Jump to content

auburnatl1

Gold Donor
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,332

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

 Content Type 

Posts posted by auburnatl1

    You guys who are going to end up voting for Trump...

    in Political Smack Talk

    Posted

    44 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

    And NO i do not speak for Jesus but i know you guys talk out of both sides of your mouth.so does jesus. remember that because many of you have forgotten. not all.......

    imo activist evangelicals (which is a Christian paradox in of itself) believe the end justifies means (or the person). Their priorities are focused on a conservative supreme  court (anti abortion and LGTQ stuff), law makers, ect.  The 1950s remade. Therefore trump being a sociopath is a little embarrassing,  but ultimately irrelevant - “the ends” are.

    I strongly disagree with this doctrine at a biblical, political, heck,  every level - but nonetheless, it is what it is. They do - therefore you get the “Trump is a flawed instrument of God” rationalization. Porn stars and all.

    • Like 3

    Gulf Stream

    in Politically Speaking

    Posted

    Just now, johnnyAU said:

    I'll borrow it from you after you watch the documentaries on Bigfoot, the Easter Bunny, the Loch Ness Monster and Santa Clause. Just give me a heads up.

    So there’s a documentary on… the Easter Bunny?  Your streaming service must get all the cool stuff.

    • Haha 1

    Gulf Stream

    in Politically Speaking

    Posted · Edited by auburnatl1

    27 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

    In reality, if Biden were no longer president the other things would fix themselves.

    Ah, the old serpent in the garden of Eden logic. Good luck with that in a lot of ways. Anyway - back on topic.

    • Haha 1
    • Sad 1

    Gulf Stream

    in Politically Speaking

    Posted

    1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

    You forgot Biden was no longer president.  Your answers always seemed to lack something.  :poke:

    Nothings ever enough for you maga boys. You  already got your flaming moat, Gazan’s off the planet, and everyone’s heterosexual - you don’t care who’s president. Just relax and enjoy blowing the hell out of  trees with your bazooka.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

    Gulf Stream

    in Politically Speaking

    Posted

    18 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

    I would believe *the science* that *climate change* is an existential threat if 1) there weren’t so many other existential threats in the world, 2) our leaders and elites took personal responsibility for leading the way by example and 3) China and India take the issue seriously.

    Change those three things and you will have a convert.  Good luck.

    My instincts are  even if the Gazans were  relocated to mars, every transgender went straight -found religion -- and married and had 2 cute kids,  a 500 ft wall with a flaming moat and mine field was built at the border , all the bad people were locked up so every law abiding citizen could buy a bazooka,  AND the US deficit magically went away with us not actually having do anything…… you’d still find a way to deny. 😎

    But I appreciate the sentiment.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

    Gulf Stream

    in Politically Speaking

    Posted

    14 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

    The problem has always been there.  We have always had to deal with it. Technological advances can help protect us from it better and more efficiently, while allowing us to thrive, but we'll continue to need reliable, affordable and available energy sources to do it. Complete electrification along with overreliance on wind, solar and biomass, etc...aren't going to cut it.

    Claiming we are causing the problem and thus can prevent it is the new manufactured "crisis". 

    The base premise is that we’re unnaturally releasing massive amounts of carbon that was created 300 million years ago during the Carboniferous period (btw when that much carbon was initially pulled out of the atmosphere to create oil/coal it caused a huge planetary temp drop/mass extinction). Yin meets Yang. Net net were currently terraforming the planets climate.

    However, if youve looked at the science and believe that nothing is wrong, or it’s not man made, or magic elves are causing it, or whatever - you’re simply word smithing there’s no problem/nothing we should do.  I get it. We disagree.

    • Love 1

    Gulf Stream

    in Politically Speaking

    Posted

    17 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

    1) The problem of a changing climate has always been and always will be there. The issue now is the claiming the driver of such a nonlinear, chaotic, complex system is a trace gas without proof.

    2) The solution has always been the same. Protection from weather events, changing climate, etc...along with the thriving of humanity itself. We have done a tremendous job of this over the last 200 years. Deaths from these types of events have fallen 95+% over the last 100 years. We have increased technology, healthcare, communication, agriculture, sanitation, human lifespan and decreased infant mortality rates and overall human suffering. Much of that has been on the back of the use of fossil fuels. The problem is the green "solutions" put forth will likely adversely affect humanity rather than help it, all while doing nothing to significantly alter the global temperatures, weather events or overall climate, costing trillions of $$ and reducing our ability provide adequate, reliable and affordable energy to those in need.

    3) The solution is to continue to help humanity thrive by continuing developing technology and all of the above, while spreading those things to underdeveloped countries. That means the continued use of reliable, affordable and available energy sources. Yes, that means fossil fuels, nuclear, coal and natural gas, geothermal and hydro with some small scale solar and wind. Yes, that means continued use of internal combustion engines along with some EV's and hybrid. Forcing a move to net zero and an over reliance on wind and solar is an unmitigated disaster. 

    Doing these things won't leave our kids to "deal with it". It will be equipping them to be even safer from their environment than we currently are, which is much better than our predecessors had it. 

     

    That was a very lengthy and well articulated way of saying there isn’t a problem.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 2

    Gulf Stream

    in Politically Speaking

    Posted · Edited by auburnatl1

    4 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

    Seriously?  *Same thing about the deficit*!!!

    It is obvious that the climate cultist are more worried about the generations more than 100 years from now with no thought of how much it will cost or if what they spend will actually work.  $50 Trillion by 2050 and our current deficit is $35 Trillion.

    You’re not worried about the deficit if you believe we have to spend to cure a problem we may or may not have.

    Oh, and it has nothing to do with saving the earth.  The cultist have admitted that.

    For the 100th time I don’t agree with a good bit of the current solution approach. Let’s review where we are and why this conversation is all over the place.  3 parts to problem solving - .

    1) defining problem - existence, severity, trends, consequences, timeframes

    2) solution options - the perfect vs practical (where I’m focused, cost vs benefit solutioning)

    3) select solution, commit and implement in phases and monitor costs and results 

    Youre on …. step 0: no problem, or if there is, let our kids deal with it.  Therefore, arguing with you about the cost of solving a problem that you don’t want to solve is kinda a waste of everyone’s time. Right?

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2

    Nikki reverts to form

    in Political Smack Talk

    Posted

    Just now, TexasTiger said:

    The problem is actually that most caved which has left Trump unaccountable and greatly empowered. There was finally, even among the kiss asses, some reality being expressed  after January 6th and there was the strong sense that, with McConnell's green light, enough senators were willing to vote for an impeachment conviction that would have rendered him ineligible to run. The Republican house caucus is already controlled by the crazies anyway. 

    Understand. IMO  It’s an abstract concept like infinity times 10 - crazy vs crazier.

    Nikki reverts to form

    in Political Smack Talk

    Posted

    5 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

    Which of those people are principled?

    Rhetorical question. The problem is if there wasn’t cringe-worthy gop flip flopping by those guys, you’d have an epic flood of mtg crazies/loyalists from the red states. I’m not defending - but we’re in never ending, picking the least crappy option scenarios.

     

    Gulf Stream

    in Politically Speaking

    Posted · Edited by auburnatl1

    12 hours ago, autigeremt said:

    Not at the expense of the people you are trying to “save”. 

    In reality the thinking is to assist the following generations with our screw ups. Same thing about deficit.

    There are people who plan retirement and theyre estates,  and there’s people who can’t plan past lunch.

    For the lunch crowd this is a pretty pointless conversation.

    • Like 2

    Sweet Freedom!

    in Political Smack Talk

    Posted

    52 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

    The fuss is a bit silly. My understanding is that in the past lighting was left up to the cities. With Freedom Summer being a state thing it supersedes city decisions. Just happens to coincide with pride month.

    Ok….

    • Haha 1
×
×
  • Create New...