dfiant1 Wrote:Who said the government are making it up?
be careful when 'assuming' what people are saying.
The Government is using the FEAR element of the changing climate to raise revenue and justify their taxes when there is nothing that taxing people higher and higher amounts will help.
For example, we have a 'carbon tax' which the spin doctors tell us will remove that dastardly pollutant, CARBON, from our environment and reduce the impact that humans have on the environment.
The changes in our climate do follow NATURAL patterns which can only be measured in millenia's, just not the patterns that are being reported on in the news based on 300 or so years of weather information.
The real conspiracy theorists are the ones that were telling us in 1980 that the sea would rise so high that by the turn of the century the entire eastern seaboard of Australia would be dramatically changed that Sydney Harbour would no longer boost the Opera House, Botanic Gardens and Darling Harbour and now the fact is there is no desernable change in the sea level in the last 40 years.
This is without mention of the Research vessel that got trapped in a place where the ice had receeded so far that the spot they were in was 'miles' away from ice....but they got trapped in????
Well fuck me dead, that Ice shouldn't be there.
Understand why there are skeptics...you know, the people that you are kindly referring to as 'conspiracy theorists'?????
The carbon tax only applies to industries, and is used as an incentive to clean up their facilities. It HAS made a difference, just not much of one. carbon tax is not applied to the population at large.
Also, citing a prediction from 30 years ago isn't evidence that climate scientists don't know what they're talking about. No one uses data that is 30 years old for present day predictions. Meteorologists make wrong predictions every day, but we don't say that the weather they are using is not real data.
Finally, being miles from ice in the northern (or southern) oceans near the polar regions doesn't mean anything. Ice can come one extremely fast; as in only a few hours. It has nothing to do with climate change being real or not. If you're in the area where ice can form, and usually does, it WILL form if you stay long enough (like if you are in a research vessel spending long periods in the region).
it was terrible in Atlanta and they didn't get much more snow and ice than we did in Virginia. the first snow we had this winter I stayed home because there's a lot of people here that can't drive in the snow, the second time I couldn't because my little car couldn't make it through the 8-9'' we had, and the days I did go to work like MisterTinkles some dip shit was riding my bumper and I was tempted to slam on breaks.
it was the same last time they had snow there, the city was shut down for something like 1-3".
ceez Wrote:it was terrible in Atlanta and they didn't get much more snow and ice than we did in Virginia. the first snow we had this winter I stayed home because there's a lot of people here that can't drive in the snow, the second time I couldn't because my little car couldn't make it through the 8-9'' we had, and the days I did go to work like MisterTinkles some dip shit was riding my bumper and I was tempted to slam on breaks.
it was the same last time they had snow there, the city was shut down for something like 1-3".
Tailgating is an issue everywhere, but it always seems to be more prevalent in inclement weather when smart people drive to the conditions and the aggressive drivers want you to go faster.
ceez Wrote:it was terrible in Atlanta and they didn't get much more snow and ice than we did in Virginia. the first snow we had this winter I stayed home because there's a lot of people here that can't drive in the snow, the second time I couldn't because my little car couldn't make it through the 8-9'' we had, and the days I did go to work like MisterTinkles some dip shit was riding my bumper and I was tempted to slam on breaks.
it was the same last time they had snow there, the city was shut down for something like 1-3".
Well, IF....that is IF you know HOW to drive in bad weather and HOW to exactly maneuver and handle the vehicle you are in, you can deal with tailgaters.
Some years ago, we got an ice storm come out of nowhere. I was on my way out of town, but the highway was backed up. It was sunny and in the 80's. All of a sudden, it got dark, and it was like driving into a parallel universe. All of a sudden the ground and highway went from clean and dry to cold and wet, with 3 inches of ice covering EVERYTHING!!!
Anyway, I know how to drive in bad weather and how to maneuver what I drive.
I was driving to East Texas in the dark on a bad road. This asshole would NOT stay away from my car!!! I slowed down, HE slowed down. I sped up, HE sped up.
Finally, I got tired of it, and tapped my brakes hard to make my car "fishtail" a little bit. It was enough to scare the jackass away from my vehicle.
First rule of driving on snow and ice................let air out of your tires. You get more traction that way. Dont let your tires get below 20-30 psi though...depending on if you have a car or truck.
BYoNexus Wrote:How so? You expect me to look at your comment and think, "Oh Gee, I guess I'm wrong. someone said so without any reasoning behind his assertion."
I'm not sayign your wrong, but if you dont at least TRY to refute something like what I said, why should I take your word for it?
My apologies...I thought the reasoning was rather blatantly obvious...A POLITICIAN says it is only industries paying Carbon Tax and you take their word as truth.
i generally like to refute, but sometimes if refuting means laughing or even banging your head on a brick wall, seems like a waste of time, so please accept my apologies for not refuting or what ever.
dfiant1 Wrote:My apologies...I thought the reasoning was rather blatantly obvious...A POLITICIAN says it is only industries paying Carbon Tax and you take their word as truth.
i generally like to refute, but sometimes if refuting means laughing or even banging your head on a brick wall, seems like a waste of time, so please accept my apologies for not refuting or what ever.
I didnt get that information from a politician. I was stating how it is here, in my province, and generally so in the places in north america where a carbon tax is imposed. So how is that naive? Just because its levied against a whole lot else where you come from doesn't mean the same corrupt policies exist everywhere else... and you call ME naive?
Now who's assuming things?
Besides, its politicians who are pushing the idea that climate change ISNT real. It took a hurricane hitting New York City for people to begin to take the idea seriously (This has never happened in the city's history. Hurricanes would weaken before reaching that far north any previous time one would move up the coast).
But hey, I must be wrong, because in the Australia its not like that
Some examples:
"Maryland
In May 2010 Montgomery County, Maryland passed the nation's first county-level carbon tax. The new legislation calls for payments of $5 per ton of CO2 emitted from any stationary source emitting more than a million tons of carbon dioxide during a calendar year. There is only one source of emissions fitting the criteria laid out by the council, an 850 megawatt coal-fired power plant owned by Mirant Corporation."
"In May 2008, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, which covers nine counties in the San Francisco Bay Area, passed a carbon tax on businesses of 4.4 cents per ton of CO2."
"Quebec: The Canadian province of Quebec became the first in Canada to introduce a carbon tax. The tax was to be imposed on energy producers starting October 1, 2007, with revenue collected used for energy-efficiency programs including public transit."
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
Pisces
![[Image: tumblr_n60lwfr0nK1tvauwuo2_250.gif]](https://38.media.tumblr.com/d4f163772df4bb95fe71717adc7d7ca5/tumblr_n60lwfr0nK1tvauwuo2_250.gif)
