(Lake Hartwell Specific)
65 messages
Updated 7/9/2024 4:45:25 PM
Lakes Online Forum
83,915 messages
Updated 9/7/2024 7:52:09 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,200 messages
Updated 8/23/2024 12:20:47 PM
(Lake Hartwell Specific)
3 messages
Updated 8/24/2016 3:16:17 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,171 messages
Updated 6/27/2024 7:05:46 AM
Lakes Online Forum
4,261 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,979 messages
Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
Subject: |
John Kennedy vs. Turk, Deputy Energy Department
|
Date:
|
5/5/2023 4:36:09 PM
|
I love John Kennedy from Louisana. During a hearing, he point blank asked John Turk, Deputy Energy Secretary how much it was going to cost the US to be Carbon Neutral by 2050. Turk dodged the question at first, but then admitted that it would be in trillions. Kenneday then asked him another point blank question about how much that will affect climate change.
It turns out that the US in only responsible for 13% of global emissions. Mr. Turk explained that it will take US leadership to get all countries cutting their carbon emissions, but even then the number or effect can't be reliably caculated. So the trilliions that our boy Joe wants to spend may or may not have any impact at all.
I have never believed that carbon emission would have any impact on climate change. I've always believed that climate change is part of a larger cycle in our Universe and there isn't anything we can do about it, except learn to cope.
I wish they were as worried about what we're doing to our oceans by dumping garbage in it.
|
Name: |
lakngulf
-
|
|
Subject: |
John Kennedy vs. Turk, Deputy Energy Department
|
Date:
|
5/5/2023 8:18:26 PM
|
I agree. We are but a spec in this universe
|
Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
Subject: |
John Kennedy vs. Turk, Deputy Energy Department
|
Date:
|
5/6/2023 11:54:00 AM
|
I watched that as well and he was as usual right on point and the witness was pathetic in his non-answer. The reason he refused is that the calculation has already been done, such as it is from an accuracy perspective. If the U.S. ceased to exist from a carbon emissions standpoint it would have almost no effect on global climates. Of course 300 million of us would die of starvation, exposure and disease which for these zealots is probably an added benefit.
What his refusal to answer also prevented was Sen Kennedy pointing out to him that while they drive us toward this path of utter self destruction India, China, Russia and most of Africa will more than pick up the slack in terms of emissions. They won't follow our lead, an utterly absurd idea, because they are not so decadent, stupid and economically/scientifically illiterate enough to think decarbonization makes an ounce of sense. They will just sit by in wonder, laughing at our insanity and moving on their merry way.
Some things are so stupid that only someone with an Ivy League education will think they make sense. Needless to say when you see things like this you better understand why I hold government "experts" in such low regard. Political appointees are not our best and brightest.....quite the opposite. And far too many scientists in the bureaucracy are likewise not terribly bright.....I deal with moron scientists from EPA every day and to put it mildly, most of them could not even remotely prosper in the private sector. They are eco-fascists with a degree.
|
Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
Subject: |
John Kennedy vs. Turk, Deputy Energy Department
|
Date:
|
5/6/2023 12:01:12 PM (updated 5/6/2023 12:02:52 PM)
|
(This cannot be viewed if you click "view entire thread")
|
Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
Subject: |
John Kennedy vs. Turk, Deputy Energy Department
|
Date:
|
5/6/2023 4:03:19 PM
|
Boy, I could add a whole new row or two to this cartoon that would make it even more accurate. The whole change from cooling/warming to change is the most disingenuous and cynical move ever. They were wrong about cooling, wrong about warming so they now use climate change so they can blame us for whatever the weather does. Not to mention a whole slew of 7/10/12 years to the end prognostications that never came true.....and never will.
If we can't survive a 1 to 3 degC change in global climates over 100 to 200 years we deserve to die off. Of course those of us that have a brain know that cold kills far more people than heat, additional CO2 in the atmosphere is a boon to agriculture as is longer growing seasons extending further north, there has been no increase in extreme weather events, the ice in the poles is not melting and the polar bears are doing just fine.........but otherwise, the sky is falling and we are all doomed. /sarc
|
|
|