Remember me
▼ Content

The IPCC in 2013



Page 1 of 3123>
The IPCC in 201312-05-2019 17:56
James___
★★★★☆
(1349)
I'll be posting some links to this later on. In 2013 the IPCC had issued 2 reports. One stated that there was at that time a 15 year global warming pause.
They also issued another report stating that the stratospheric ozone layer had about stop being depleted by CFCs.
Then when the media saw the initial report, it obviously made the news. Then the IPCC, other scientists in that group said that they were preparing a new report which would make dire predictions.
During one press briefing, the head of the IPCC would not answer certain questions. Instead certain members of the IPCC seemed to take over that group.
Just like in this forum, Isn't and IBNotDaMann will say allowing for science and/or government automatically makes you a Marx supporter while they know who Marx was and was about.
They routinely claim that socialism is communism. They're not the same thing but they do appeal to people's emotions rather than asking them to consider something.
Isn't it funny? The leaders of the IPCC might be like Isn't and IBNotDaMann, they want to be important.
12-05-2019 19:10
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3851)
James___ wrote:Then the IPCC, other scientists in that group said that they were preparing a new report which would make dire predictions.

Can you provide the forum five examples of predictions made by the IPCC, exactly as written in IPCC reports?


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
12-05-2019 19:13
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
socialism isn't communism, but it usually leads to it.
12-05-2019 19:38
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(807)
5 dire warnings, should be simple...

Ice melting
Oceans rising
Increase in frequency and intensity of catastrophic weather
Food crop failures
Extinction of important species, like polar bears and penguins

Could probably list another five, if I spent more than a minute thinking about it...
12-05-2019 19:45
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3851)
HarveyH55 wrote:
5 dire warnings, should be simple...

Ice melting
Oceans rising
Increase in frequency and intensity of catastrophic weather
Food crop failures
Extinction of important species, like polar bears and penguins

Could probably list another five, if I spent more than a minute thinking about it...

Thanks, but I want the exact wording of the "predictions" from the IPCC reports. My point is that the IPCC never actually makes any predictions. All they do is hype fear and panic over what they claim is possible.


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
12-05-2019 19:57
James___
★★★★☆
(1349)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:Then the IPCC, other scientists in that group said that they were preparing a new report which would make dire predictions.

Can you provide the forum five examples of predictions made by the IPCC, exactly as written in IPCC reports?



That's not my concern although I see that Harvey listed them. It's easy enough to do. I find it strange how your sense of self is dependent on the IPCC. Either that or saying Marx.
What I'm concerned about is if something is being missed that we might need to know. I think many things haven't been considered yet it seems that you limit things to "the IPCC said" or Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
It's possible that improved monitoring has allowed for a better understanding of the heat content in our oceans and our atmosphere. Yet you know that with me I wouldn't be surprised if in another 100 years or so our planet starts cooling and would eventually go into another Little Ice Age.

At dehammer, Scandinavian countries are socialist but have little interest in communism. Americans also hate those countries because they have free healthcare as good or better than that in the US at a much lower cost. Their healthcare systems like Canada's and England's is not specifically a for profit business enterprise. In the US, managing the profits of the healthcare industry might account for 25% of the cost of healthcare.
The added cost of healthcare in the US makes American made products more expensive so it's more difficult for the US to export it's goods while a communist country like China is it's #1 trading partner.
Year to date, an $80 Billion trade deficit with China.The trade deficit with Mexico and Canada, both Democracies, $24 Billion. People in Mexico and Canada are better paid as well limiting the deficit in lost man hours of work in the US.
https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/top/top1903yr.html
12-05-2019 20:21
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
It isn't that we hate them for things like that. The thing you don't know about those countries is they often come to America for the newest treatments and medicine. Socialism doesn't reward research into new medicine and methods of treatment. Capitalism does.
12-05-2019 20:32
James___
★★★★☆
(1349)
dehammer wrote:
It isn't that we hate them for things like that. The thing you don't know about those countries is they often come to America for the newest treatments and medicine. Socialism doesn't reward research into new medicine and methods of treatment. Capitalism does.



That's funny. That's a good reason to hate people? I don't know of any such people myself (that have received Healthcare in the US). Norway has a population of 5.28 million and Sweden has 10 million. Maybe it's because they're more interested in the quality of their lives?
What Americans like that comes from socialist countries:
https://www.koenigsegg.com
and
https://www.lamborghini.com/en-en

Some interesting thoughts on what might be considered socialism. Slovenia where Melania Trump, First lady of the US is from might not be so different from Nordic countries.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/08/sorry-bernie-bros-but-nordic-countries-are-not-socialist/#688b0efd74ad
And from Slovenia itself (I think);
http://www.sloveniatimes.com/slovenia-25-years-of-independence-an-economic-perspective

Slovenia's healthcare system might be like the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) but is paid almost entirely by employer contributions. So if it's free to people then it's socialism, right?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27467813
Edited on 12-05-2019 21:01
12-05-2019 21:17
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3851)
James___ wrote:Then the IPCC, other scientists in that group said that they were preparing a new report which would make dire predictions.


IBdaMann wrote:Can you provide the forum five examples of predictions made by the IPCC, exactly as written in IPCC reports?


James___ wrote:That's not my concern although I see that Harvey listed them. It's easy enough to do.


I knew you would avoid it. As you mention, it should be easy to do, yet you flee from doing so. I think we all know why. You aren't actually trying to take a scientific approach, i.e. predict nature and learn what is "actually going on" but rather you are looking for someone to tell you what to believe and the more uncertainty, fear and hype the better.

This becomes clearly revealed in the light of the IPCC never actually making any predictions, yet you stand mesmerized by the religious dogma babbled by the IPCC. Hmmm. The problem seems clearly on your end.


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
12-05-2019 21:33
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3851)
James___ wrote:Yet you know that with me I wouldn't be surprised if in another 100 years or so our planet starts cooling and would eventually go into another Little Ice Age.

Would you be surprised to learn that the earth is cooling right now? ... or would you summarily reject the idea for religious reasons?

James___ wrote: At dehammer, Scandinavian countries are socialist but have little interest in communism.

Says the gullible economics illiterate Marxist.
https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/denmark-tells-bernie-sanders-to-stop-calling-it-socialist/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/08/sorry-bernie-bros-but-nordic-countries-are-not-socialist/#25fa3b7874ad
https://reason.com/2019/01/02/sweden-isnt-socialist/
https://fee.org/articles/is-norway-a-role-model-for-democratic-socialism/
https://fee.org/articles/the-myth-of-scandinavian-socialism/


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
12-05-2019 21:38
James___
★★★★☆
(1349)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:Then the IPCC, other scientists in that group said that they were preparing a new report which would make dire predictions.


IBdaMann wrote:Can you provide the forum five examples of predictions made by the IPCC, exactly as written in IPCC reports?


James___ wrote:That's not my concern although I see that Harvey listed them. It's easy enough to do.


I knew you would avoid it. As you mention, it should be easy to do, yet you flee from doing so. I think we all know why. You aren't actually trying to take a scientific approach, i.e. predict nature and learn what is "actually going on" but rather you are looking for someone to tell you what to believe and the more uncertainty, fear and hype the better.

This becomes clearly revealed in the light of the IPCC never actually making any predictions, yet you stand mesmerized by the religious dogma babbled by the IPCC. Hmmm. The problem seems clearly on your end.


You aren't actually trying to take a scientific approach, i.e. predict nature and learn what is "actually going on" but rather you are looking for someone to tell you what to believe


And yet here you are telling me as well as everyone else what to believe because you know what's going on. Very clever. very clever indeed. Accuse me of not doing something for specific reasons (not knowing what's going on, ie., I stand mesmerized) while basing your arguments on your stipulations (stating what's going on, ie., I'm looking for someone to tell me what to believe). You should've been a lawyer.
Of course if I do what you say, then I must be communist for knowing what the IPCC is saying.


edited to remove don't from before do at the end. Forgot to delete the word after I rewrote my post

Edited on 12-05-2019 21:40
12-05-2019 21:55
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3851)
James___ wrote: And yet here you are telling me as well as everyone else what to believe because you know what's going on.

Really? What would that be? I have no beliefs, much less any beliefs about undefined things "going on."

You are the one who is preaching WACKY violation of physics as religious dogma. You are the one who is disappointed at the IPCC being summarily dismissed as a fanatical religious organization. You are the one who fears his WACKY religious beliefs being put in jeopardy and his precious faith being threatened. I have no religious beliefs to jeopardize nor any faith to threaten.

All I have is science ... and math ... and logic ... and economics. I actually have some other knowledge too.

James___ wrote: Very clever. very clever indeed. Accuse me of not doing something for specific reasons (not knowing what's going on, ie., I stand mesmerized) while basing your arguments on your stipulations (stating what's going on, ie., I'm looking for someone to tell me what to believe). You should've been a lawyer.

In the time that you took to weasel this paragraph, you could have just copy-pasted five "predictions" from IPCC reports. Instead you exerted the effort to crank out this smokescreen paragraph to distract. The last thing anyone can expect from you is to post revelations of your gullibility.

But now that we have your gullibility firmly established, thanks to your help, I think we can close this point out.


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
13-05-2019 21:48
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(807)
The IPCC reports aren't that easy, they don't let just download a single file, it's broken down into chapters. Lot of pages of BS and HYPE, dozen of citations, that really don't have a whole lot to do with the topics they include with, aggravating garbage to sift through. I never read a whole report, did little more the skim through some of the more interesting chapters, like 'Revelations' in the other bible. I didn't bother with the citations after about 7-8 bogus links. It's really mind-numbing to read much of it. But then again, I have sort of a short attention span, if my mind start to wander too much, probably was worth reading in the first place...
13-05-2019 22:34
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
James___ wrote:
I'll be posting some links to this later on. In 2013 the IPCC had issued 2 reports. One stated that there was at that time a 15 year global warming pause.

Since it's not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth, that's an argument from randU fallacy.
James___ wrote:
They also issued another report stating that the stratospheric ozone layer had about stop being depleted by CFCs.

CFC's don't affect ozone. You can put them both in a tank and nothing happens. Ozone is not being depleted. There is still oxygen in the air and there is still sunlight.
James___ wrote:
Then when the media saw the initial report, it obviously made the news. Then the IPCC, other scientists in that group said that they were preparing a new report which would make dire predictions.

But no math formula to make those predictions with.
James___ wrote:
During one press briefing, the head of the IPCC would not answer certain questions. Instead certain members of the IPCC seemed to take over that group.

I could care less.
James___ wrote:
Just like in this forum, Isn't and IBNotDaMann will say allowing for science

Inversion fallacy. The IPCC denies science and mathematics, just like you do.
James___ wrote:
and/or government automatically makes you a Marx supporter while they know who Marx was and was about.

No one is arguing for an anarchy. Pay attention.
James___ wrote:
They routinely claim that socialism is communism.

Communism is socialism, but socialism is not communism. Socialism also encompasses fascism.
James___ wrote:
They're not the same thing but they do appeal to people's emotions rather than asking them to consider something.

No, they are what they are.
James___ wrote:
Isn't it funny? The leaders of the IPCC might be like Isn't and IBNotDaMann, they want to be important.

No, we want to stop fascism and socialism. The Church of Global Warming stems from the Church of Karl Marx.


The Parrot Killer
13-05-2019 22:35
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
dehammer wrote:
socialism isn't communism, but it usually leads to it.


The goal of socialism is communism. It may pass through fascism on the way.


The Parrot Killer
13-05-2019 22:39
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
HarveyH55 wrote:
5 dire warnings, should be simple...
Not so simple. You need a closed functional system, like mathematics to predict.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Ice melting
Math formula? Show your work please.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Oceans rising
Math formula? Show your work please.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Increase in frequency and intensity of catastrophic weather
Math formula? Show your work please.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Food crop failures
Math formula? Show your work please.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Extinction of important species, like polar bears and penguins
Math formula? Show your work please? Also, define 'important species' and 'unimportant species'. Give examples of each and justify your examples.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Could probably list another five, if I spent more than a minute thinking about it...

Bet you don't have any math formulas for those either.


The Parrot Killer
13-05-2019 23:12
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
Into the Night wrote:
dehammer wrote:
socialism isn't communism, but it usually leads to it.


The goal of socialism is communism. It may pass through fascism on the way.
The road to communism passes through socialism. You cant have communism unless you take control over the work force and that requires socialism.
13-05-2019 23:15
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:Then the IPCC, other scientists in that group said that they were preparing a new report which would make dire predictions.

Can you provide the forum five examples of predictions made by the IPCC, exactly as written in IPCC reports?



That's not my concern although I see that Harvey listed them. It's easy enough to do. I find it strange how your sense of self is dependent on the IPCC. Either that or saying Marx.

You are making shit up again.
James___ wrote:
What I'm concerned about is if something is being missed that we might need to know. I think many things haven't been considered yet it seems that you limit things to "the IPCC said" or Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
You have already been corrected numerous times. There is no Stefan-Boltzmann constant. The Boltzmann constant is not the Stefan-Boltzmann equation. You are also apparently not paying attention to any discussions on this forum.
James___ wrote:
It's possible that improved monitoring has allowed for a better understanding of the heat content in our oceans and our atmosphere.
Heat is not contained in anything. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the oceans, the atmosphere, or of Earth.
James___ wrote:
Yet you know that with me I wouldn't be surprised if in another 100 years or so our planet starts cooling and would eventually go into another Little Ice Age.

Enjoy your unfounded fear. Another ice age isn't due for over a thousand years from now.
James___ wrote:
At dehammer, Scandinavian countries are socialist but have little interest in communism.

Norway is an oligarchy. It is currently leaning conservative and supports capitalism.

Sweden is an oligarchy. It is currently leaning more liberal and supports socialism.

Finland is a republic. It has a constitution. Various government services enumerated in that constitution are authorized by the people of Finland, and are therefore not socialism.

Currently, Sweden has many economic woes, caused by their liberal government. Norway is doing much better, since even though they are an oligarchy, it is currently leaning conservative and staying out of trying to control the economy. Finland is doing very well, since capitalism is the natural economy under constitutional law.

James___ wrote:
Americans also hate those countries because they have free healthcare as good or better than that in the US at a much lower cost.
I like all of them. The Swedes are nice people. It's too bad the government gets in their way. None of their healthcare is as good as the U.S.
James___ wrote:
Their healthcare systems like Canada's and England's is not specifically a for profit business enterprise.

Correct. They are fascist elements in each of these nations. They are both run by an oligarchy.
James___ wrote:
In the US, managing the profits of the healthcare industry might account for 25% of the cost of healthcare.

Argument from randU fallacy. You are making up numbers again.
James___ wrote:
The added cost of healthcare in the US makes American made products more expensive so it's more difficult for the US to export it's goods while a communist country like China is it's #1 trading partner.

No, the cost of liberal laws, taxes, organized crime (including many trade unions), etc. is what makes U.S. goods so expensive. The situation is improving under Trump, but we have a LONG way to go.
James___ wrote:
Year to date, an $80 Billion trade deficit with China.The trade deficit with Mexico and Canada, both Democracies, $24 Billion.
There are no democracies currently existing on Earth. Canada is an oligarchy. Mexico is a federated republic (it has constitutions defining each layer of government).

Democracies have no constitution, and government is by direct vote (or 'mob rule'). This unstable form of government usually dissolves very quickly into one faction becoming the oligarchy or even dictatorship of the nation.

James___ wrote:
People in Mexico and Canada are better paid as well
No, they aren't. You are now locked in paradox. The U.S.worker is paid better. You even started your complaint based on that.
James___ wrote:
limiting the deficit in lost man hours of work in the US.

The Deficit has nothing to do with worker's wages.


The Parrot Killer
13-05-2019 23:17
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
dehammer wrote:
It isn't that we hate them for things like that. The thing you don't know about those countries is they often come to America for the newest treatments and medicine. Socialism doesn't reward research into new medicine and methods of treatment. Capitalism does.


Quite right. They often can't get the treatment they need from their 'free' system (which requires heavy taxes to implement), so they come to the United States for their treatment if they can afford it. They also pay for their own treatment. They have no insurance. Yet they are willing to pay for it anyway.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 13-05-2019 23:18
13-05-2019 23:21
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
James___ wrote:
dehammer wrote:
It isn't that we hate them for things like that. The thing you don't know about those countries is they often come to America for the newest treatments and medicine. Socialism doesn't reward research into new medicine and methods of treatment. Capitalism does.



That's funny. That's a good reason to hate people? I don't know of any such people myself (that have received Healthcare in the US).


Argument of ignorance fallacy.


The Parrot Killer
14-05-2019 05:11
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(807)
The reason people ditch their 'free' healthcare in some countries, and come to America, is the long waiting period, in some cases, or it's an elective procedure (not deemed necessary). Americans also go to other countries for medical treatment as well, it's not always about cost, but the care and treatment options available.

The thing that bothered me about ObamaCare, was that health insurance, isn't health care. Maybe it brought health insurance to more people, but it didn't help much for most, since it drove up prices on everything else. I got a higher premium, less coverage, twice the deductible, and a $10 higher co-pay. Most people could have gotten affordable insurance through their employers, if they bother to get a job, that offer those benefits. I've had health insurance with pretty much every job I had as an adult, cheap and reasonable. None of those jobs required more than high school equivalency, and likely never check anyway.

ObamaCare just increased the out of pocket costs, for those who already had insurance, everybody else needed the government subsidy. Left a loft people paying for insurance, the still couldn't afford to use. Doctors and hospitals could charge more, since they were going to get paid, one way or another, even if the patient skipped out on the deductible and co-pays, they still got the bulk of the bill paid. A band-Aid cost pennies, doesn't require a medical degree to apply, even a child can do it. Why does the ER charge $12, for the same thing? That's $12 just for the band-aid, not all the other charges for being tended to.
14-05-2019 15:52
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3851)
HarveyH55 wrote: The reason people ditch their 'free' healthcare in some countries, and come to America, is the long waiting period, in some cases, or it's an elective procedure (not deemed necessary).


This is an excellent starting point for a discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2jijuj1ysw


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
14-05-2019 19:04
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
IBdaMann wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote: The reason people ditch their 'free' healthcare in some countries, and come to America, is the long waiting period, in some cases, or it's an elective procedure (not deemed necessary).


This is an excellent starting point for a discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2jijuj1ysw


Pretty much says it all.


The Parrot Killer
18-05-2019 13:02
paramount99
☆☆☆☆☆
(39)
dehammer wrote:
socialism isn't communism, but it usually leads to it.


YES!!!
18-05-2019 13:09
paramount99
☆☆☆☆☆
(39)
HarveyH55 wrote:
5 dire warnings, should be simple...

Ice melting
Oceans rising
Increase in frequency and intensity of catastrophic weather
Food crop failures
Extinction of important species, like polar bears and penguins

Could probably list another five, if I spent more than a minute thinking about it...


I wonder how many hundreds of times these points have occurred outside human influence?!? Too many to even contemplate, I would suggest. I thought I saw a report recently (it was a real scientist (female) who was calling out hoaxers) that said polar bear numbers have rocketed exponentially since 1850: from about 5000 to a wondrous 35,000 today! It must be something in their diet: Walrus' probably. You ask (Sir [LOL] ) David Attenborough about Walrus'... Or ask the WWF, or Netflix, or DONATE to both?!?
Do you see the picture here?
18-05-2019 13:18
paramount99
☆☆☆☆☆
(39)
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:Then the IPCC, other scientists in that group said that they were preparing a new report which would make dire predictions.

Can you provide the forum five examples of predictions made by the IPCC, exactly as written in IPCC reports?



That's not my concern although I see that Harvey listed them. It's easy enough to do. I find it strange how your sense of self is dependent on the IPCC. Either that or saying Marx.
What I'm concerned about is if something is being missed that we might need to know. I think many things haven't been considered yet it seems that you limit things to "the IPCC said" or Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
It's possible that improved monitoring has allowed for a better understanding of the heat content in our oceans and our atmosphere. Yet you know that with me I wouldn't be surprised if in another 100 years or so our planet starts cooling and would eventually go into another Little Ice Age.

At dehammer, Scandinavian countries are socialist but have little interest in communism. Americans also hate those countries because they have free healthcare as good or better than that in the US at a much lower cost. Their healthcare systems like Canada's and England's is not specifically a for profit business enterprise. In the US, managing the profits of the healthcare industry might account for 25% of the cost of healthcare.
The added cost of healthcare in the US makes American made products more expensive so it's more difficult for the US to export it's goods while a communist country like China is it's #1 trading partner.
Year to date, an $80 Billion trade deficit with China.The trade deficit with Mexico and Canada, both Democracies, $24 Billion. People in Mexico and Canada are better paid as well limiting the deficit in lost man hours of work in the US.
https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/top/top1903yr.html


Don't countries like China and Russia (you know those communist counties) run mostly on a kind of secreted slave labour? Does North Korea come under the same remit?
18-05-2019 13:19
paramount99
☆☆☆☆☆
(39)
dehammer wrote:
It isn't that we hate them for things like that. The thing you don't know about those countries is they often come to America for the newest treatments and medicine. Socialism doesn't reward research into new medicine and methods of treatment. Capitalism does.


Doesn't socialism FINALLY always end in slave labour?
18-05-2019 14:32
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
In theory, it does, but we do not live in theory. In reality, it always creates a slave state.
18-05-2019 19:37
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
paramount99 wrote:
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:Then the IPCC, other scientists in that group said that they were preparing a new report which would make dire predictions.

Can you provide the forum five examples of predictions made by the IPCC, exactly as written in IPCC reports?



That's not my concern although I see that Harvey listed them. It's easy enough to do. I find it strange how your sense of self is dependent on the IPCC. Either that or saying Marx.
What I'm concerned about is if something is being missed that we might need to know. I think many things haven't been considered yet it seems that you limit things to "the IPCC said" or Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
It's possible that improved monitoring has allowed for a better understanding of the heat content in our oceans and our atmosphere. Yet you know that with me I wouldn't be surprised if in another 100 years or so our planet starts cooling and would eventually go into another Little Ice Age.

At dehammer, Scandinavian countries are socialist but have little interest in communism. Americans also hate those countries because they have free healthcare as good or better than that in the US at a much lower cost. Their healthcare systems like Canada's and England's is not specifically a for profit business enterprise. In the US, managing the profits of the healthcare industry might account for 25% of the cost of healthcare.
The added cost of healthcare in the US makes American made products more expensive so it's more difficult for the US to export it's goods while a communist country like China is it's #1 trading partner.
Year to date, an $80 Billion trade deficit with China.The trade deficit with Mexico and Canada, both Democracies, $24 Billion. People in Mexico and Canada are better paid as well limiting the deficit in lost man hours of work in the US.
https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/top/top1903yr.html


Don't countries like China and Russia (you know those communist counties) run mostly on a kind of secreted slave labour? Does North Korea come under the same remit?

The slave labor in North Korea is somewhat legendary to people in that part of the world. The conditions in North Korea are terrible. Basically, anyone that is not part of the military is slave labor. Even much of the military is treated badly.


The Parrot Killer
18-05-2019 19:38
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
paramount99 wrote:
dehammer wrote:
It isn't that we hate them for things like that. The thing you don't know about those countries is they often come to America for the newest treatments and medicine. Socialism doesn't reward research into new medicine and methods of treatment. Capitalism does.


Doesn't socialism FINALLY always end in slave labour?


Yes. With no pay, and no property, that's exactly what the population turns into.


The Parrot Killer
18-05-2019 19:38
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
dehammer wrote:
In theory, it does, but we do not live in theory. In reality, it always creates a slave state.


No. No theory. With no property and no pay, that is what the population turns into.


The Parrot Killer
18-05-2019 21:27
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
In theory, they get the pay for the "mutually owned" property. Some how it never quite works that way.
18-05-2019 21:42
James___
★★★★☆
(1349)
paramount99 wrote:
dehammer wrote:
It isn't that we hate them for things like that. The thing you don't know about those countries is they often come to America for the newest treatments and medicine. Socialism doesn't reward research into new medicine and methods of treatment. Capitalism does.


Doesn't socialism FINALLY always end in slave labour?



No. Most Americans don't know the difference between what is what when it comes to that. Norway is a socialist country. It also has a Free Market economy.
It has an excellent standard of living, free healthcare, etc.
In the US, possibly 25% of the cost of health care is because people managing the money need to get paid. Socialized health care systems do not have the overhead that the US healthcare system has because like Canada it's not a for profit business enterprise.
As a result, American goods cost more in the US and to export. The US has been trending towards becoming another Brazil. In Brazil, a capitalist country, about 5% of the people control about 95% of it's wealth. It has a lot of poverty.
On the other hand, Australia, which could be considered a socialist country doesn't have the income discrepancy that the US does. But if you were say President Trump, which would you prefer? To pay migrants low wages or pay Americans more? And as a capitalist can look for the cheapest labour.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/09/us/mar-a-lago-undocumented-workers.html
18-05-2019 22:04
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(807)
Health insurance, isn't health care. Insurance and lawsuits are a major factor in driving up health care costs. You pay a lot into insurance, vast majority of people seldom use. The insurance companies handle the health care bills, which even though the hospitals and doctors state a pretty high price, they negotiate that down quite a bit. Those higher prices are good business, since those without insurance or assistance, have to pay them, or eventually the part an insurance company would have. Malpractice suits are mostly ridiculous. People make mistakes, human nature, not one perfect person on the planet. Anytime you go in for medical treatment, it's normally because you can't fix it yourself, you fear it'll get worse, cripple or kill you. Think most people should be grateful to have survived, and suing over mistakes, or their scar is too big. It's a gamble, you live, you win, the lawyers get rich off your ordeal. Just too many people looking for big profits, too little regard for health and affordable services.
18-05-2019 22:47
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
dehammer wrote:
In theory, they get the pay for the "mutually owned" property. Some how it never quite works that way.


No, they get whatever property they own taken away from them. That's theft, not pay.
Using property owned by someone else is not pay.


The Parrot Killer
18-05-2019 22:50
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
In the theory of socialism, EVERYTHING is owned by EVERYONE. In reality, only the government owns anything and only a few people profit from it.
18-05-2019 22:55
James___
★★★★☆
(1349)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Health insurance, isn't health care. Insurance and lawsuits are a major factor in driving up health care costs. You pay a lot into insurance, vast majority of people seldom use. The insurance companies handle the health care bills, which even though the hospitals and doctors state a pretty high price, they negotiate that down quite a bit. Those higher prices are good business, since those without insurance or assistance, have to pay them, or eventually the part an insurance company would have. Malpractice suits are mostly ridiculous. People make mistakes, human nature, not one perfect person on the planet. Anytime you go in for medical treatment, it's normally because you can't fix it yourself, you fear it'll get worse, cripple or kill you. Think most people should be grateful to have survived, and suing over mistakes, or their scar is too big. It's a gamble, you live, you win, the lawyers get rich off your ordeal. Just too many people looking for big profits, too little regard for health and affordable services.


Harvey, I wasn't posting to you. You really have no idea what you're talking about. It seems that you were rambling on with random thoughts. You're not on medication are you? From your post that wouldn't be too surprising.
18-05-2019 22:57
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
James___ wrote:
paramount99 wrote:
dehammer wrote:
It isn't that we hate them for things like that. The thing you don't know about those countries is they often come to America for the newest treatments and medicine. Socialism doesn't reward research into new medicine and methods of treatment. Capitalism does.


Doesn't socialism FINALLY always end in slave labour?



No. Most Americans don't know the difference between what is what when it comes to that.

Yes it does. The population is converted to slave labor.
James___ wrote:
Norway is a socialist country. It also has a Free Market economy.
Norway is not a socialist country. It is a capitalist country. It even has a constitution. A free market economy IS capitalism.
James___ wrote:
It has an excellent standard of living, free healthcare, etc.
No healthcare is free, dude. Norwegians are taxed for it. Despite this, though, Norwegians do enjoy a good standard of living.
James___ wrote:
In the US, possibly 25% of the cost of health care is because people managing the money need to get paid. Socialized health care systems do not have the overhead that the US healthcare system has because like Canada it's not a for profit business enterprise.

Canada's 'healthcare' system is legendary it's so bad. They don't HAVE a functioning health care system. The 'free healthcare' is a heavy tax burden on Canadians as well.
James___ wrote:
As a result, American goods cost more in the US and to export.
No, they don't. Otherwise we wouldn't be exporting them. People won't buy the higher priced product when they can get it cheaper someplace else.
James___ wrote:
The US has been trending towards becoming another Brazil.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Our economy is considerably LARGER than Brazil!
James___ wrote:
In Brazil, a capitalist country, about 5% of the people control about 95% of it's wealth. It has a lot of poverty.
Mostly because only about 5% of the people have enough initiative and drive to create that wealth. Wealth is not a zero sum game. Capitalism CREATES wealth.
James___ wrote:
On the other hand, Australia, which could be considered a socialist country doesn't have the income discrepancy that the US does.
Argument from randU fallacy.
James___ wrote:
But if you were say President Trump, which would you prefer? To pay migrants low wages or pay Americans more? And as a capitalist can look for the cheapest labour.
...deleted Holy Link...

Markets have this thing called 'price discovery'. I suggest you read up on it.


The Parrot Killer
18-05-2019 23:01
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Health insurance, isn't health care.
Personally I find it amazing how many people can't seem to figure that out.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Insurance and lawsuits are a major factor in driving up health care costs.

Don't forget the hypochondriacs, the drug users, stupid risky behavior, government price controls in health care or in health care insurance, etc.


The Parrot Killer
18-05-2019 23:03
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8136)
dehammer wrote:
In the theory of socialism, EVERYTHING is owned by EVERYONE. In reality, only the government owns anything and only a few people profit from it.


It is not possible to have anything owned by everyone.

Public buildings are owned and operated by the government, not everyone. It matters not whether that public building is a factory, farm, or courthouse.

Not even the government profits with what they stole. They don't know how to run a dairy profitably, how to build a car profitably, or anything else profitably.

They just take, and take, and take, until there isn't anything to take anymore. Then they collapse.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 18-05-2019 23:06
Page 1 of 3123>





Join the debate The IPCC in 2013:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Early IPCC Reports908-07-2019 07:48
What makes IPCC scientists sure warmer air hundreds of millions of years ago due to7106-06-2019 23:39
How come they never let a Chinese be in IPCC or UN climate department?229-04-2019 01:38
What makes IPCC thinks CO2 is better than O2 at trapping heat?028-04-2019 15:40
Medieval warm period was way hotter than today's climate. 1 C hotter globally. So why IPCC do not ack019-04-2019 16:33
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact