the way for future no child should suffer

Humans are just really poor at long term risk and consequence analysis. It's almost always a jam today approach. Our governments are elected on such short timescales that all environmental cans are just kicked down the road, as the economic pain isn't something governments want to inflict.

When we remove subsidies for solar and renewables whilst failing to acknowledge the environmental subsidy that fossil fuels are inherently getting as we turn a blind aye to the consequence costs that future generations need to pick up.

I didn't resent the recent industrial revolution in both India and China, they were just 100 years later and coal/gas was/is the energy that fuels it. The one positive at least in the case of China is that they moved so quickly that environmental pressure has become important to them and their populous.

The utterly ignorant dust belt coal driven stimulus is so short sighted it beggars belief.

comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 13 minutes ago
Rosso, I have an intellectual man-crush on you...

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Haha. I am scared though, Dave, I really am.

As much about the collective cognitive dissonance and the resulting inevitability of it all as about what is already happening in terms of the impact on the hundreds of thousands of species of life on the planet.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So am I. I'm terrified.

You know why I make what are perceived as outlandish proposals about killing most of us, we need to go.

I'm actually genuinely a bit reticent about having children with my partner. They'll really suffer.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Completely fair POV. What's happening now, what we're doing and not doing is paving the way for future no child should suffer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was running genetic algorithms last night over millions of generations to find a solution to a multi variable problem.

In theory we are at the technological cusp where conventional reproduction is outdated. We have crispr, three parent embryos, ovary/cell hollowing etc.

In theory we could run thousands of generations of very selective evolution iteratively in a test tube before implanting embroys in surrogates to cary to term.

If a country like China can overcome the moral and ethical barriers, we will have a very different class of human within 100 years. Which is sobering.

I had typed up a much much bigger comment but lost it, so the above is a short rehash.

Guessing it won't be long before most causes of an early death are eradicated either through pre birth genetic selection, vaccination or treatment.

Then the aging process will be paused and we're even more facked.

What's your view on human population over the next century or so?

To me at least, the current acceptance/theory (excuse for not looking at some sort of intervention) that it will all level off around 2100 is horribly flawed.

To get to that stage all developing nations will need to go through their own economic, technological and medical revolution which means they go from tiny carbon footprints to what we have in the developed world.

We have absolutely no idea how the planet will be able to handle that level of developed human population.

Well actually I can guess, there would be absolutely no hope.

comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 4 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 13 minutes ago
Rosso, I have an intellectual man-crush on you...

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Haha. I am scared though, Dave, I really am.

As much about the collective cognitive dissonance and the resulting inevitability of it all as about what is already happening in terms of the impact on the hundreds of thousands of species of life on the planet.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So am I. I'm terrified.

You know why I make what are perceived as outlandish proposals about killing most of us, we need to go.

I'm actually genuinely a bit reticent about having children with my partner. They'll really suffer.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
We've already decided against, Dave, largely on environmental grounds.

Dave

Get riding.

The world needs more wee Dave's and Rodneys.

FUN TRYIN TOO

Sorry for being coarse, but my alter ego is a dirty foul mouthed right wing bigot....so unlike me.

We have billions of loons in the world so a few wise ones could enhance the journey.

comment by Dave NotSo (U11711)
posted 16 hours, 23 minutes ago

Some in particular were the lies about oil and gas production, and energy exports. Both were first achieved under Obama, one even SEVEN years ago, yet he still keeps claiming he's responsible. It's just bizarrely comical.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

How is that even possible when Obama's put the shackles on many E&P and midstream companies domestically? No arctic drilling, no pipelines, etc.

His policy is why I couldn't move LPG out into West Coast and into eventually into the Asian Pacific market.

You were on the right path until you gave credit to Obama. It was during Bush's tenure when we had horizontal drilling and the whole 9 yards that came with it (uptick in production).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Freedom, I hope you know that I admire your intelligence and your points of view on many issues from our past chats in this thread. Keeping that in mind, please re-read my comment.

I'm NOT saying Obama was the greatest thing since sliced bread. I'm not even giving him sole credit for any of the policies relating to O&G. It is simply FACT that under Obama's terms as POTUS, the US became net exporters of energy and were the largest producers of O&G.

Irrespective of whether this was initiated by Bush and then carried on by Obama and Trump, Trump is FACTUALLY wrong about his grandiose claims that he is responsible.

Partisanship aside, Trump lied yet again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the kind words. My apologies if my tone comes off as a bit too strong.

Think where we are getting tangled up is in the details. During Obama's 8 years, we ramped up production numbers due to new technologies being implemented more commonly (first seen under Bush administration). Relating to my line of business, the statement seemed true since storage outlook and demand has been overwhelmingly positive.

While production is up, Obama's policy makes it hard to keep producing and selling it overseas. Trump took that shackle off which is why he's taking credit for it. In a sense, Trump did impose more favorable energy policies which is why I'm okay with what he said.

I know for a fact that refined products are exported in a much higher volume than ever before. Raw crude, maybe that's not true because why export crude when we have all the refineries here that can do the job and you get higher margins for refined products anyways.

If you can decipher my mumble jumbo, awesome. If not, my bad

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-oil-eia/in-major-shift-us-now-exports-more-oil-than-it-ships-in-idUSKBN1O51X7

Much shorter post, I noticed that I have to constantly remind people about Trump's persona. He speaks in absolutes 99% of the time so you just have to tone down the clanging and drumming of what he means to go, "oh okay. got it."

Feel like y'all are taking him far too literally.

Also to note on cleaner energy, the likes of ExxonMobil and Chevron and all the supermajors are still invested in clean energy, it's just not being report. It is just more economically feasible to drill oil right now.

Also to note, the democrats were appalling the other day at the SOTU. Especially the ones in white for solidarity or whatever. Don't cheer for a job well done on unemployments for minorities but cheer when he talks about how there's more women in congress now. What the hell is up with that.

Much shorter post, I noticed that I have to constantly remind people about Trump's persona. He speaks in absolutes 99% of the time so you just have to tone down the clanging and drumming of what he means to go, "oh okay. got it."

—

Can you reduce blatant lies to that?

This is a fascinating insight in regard to self interest and Trump's presidency:

https://twitter.com/JKCorden/status/1093634176845139968?s=09

comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 20 hours, 42 minutes ago
What's your view on human population over the next century or so?
----------------
I think the predicted rates will be there or there abouts. Though we could easily see a shock to population particularly due to some of the densities seen in the modern world. The antibiotic crisis may manifest as predicted. Again nuclear war and conventional war wouldn't be unthinkable as the creaks are starting to appear in the current capitalism model.

comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 20 hours, 42 minutes ago
What's your view on human population over the next century or so?
----------------
I think the predicted rates will be there or there abouts. Though we could easily see a shock to population particularly due to some of the densities seen in the modern world. The antibiotic crisis may manifest as predicted. Again nuclear war and conventional war wouldn't be unthinkable as the creaks are starting to appear in the current capitalism model.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We're already seeing increased and expanding tribal conflict due to regional fresh water shortages.

The inability of agricultural industry to function competitively and provide affordable food for domestic populations due to environmental changes (temperatures, water shortages and soil degradation primarily) in poorer parts of the world coupled with related and unpopular political decision making is already leading and will continue to lead at an increasing rate to further civil warfare.

There are all kinds of possible catastrophic scenarios relating to MMCC and super-pollution, including continental Colony Collapse Disorder (already seen on a small scale - as a mathematician with an interest in complex systems in interested in hearing your views on that Admin), desertification, irreversible temperature increases, worsening air quality (already responsible for 9 million deaths per year), collapse of fish stocks due to overfishing, habitat degradation and eventually catastrophic marine ecosystem failure.

Then you've got the risks associated with AI, biotechnology, nanotechnology, mineral resource exhaustion (that sees us run out of materials to construct cellphones and computers, for example), testing and deploying experimental technology/weaponry, and cyberattacks on defence or utilities networks.

And that's just the stuff that's entirely within our control.