Remember me
▼ Content

Best US presidential candidate


Best US presidential candidate01-03-2016 19:43
Madison
☆☆☆☆☆
(22)
Who has the best energy policy?

All republican candidates are more or less deniers of climate change, but there can still be substantial divergences on energy policy, which in fact will have a lot of influence on the climate, even if they don't admit it.

And Clinton vs. Sanders - who is the greenest?
01-03-2016 19:48
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4672)
Madison wrote:
Who has the best energy policy?

All republican candidates are more or less deniers of climate change, but there can still be substantial divergences on energy policy, which in fact will have a lot of influence on the climate, even if they don't admit it.

And Clinton vs. Sanders - who is the greenest?

I think a better question is who is the reddest?


The Parrot Killer
01-03-2016 20:00
Madison
☆☆☆☆☆
(22)
I think no one doubts that Sanders is the reddest. So the question still remains: Who is the greenest?
01-03-2016 21:51
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4672)
Madison wrote:
I think no one doubts that Sanders is the reddest. So the question still remains: Who is the greenest?


I suppose it depends on what they recently ate.

Define what you mean by 'green'.


The Parrot Killer
01-03-2016 21:54
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
Madison wrote:I think no one doubts that Sanders is the reddest. So the question still remains: Who is the greenest?

Gee, I wonder what your agenda is...hmmm...

All Republican candidates are "deniers"...hmmm

Who the best, Bernie or Hillary?

Bernie is red. Green is good.

[coy] Who's the green-est? [/coy]


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-03-2016 09:14
spot
★★★☆☆
(925)
Trump is the orangeist
02-03-2016 11:34
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
spot wrote:Trump is the orangeist

It looks like Trump will be the next Pres.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-03-2016 11:53
spot
★★★☆☆
(925)
That will be entertaning. Have you got the job of science adviser?
02-03-2016 16:14
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
spot wrote: That will be entertaning. Have you got the job of science adviser?

I'm requesting the position of IPCC Ambassador. Assuming I am selected, my press conference speech is already prepared:

"Ladies and gentlemen of the IPCC, I am honored to ascend to your ranks. I want you all to rest assured that I am committed to the core idea that we all share the same common bond, that we must ensure that we deliver our clear and solemn message of the importance of what we do. With the very "climate" of the planet hanging in the balance, its care has been entrusted to us. We are the planet's "first responders"; governments need to heed our siren and obey our instructions. Earth first! ...the other planets next.

I call for renewed imperative to saving humanity and ALL life on earth. I DEMAND regular "climate" summits in the form of weekly "climate" parliaments to legislate away the clear and present threat that strikes uncertainty and fear into every man, woman and child whose eyes befall the current state of our "climate." I insist we carry out our weekly enforcement efforts in Maui, Tahiti, Cancún, Buenos Aires, Rio de Janiero, Cartagena, the Bahamas, Barcelona, Dubai, Singapore and other key "sounding boards" for our message to echo.

To the American people, I hearby affirm to uphold your mandate. I hear your demands and I will act. You want me to take your concerns to the Hague and beyond. I will push for ever-expanded expense accounts so I can work for YOU. I promise to mingle with every influential person, all over the world and to press your "climate" concerns in the world's biggest ever globally-unifying kumbaya. I will be the new "climate" driver. I will be the new "climate" FORCING. I will be YOUR "climate" superhero, to the fullest extent of my travel budget.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist

Edited on 02-03-2016 16:17
02-03-2016 17:52
spot
★★★☆☆
(925)
IBdaMann wrote:
spot wrote: That will be entertaning. Have you got the job of science adviser?

I'm requesting the position of IPCC Ambassador. Assuming I am selected, my press conference speech is already prepared:

"Ladies and gentlemen of the IPCC, I am honored to ascend to your ranks. I want you all to rest assured that I am committed to the core idea that we all share the same common bond, that we must ensure that we deliver our clear and solemn message of the importance of what we do. With the very "climate" of the planet hanging in the balance, its care has been entrusted to us. We are the planet's "first responders"; governments need to heed our siren and obey our instructions. Earth first! ...the other planets next.

I call for renewed imperative to saving humanity and ALL life on earth. I DEMAND regular "climate" summits in the form of weekly "climate" parliaments to legislate away the clear and present threat that strikes uncertainty and fear into every man, woman and child whose eyes befall the current state of our "climate." I insist we carry out our weekly enforcement efforts in Maui, Tahiti, Cancún, Buenos Aires, Rio de Janiero, Cartagena, the Bahamas, Barcelona, Dubai, Singapore and other key "sounding boards" for our message to echo.

To the American people, I hearby affirm to uphold your mandate. I hear your demands and I will act. You want me to take your concerns to the Hague and beyond. I will push for ever-expanded expense accounts so I can work for YOU. I promise to mingle with every influential person, all over the world and to press your "climate" concerns in the world's biggest ever globally-unifying kumbaya. I will be the new "climate" driver. I will be the new "climate" FORCING. I will be YOUR "climate" superhero, to the fullest extent of my travel budget.


.


Nice; I bet its funnier in your head then it is written down.
02-03-2016 18:30
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
spot wrote:Nice; I bet its funnier in your head then it is written down.

Your envy is so transparent.

(what's your native language, btw?)


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-03-2016 23:11
spot
★★★☆☆
(925)
Smartphone
03-03-2016 01:21
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
spot wrote:Smartphone

The FORCING is strong within you, Luke.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-02-2017 02:10
Wake
★★★★★
(2944)
Madison wrote:
Who has the best energy policy?

All republican candidates are more or less deniers of climate change, but there can still be substantial divergences on energy policy, which in fact will have a lot of influence on the climate, even if they don't admit it.

And Clinton vs. Sanders - who is the greenest?


What do you suggest an energy policy even is? The Federal government has no business interfering with state's rights to create the energy they require.

Are you proposing that a 30% across the board reduction in the US will do ANYTHING but have entire industries move to China and produce exactly the same or more energy for their production?

We have ALREADY seen that happen. What happened to the auto industry? Do you think that anything more than a couple of percentage of heavy equipment is built here now?

California is now the most anti-business state in the union. The ONLY thing that is supporting this state beyond agriculture is the aircraft industry in southern California and the Silicon Valley group.

Intel has just announced the most advanced semiconductor production plant in the world - to be built in Chandler, AZ. This means the start of the END of the real semiconductor business in California.

Google, Facebook and Uber are non-productive business that require people to cooperate with them. Yahoo is dying and will soon be dead unless someone buys up their Email system.

Facebook cannot earn a living. Google is a search engine but the ONLY way that they can make money is people buying a place just like in the yellow pages.

ONE hacker can destroy Google with a virus that destroys those listings.

The aircraft industry is a left-over that DARES not allow ANY of their technology out. But with each year California pressuring them more and more it is only a very short time before they leave.

Do you think that the Federal government should limit the amount of energy that Intel uses in Chandler? Do you think that they would DARE to limit the energy used by mostly military aircraft companies?

So - why do you want a Federal energy policy? Do you wish the world's most advanced fighter aircraft to be made in China? Do you want the entire technological lead in electronics to be given to the Chinese?

Exactly where are you coming from?
16-02-2017 16:25
Wake
★★★★★
(2944)
Wake wrote:
Madison wrote:
Who has the best energy policy?

All republican candidates are more or less deniers of climate change, but there can still be substantial divergences on energy policy, which in fact will have a lot of influence on the climate, even if they don't admit it.

And Clinton vs. Sanders - who is the greenest?


What do you suggest an energy policy even is? The Federal government has no business interfering with state's rights to create the energy they require.

Are you proposing that a 30% across the board reduction in the US will do ANYTHING but have entire industries move to China and produce exactly the same or more energy for their production?

We have ALREADY seen that happen. What happened to the auto industry? Do you think that anything more than a couple of percentage of heavy equipment is built here now?

California is now the most anti-business state in the union. The ONLY thing that is supporting this state beyond agriculture is the aircraft industry in southern California and the Silicon Valley group.

Intel has just announced the most advanced semiconductor production plant in the world - to be built in Chandler, AZ. This means the start of the END of the real semiconductor business in California.

Google, Facebook and Uber are non-productive business that require people to cooperate with them. Yahoo is dying and will soon be dead unless someone buys up their Email system.

Facebook cannot earn a living. Google is a search engine but the ONLY way that they can make money is people buying a place just like in the yellow pages.

ONE hacker can destroy Google with a virus that destroys those listings.

The aircraft industry is a left-over that DARES not allow ANY of their technology out. But with each year California pressuring them more and more it is only a very short time before they leave.

Do you think that the Federal government should limit the amount of energy that Intel uses in Chandler? Do you think that they would DARE to limit the energy used by mostly military aircraft companies?

So - why do you want a Federal energy policy? Do you wish the world's most advanced fighter aircraft to be made in China? Do you want the entire technological lead in electronics to be given to the Chinese?

Exactly where are you coming from?


This is the liberals at a glance - hand out a ration of insulting BS when they haven't the vaguest clue what they're talking about.

Children who are happy to take anything to say that their elders are stupid and that they are smart. Too bad that their intelligence isn't even skin deep. Or at least those that know that and name themselves "surface detail".




Join the debate Best US presidential candidate:

Remember me

▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Will Arctic summers be ice-free in this century?

Yes

No

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact