Page #1
Pages: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 ...#215|
Started by #610414 [Ignore] 14,May,20 02:51
New Comment Rating: 3 Similar topics: 1.Food stuff 2.STUFF, JUST STUFF 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 4.A Forum Topic 5.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
Yeah, not too long ago I attempted to do something nice for a member and surprisingly, they copped a for shit attitude. I shouldn’t be surprised, the member comes across as a very bitter person. Oh well, that’s on them.
--------------------------------------- added after 60 seconds
Oh, BTW, thanks for your effort
That's how it's done. The voters need to get involved.
He's losing it and too far gone to realize it.
only registered users can see external links
People confuse money for real resources.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Responding to the lie that they keep telling you.
even the gerbiler richard geere left.
only registered users can see external links
uk can haver "her", although she claims to hate white men, she trys her damnest to look like 1.
only registered users can see external links
nothing is happening. Anecdotes are not strong evidence.
If the 99.9% that is staying is paying more taxes, it's worth it.
Raise those taxes, until 10% is going away. Show other countries that it's OK,
to follow the example, and they have nowhere to go.
only registered users can see external links
The heroism of war is a lie, it’s not the bravest who fight, but those who have no other choice. It’s not the noble who die, but those who are the least equipped to avoid death.
The glory of war is a mask put on to cover the despair of people without hope.
War is the manifestation of a society that has lost its meaning. Every life is disposable for a national or political ideal when the rich wage war. It is the poor that die, the sacrifice is always made by those who have the least to gain. War is sold to the public as a necessary evil, the powerful and the rich paint it as a moral Crusade, but the Crusaders are the poor and the disenfranchised.
Every war is a war of fear. It is purposely portrayed to the people as a kind of ecstasy.
If they believe in it, they will likely believe in anything that releases them from the responsibility of creating their own destiny. It’s true that men love their fear, it reconciles them with their cowardice and shame. Men get the war they deserve!
They remember what it's like to live under control of Russia.
Death is preferable. only registered users can see external links
13% of Ukraine’s total housing stock has been damaged or destroyed.
It's not Gaza. They have lots of potential to recover themselves.
"Despite wartime challenges, Ukrainian manufacturing shows notable recovery,
with output nearing $97 billion and value-added close to $20 billion.
Production is rebounding firmly, particularly in early 2025."
In Ukraine, doctors, lawyers and professors are fighting right besides shop assistants
and road builders. Who do you think Russia is sending to fight?
All I hear is propaganda and ignorance. Your media is destroying your brain.
Tell me what you think Russia will do, if Ukraine fully surrenders tomorrow.
Do you think they won't do something that they will call "denazification"?
If you know how they treat their own citizens, then what will that look like?
Would you want to put yourself at the mercy of your conquer, like that?
if you are alive, you can heal,recover and fight another day. if you are dead, you can't do shit,including defending your land or your family. just stop fighting. rest, russia can't afford to do alot right now, you can gather your men,your guns, and attack while they are asleep-drunk from their vodka they drank after they thought they won.
The US is the last country to need it, because you also have a bigger military
than the next ten countries combined, but you do have that too.
However, have you ever considered that people who are preparing for battle and war all the time, often end up finding it? Some people prefer preparing for peace.
A bard is traditionally a poet, musician, or storyteller who composes and performs songs, poems, or stories, often celebrating heroic deeds, history, or cultural traditions.
The term is most commonly associated with ancient Celtic cultures, but it has appeared
in other societies as well. Bards often played an important social role, preserving history and spreading stories orally.
Here's an example of a modern bard: only registered users can see external links
I have not seen any POTUS in my lifetime being weaker on Russia than Trump.
My god man, are you blind and deaf? Your guy is humiliated again and again.
European leaders want to be involved, just so Trump doesn't FUCK IT UP.
Every time they see your clown near Putin, they hold their breath thinking "Will we be at nuclear war after this or did he gift Ukraine to Russia, for a weapons deal with Russia?"
That's maybe a bit of an overstatement, but not by much.
only registered users can see external links
Elon Musk is the most hated famous person in the world.
only registered users can see external links
Good that you think about that. Don't forget it, when it's something that you like.
There was zero ad-crap when I opened the link. Maybe your PC is infected with adware.
Why Gallup Is Trusted:
- Scientific, transparent methodology: Gallup employs rigorous research methods—including probability-based random sampling, demographic weighting, and maintaining long-standing trend series—to ensure credible results across topics like politics, health, and well-being. Their Methodology Center emphasizes this commitment to quality data.
-Global reach: The Gallup World Poll covers over 150 countries, surveying approximately 1,000 people per country using in-person or telephone methods depending on coverage, allowing for internationally comparable data
- Low bias in reporting: Media Bias/Fact Check rates Gallup as “least biased” with “high credibility,” noting a 69% accuracy rating in political polling and only a slight right-leaning skew (~+0.6).
Elon's approval ratings would be even lower.
you can be sure that he would drop all the way down.
At this moment, he appears clean to most people.
He also doesn't contribute to your Christo-fascism,
but speaks out against it. Everyone except you likes that.
This is evidence that you are a much smaller group than you want to believe.
People obviously think that Elon is changing the world more for the worse,
than for the good. Technology can be positive, but fascism isn't, ever.
Don't overestimate Elon's positive effect. He promised the world affordable electric cars. He is not delivering, he keeps building too expensive cars. He could easily deliver what he promises, he is the wealthiest man in the world, but he keeps failing on his promises. People take that in consideration when they judge him.
Cheaper raw materials, probably somewhat. Why, though?
Cheaper technology? Not really, they just have lots of government investments.
Labor is only a tiny part of car manufacturing. Cars are mostly made by robots.
Elon could make cheaper electric cars, but he doesn't want to. He wants to be a trillionaire. He doesn't care about humanity or nature, he only cares about what makes him wealthy. He could once talk a good game, and he invested well, but now his mind is fucked, probably from all the drugs he's taking. Electric cars were a good investment. I told you many times that I liked him for making EV's cool. But, I also told you that EV's are not saving the world, they are just saving the car. If he is not delivering the cars that humanity needs, but keeps making the big, expensive ones, he's not doing anything positive. He's only taking lots of tax-dollars, to give rich people a good feeling for driving electric. That money could go to better goals.
I don't consider China 'good', but they are better than Elon.
They are actually investing in technology that humanity needs to survive.
ON EARTH, that is, while Elon is investing in humanity surviving on Mars.
He is wasting lots of money on that fantasy, while he takes money from people who need it. That's why I dislike him, besides being a fascist.
Of course, that's much to complicated for most people who answered the poll.
They just saw him turn X into a fascist conspiracy theorist's wet dream
and saw him do the Nazi salute. Those are good reasons to hate him.
However, in the US, they are fanatical monsters. Their politicians are horrible back-stabbing liars, who abuse their power to destroy public schooling, with the goal of getting to indoctrinate other people's children. They also show an amount of hate, towards everyone outside of their cults, that has equals in history of very frightening times. In my country they are humble, in the US, they are downright evil.
The problem is that they are forced, and then get told that THEY sinned.
First they teach them everything related to sex is a sin, and then they r@pe them.
That has fucked up many kids, who suffer from it their whole lives.
However, some have said that the intolerant religion did more damage than the r@pe.
Don't confuse the feelings of 14 y.o. boys, with those of dirty old men, like us.
Many of them were much younger, by the way. Some were girls too.
Sex is fun for consenting adults. Kids might start experimenting before they are adults, but that's no reason for adults to be involved with that. That usually turns out to be very damaging. Not everyone is ready at age 16 or 18, some much earlier, but that's an arbitrary limit that we have set as society, to protect the children who are not.
Or is this some coping for your president, who has very like abused under@ged girls. Understand that being a forced prostitute has no safe age limit, to prevent damage.
He is weaponizing the legal system and the FBI, to keep himself out of prison.
Presidential immunity doesn't cover sex-crimes, from before taking office.
/blogs/60282.html#t0
cat52! cunt!
So they are already having issues with charging electric cars?
Sheesh,what about in 5 years? The power company are not permited to build new power plants.Solar and wind are going to be important to keep the grid up. But that didn't work in Texas did it?
They make a lot of energy in Texas,but how many folks died over the winter this past 1?
Angel1227!
So a private, for profit, company did not plan on a hard winter so their production of electricity was not sufficient? And this utility, regulated by the states, failed to meet the demands? This state (Texas) governed by Repukers was not regulated correctly so this company spent less on production and got richer because of it? This sounds very much like a Repuker business idea.
I fault the power companys in texas to a point but I also fault the citizens for lack of preparedness.
Face it, sometimes you need regulation, especially for basic facilities like power.
And I then mentioned the issues in texas with electricity.
What everyone is missing here is the fact there is NOT enough electricity being produced to meet CURRENT demand.As Ananas has indicated.So imagine if you will,5-10 years from now,when there is GREATER demand? What a mess we are in for.
Regulation is not the solution. that is how you GOT TO THIS POINT. To many regulations preventing new power plants being built and trying to snuff out coal,a effective energy source.
You think that if they are running short they won’t try to catch up? The regulations you protest are there to protect the people and the environment. But, knowing how you think, fuck that. Let coal continue to pollute. We’ll be dead by the time our grandkids die of poisoned air.
only registered users can see external links
Only 2 under construction according to this chart.
only registered users can see external links
The US shut down how many? lets see
only registered users can see external links
Now, we shut down 39 and we are building 2. Does that sound like regulations are helping any? 2, there are 50 states. So state regulation is not changing anything where it may be either.
If you want coal gone,you need to have a replacement handy before hand.
Nuclear power is not the solution. There are 80 sites in the United States where nuclear waste is stored. Some of it is stored temporary in a location that is not safe long term. The best uranium sites are already running out and it's getting ever more expensive to mine the stuff.
That waste has to be looked after for the next 20,000 to 1M years, before it's safe. Humanity probably kills itself before that or there might be a few survivors that don't know how to keep the waste safe and radiation will finish them off. But who cares, right?
only registered users can see external links
Like nuclear is the only alternative to coal.
I just used nuclear here because MOST tree huggers-liberals,think nuclear is the answer.And it has Ooodles of issues that take Many years to deal with.
Actually, I even prefer fossil fuels over nuclear, even though I'm a tree hugger-liberal. Nuclear might be a bit better on carbon emissions when the reactor is built, but building new ones creates so much emissions, it takes 20 years to recover.
Another problem is that nuclear reactors take ages to start up and stop again, which is not practical as backup for solar and wind. Fossil fuels are at least needed until we have enough geothermal, hydro (incl. wave), biofuel, biogas, hydrogen, chemical storage (formic acid), thermal energy storage, battery storage and whatever I forgot or they think up next.
Then there is off-course the waste and the risk.
Eh so more electric cars will reduce demand?
I know you are not a engineer,but even you should be able to figure out that can't work.
groas violations of human rights, so the US or Europe don't need them as an ally.
If they can't sell us oil ,they will make their money on interest from loans.
We could afford to use fossil fuels if we could finish our pipelines and drill in otherwise useless lands like up north in alaska where there is nothing but woods.
The alaskan pipeline built long ago,was supposed to be such a wildlife disaster,ha,the animals love it,it is warm near the pipeline.
California has MILES of coast line,Why are they not looking into this tech?
only registered users can see external links
Instead of wasting all that coast line for half naked people to lay around and spread covid,there could be power plants there!
NO pollution! No noise that is not already there,and erosion control! WOW,
Kansas,could be using wind and solar to help of course.
Another non polluting power source,
only registered users can see external links
When I build a green house,yep,I will use geothermal to help with temp control.
Every bit you can use of it is better than none at all.
Here are some fun do-it-yourself builds on YouTube.
I had seen them before and it made me regret living next to a stationary ditch.
Maybe there are some ideas you can use:
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
I DO NOT quite understand the amount of AMPS he is getting from that washing machine motor.
only registered users can see external links
How many Chernobyl’s do you know? One in the states, one in Japan, and one in Russia. Here, in Miami-Dade county, FP&L has been operating the local one over 50 yrs. Same in other cities around the state. And no pollution
You don't hear about the Mcquire plant here in NC getting to hot but it did a few years ago. The tree huggers were angry because a type of fish was dieing from getting caught in the cooling system water.So they put a screen over the intake. Worked fine for a while. Until the screen clogged up with little fishes.A employee told me about it.
Here is a long list of potential accidents and how to deal with them
only registered users can see external links
Yea,I know,I got dizzy after 10 minutes of readin!
I can't see a coal plant being any where near as dangerous to operate
They can't even take in water, without sucking up all the fishes
According to the Rainforest Action Network. For decades, climate change has been a global crisis that will impact every single person and living being on this planet. Now, according to the latest UN climate report, we have less than 10 years to cut global emissions in half.
Burning fossil fuels isn’t just bad for the climate, these industries also violate countless fundamental human rights. From frontline communities facing a fossil fuel pipeline on their land to Indigenous people facing fires in the Amazon to worker rights violations on palm oil plantations, the industries fueling climate change are also fueling injustice.
Coal, tar sands, and fracked gas show everything that’s wrong within the fossil fuel industry. These extraction practices are harming people and planet every day, and big banks are fueling this destruction of the planet and negligence of life.
So what’s so bad about coal, tar sands, and fracked gas? Basically everything, from start to the finish these fossil fuels are disastrous. For decades, climate change has been a global crisis that will impact every single person and living being on this planet. Now, according to the latest UN climate report, we have less than 10 years to cut global emissions in half.
Burning fossil fuels isn’t just bad for the climate, these industries also violate countless fundamental human rights. From frontline communities facing a fossil fuel pipeline on their land to Indigenous people facing fires in the Amazon to worker rights violations on palm oil plantations, the industries fueling climate change are also fueling injustice.
Coal, tar sands, and fracked gas show everything that’s wrong within the fossil fuel industry. These extraction practices are harming people and planet every day, and big banks are fueling this destruction of the planet and negligence of life.
So what’s so bad about coal, tar sands, and fracked gas? Basically everything, from start to the finish these fossil fuels are disastrous.
Like I said, “What you don’t see can be more dangerous.”
only registered users can see external links
chernobyl didn just happen and stop.It is still happening today.
Smog will go away at some point.
coal smoke can be filtered.Try filtering radiaton.
So we only would need half that exclusion zone filled with solar panels
and that would cost about 78 Billion Euro's. That would raise our national debt from 56.3% of GDP to 66.2% of GDP.
Jobs for all our unemployed people will pull that debt down soon enough.
Accidents happen. Even if the chance is 1:1M (historically proven it's much higher), when you multiply that risk by the number of nuclear power plants required, something catastrophic will happen at some point. Such catastrophes could cost more than the complete energy transition.
That's not worth it, because nuclear power is only a temporary solution, because the uranium will run out at some point. It's already becoming more and more expensive to mine the stuff.
Even if all those problems didn't exist, it still takes 10 years before any nuclear power plant has compensates his own build. But it first takes 10 years to build any. Then after 20 years, they are just as CO2 effecient as wind and solar. That's too late. We need to lower CO2 emissions ASAP.
Anyone with some money to spare can invest in their own solar panels,
lower their costs and be less dependent on power companies.
It's nice to have air-conditioning in a heat wave, when the government
is telling you not to use power or you can't afford it when power companies are charging you 100x the normal rate.
only registered users can see external links
There are al sorts of natural disasters, but it can also be a terrorist attack or a hacker or just basic human error.
BTW, instead of Kansas I could have picked West Virginia
--------------------------------------- added after 4 minutes
As far as anything else, we have to trust security will prevail. Every thing is a crapshoot. Hopefully we don’t roll snake eyes,
only registered users can see external links
I also don't like nuclear energy and my arguments are in line with the science on climate change. That uranium has to be mined, which also emits CO2.
A nuclear power plant takes a lot of energy to be built and maintained.
Then afterwards we have to keep the waste safe for the next 20,000 years.
On the short term nuclear is about as energy/CO2 efficient as wind power and even less than solar. In the long term nuclear has a horrible energy/CO2 efficiency, because keeping the waste safe also costs energy. Also, building nuclear power plants takes a long time and lots of materials. It takes about 10 years before a nuclear power plant compensates his own build. That's about 1-1.5 years for wind energy and 2 years for solar. However solar is cheaper
on maintenance.
Other than that, I agree with most of what you said.
All energy technology costs money, materials, energy and land to build and maintain. All energy technology has downsides like pollution, mineral shortages, exploitation of people and CO2 emissions. We just need to stop with the worst energy technologies first and expand on the best ones the most.
It doesn't require completely changing our life or have impact on the quality of our life. However climate change already impacts our life and it will only get worse. We can either choose to accept some changes now and prevent total catastrophe later or we can deny the truth until catastrophe proves us wrong.
New Comment Go to top