Sea level rise

@medullah said
I see that the conversation has moved to power and efficiency.

Has anyone ever researched Telsler (free power, extrtemely clean energy) and ever asked the question "why hasn't that been made avilable already?"

There is no such thing as free power. Even a simple device to tap into an available energy source would cost money to build.

If you are talking about Tesla I'm not sure he really proposed free energy. There is a lot of misinformation out there. You might find this video interesting though.

YouTube

This guy claims President Trump's uncle John G Trump knew Tesla and Tesla called him an idiot. Then JG Trump was privy to many of Tesla's notes that were seized after Tesla's death and used the information. He claims this information can be accessed from the FBI's website.

@metal-brain said
Do you agree with me that a tax is not necessary and both parties should work together now to improve efficiency standards?

I have again and again already answered that but you just ignore all my posts.
Lets see if you yet AGAIN refuse to read my post;

1, As I already REPEATEDLY clearly implied, I agree that "both parties should work together now to improve efficiency standards".

2, I have NO personal opinion about whether we should have the tax. Therefore I do not agree with you that its "not necessary" just as much I wouldn't agree with you if you said it was "necessary", because I do not know whether tax would be part of the best strategy.

3, whether we have the tax will have no effect on 1. There is no logical contradiction in having BOTH "both parties should work together now to improve efficiency standards" and the "tax" at the same time. That doesn't imply I agree with the tax; It only implies that, if I did come to disagree with the tax, I wouldn't disagree with the tax for that specific 'reason' of yours, because that specific 'reason' of yours makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever.

@metal-brain said
There is no such thing as free power.

Agreed.
That doesn't imply we shouldn't have "extremely clean energy".

@humy said
I have again and again already answered that but you just ignore all my posts.
Lets see if you yet AGAIN refuse to read my post;

1, As I already REPEATEDLY clearly implied, I agree that "both parties should work together now to improve efficiency standards".

2, I have NO personal opinion about whether we should have the tax.

3, whether we have the tax will have no effect on 1.

Good. We at least agree on #1

Both parties are failing us all. We are wasting energy and they don't want to do much about it. There is little need to debate AGW when waste should be the issue.

@humy said
Agreed.
That doesn't imply we shouldn't have "extremely clean energy".

Agreed

@metal-brain said
Good. We at least agree on #1

Both parties are failing us all. We are wasting energy and they don't want to do much about it.

I generally agree so far because although some of them are trying to do something, its generally too-little-too-late, BUT;

There is little need to debate AGW when waste should be the issue.

False. They are BOTH important issues that should be debated. One being important doesn't make the other unimportant and there is no logical contradiction in debating BOTH issues.

@humy said
I generally agree so far because although some of them are trying to do something, its generally too-little-too-late, BUT;

There is little need to debate AGW when waste should be the issue.

False. They are BOTH important issues that should be debated. One being important doesn't make the other unimportant and there is no logical contradiction in debating BOTH issues.

Too late do do anything about it? Then what is the point of debate if you would rather do nothing? You will support a carbon tax after it is too late though. Oh, that's right. It is already too late. Why try at all?

That sums up your so called alarmist position. It is too late so don't do anything until a carbon tax is on the table. You secretly don't believe your own rhetoric. You are trying to rationalize doing nothing while telling everybody else they should panic. You are a hypocrite.

@metal-brain said
You are a liar.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/04/obama-carbon-taxes-france/

This refers to a speech. Obama's policies were focused on improving overall energy efficiency, not taxation. Many of those Obama-era policies you refer to (for example credits for energy efficient applicances) have be de funded or straight up reversed (e.g. lightbulbs and fuel efficient cars) in GOP-controlled government.

@wildgrass said
This refers to a speech. Obama's policies were focused on improving overall energy efficiency, not taxation. Many of those Obama-era policies you refer to (for example credits for energy efficient applicances) have be de funded or straight up reversed (e.g. lightbulbs and fuel efficient cars) in GOP-controlled government.

You said this:

"Democrats didn't even propose it for the entirety of the Obama administration"

Obama is a democrat and he proposed it. I proved you wrong.

@metal-brain said
Too late do do anything about it?

"Too late do do anything about it? " is gibberish.
Assuming you mean "Too late to do anything about it? ";
No. And that's clearly NOT what I just said and you know it.
You really love your straw mans don't you!

@humy said
"Too late do do anything about it? " is gibberish.
Assuming you mean "Too late to do anything about it? ";
No. And that's clearly NOT what I just said and you know it.
You really love your straw mans don't you!

You said " its generally too-little-too-late".

Clarify.

@metal-brain said
You said " its generally too-little-too-late".

Clarify.

I said;
"I generally agree so far because although some of them are trying to do something, its generally too-little-too-late," which clearly does NOT imply its "Too late do do anything about" global warming.
The operative words here are "so far" (what about later?) and "generally". Do you want me to explain to you the meaning of these words?

@humy said
I said;
"I generally agree so far because although some of them are trying to do something, its generally too-little-too-late," which clearly does NOT imply its "Too late do do anything about" global warming.
The operative words here are "so far" (what about later?) and "generally". Do you want me to explain to you the meaning of these words?

Too late for what? Be specific instead of evasive. People notice when you are evasive to avoid answering the question. You are not fooling anyone.

@metal-brain said
Too late for what?

It wasn't ME who first said "Too late for" but YOU. If you didn't know what it was "Too late for" because you didn't know what you were talking about, that's YOUR problem, not mine. Don't ask me to clarify YOUR words. Only ask me to clarify MY words.

@humy said
It wasn't ME who first said "Too late for" but YOU. If you didn't know what it was "Too late for" because you didn't know what you were talking about, that's YOUR problem, not mine. Don't ask me to clarify YOUR words. Only ask me to clarify MY words.

You said " its generally too-little-too-late".

Too late for what? Be specific.