Random Politics & Religion #00

Yeah, don't fill in the blanks please. I don't go rank-in-file with how most conservatives view proper government spending, although it's safe to say I'm even further away from how liberals view it. Regardless, for once I'll say the rest of your post is fair. Things like drought preparedness aren't exactly what I had in mind when making my previous comments. I was trying to make the case that prevention should be a much higher spending priority than forecasting. Disagree with me or not, there is some logic to it.

Edit: That's it for me today, I'll catch up with y'all tomorrow.

I haven't been reading posts that you've addressed at other people, but I did go back and read them. Of the past 3 pages, the only thing I could find is that you said government should direct their research into products that could compete in a global market.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that a form of socialism? Investing into research is one thing, but producing products for sell on the market should be left to private entities.

As things stand now, the government is investing/providing grants for private entities to research new technology as well as support clean energy companies to create and sell their products on the market. The government does this for most/all energy companies across the board. I don't think many people will agree that it's the role of the government to compete with private industries.

Mmkay, you caught me in time, but forreals this is it for tonight. I'm not saying that the government should produce products for sale, I'm saying if they're going to funnel money into an industry anyway then it might as well be more utilized in the ways outlined in your last paragraph, since in my view that's the only way anything will ever change. This all goes back to my view that the industry hasn't made enough progress in that area, or has made progress in things that simply aren't very valuable. Maybe more money wouldn't do squat to change that though, I dunno. And I'm not saying that the government should screw over the oil companies in the process per se, either. Some industries just need a boost to get to the point where they can actually compete against the big dogs and then let capitalism take control from there.

Auto manufacturing plants are highly automated, Nissan's being one of the more automated of the domestic plants. Plants in other countries like Mexico are more labor oriented, but that's a different story because labor is cheaper.

Cutting out standard features like power windows only saves maybe a dollar per door in production cost (depending on volume obviously), so you can do the math of what it would take to cut thousands to make a car with modern technology competitive and viable. Nissan spent like 11 years developing the Leaf and will basically lose money on every one they sell for the first 5 years of it's production at projected sales numbers.

Like most companies, the only reason to build and sell a car like the Leaf or Prius is to allow them to sell more trucks and SUV's at a higher profit margin while still conforming to CAFE standards. Car companies don't really make money selling cars, they make money selling their name to dealerships and dealerships make money selling service and used cars.

Give them a reason to make modern cars and energy companies will have a reason to build the infrastructure for them.

2 years ago I may have given more credence to the global temperature rising, but I still was in doubt it was man made. Charts like the ones you think point straight to global warming all get their information from the same sources so why wouldn't 2-3-4 different groups gather the same conclusion. The question you should be asking is whether or not they are aware of the methodology behind the numbers. I highly doubt they are, and they surely are not gonna go into it because the data they have backs up what they believe.

Just for fun.
http://www.news4jax.com/weather/coldest-november-morning-in-38-years-across-usa/29817030

The real term for the phenomena is global climate change. Increased temperature variability is to be expected.

And your reasons for believing that are?

Ah, so you "want your cake and eat it to". You can't fear monger the public with "OMG the global temp has risen 1-2 degrees" then say, Increased temperature variability is to be expected. When it starts trending the other way.

Show me proof to the contrary, I've never found any.

So, you just assume that they are unaware of how data is gathered and require others to prove that you're wrong?

So basically, since you never found any reasons why it is true, that is enough for you to highly assert that it is false.

Since you said you've never found any, that suggests that you've actually gone to look before. Can you tell me what you've done so far to try and verify that those numbers are true?

The sources of the numbers are within the IPCC report from which the graphs came from. Direct links are provided in the link. :0

This does a reasonably decent job at explaining it.

The reason for the change is because there seem to be people that exist that can't comprehend the fact that what they experience locally is not indicative of global trends. I know it seems impossible to believe, but these people do exist.
I mean, it isn't as if someone mentioned how they had 30ish years of experience with weather in their area, so obviously data taken from the rest of the globe should match their expectations and experiences.

Farming? That's millenia old.
I guess we should close down all of our agricultural research stations.

Bad rationale is bad.

Said every climate scientist in the past 20 years.

LoL what research stations would those be? Also, I'm all for cutting all aid to every single farmer. It would level the playing field dramatically.

Or it's just a good thing that the government isn't a business, aside from that: I'd hardly call any of the advancements "minor" but yeah, that's kind of how technology improved until we have breakthroughs, but those don't happen too terribly often.

Except for a almost 2yr old article forgets to mention the mass expansion of ice. /sigh

Oh, kind of like they want to do with the keystone pipeline?

So what your saying is local trends only matter when they back up your side of the argument.

AO, just following up on a previous post. You claimed that the reason why you "highly" doubt those temperature numbers are true are because you've never found any information that shows those numbers are true. I assume that means you've previously spent some time looking into those numbers before. Can you tell me where you've looked?

The internet.

Edit:
Been looking at the info for those charts you posted, did you even read how the data was collected and how the "sparse data" was factored in? They have a wealth of data from around the globe from the 70s-90s before then it looks like a lot of guess work went into those charts. Are you willing to bet mass amounts of money and jobs that will be lost to new rules, regulations and taxes when a mere 1 and a half degree possible heat increase happened? Not to mention how the climate seems to be going the other way the past decade? Or will you continue to drink the Kool-aid and believe everything that's shown to you in a pretty chart?

Can you be a bit more specific?

what, the absolute vagueness of the internet isn't specific enough for you people?

Next you'll be asking for links and citations and ***... from credible sources with both dissenting and supporting opinions!

HOW DARE YOU!

Ah, so you read Mann et al 1999. What are your issues with their data collection?

Can you please give me the numbers and source you're referring to?

You mention the money angle a lot when discussing climate change research. Could you give those numbers you keep referring to, as well?

Since, frankly, I have no idea what you are referring to.

Edited to be more specific
Edit 2:
These are numbers I can find about clean tech. $77 billion from FY2008 to FY2013, 75% funded technology development through DOE.
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43227.pdf

This is one of the reasons I say you're scientific illiterate.

If you don't mind, this thread has been going for three pages without fecal material being thrown around. It would be nice if it would stay that way.

Jet can't help flinging poo, its in his nature.