COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 2129

starting strength gym
Page 2129 of 2235 FirstFirst ... 1129162920292079211921272128212921302131213921792229 ... LastLast
Results 21,281 to 21,290 of 22347

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #21281
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,000

    Default

    • starting strength seminar august 2022
    • starting strength seminar october 2022
    • starting strength seminar december 2022
    "The 'defactualization' of America." - Ukraine as mirror. by Patrick Lawrence

    Recommended as a "must read" by Cynthia Chung (Matthew Ehret's spouse), it helped me understand just how far we have devolved into fantasizing children.

    This majority — and it is almost certainly a majority — has no thoughts or views except those first verified through the machinery of manufactured images and “facts.” Television screens, the pages of purportedly authoritative newspapers, the air waves of government-funded radio stations—NPR, the BBC—serve to certify realities that do not have to be real, truths that do not have to be true.

    This leaves us in a sad and very parlous place.
    :
    :

    Nine years before Arendt published her NYRB piece, Daniel Boorstin brought out The Image: Or, What happened to the American Dream, an unjustly neglected work. “I describe the world of our making,” he wrote, “how we have used our wealth, our literacy, our technology, and our progress to create the thicket of unreality which stands between us and the facts of life.”

    The press, as you can imagine, did not escape Boorstin’s scrutiny. “The reporter’s task,” he wrote memorably, “is to find a way to weave these threads of unreality into a fabric the reader will not recognize as entirely unreal.”

    This is our condition. The Ukraine crisis is the mirror that reflects us as we are.
    Covid was also a mirror of this same condition.

    We see here in this forum what happens when a person from this unreality attempts to converse with those who reject it. The same is happening every day in the real world.

  2. #21282
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    48,795

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilead View Post
    There is no escape in Canada. Even the ones that want to seclude themselves in a rural county and homestead.
    Agenda 2030: County proposes limiting livestock for rural residents | America'''s Frontline Doctors
    Of course. Canada just showed them everything they needed to know about what people will do when authority pushes them. It's just started.

  3. #21283
    Join Date
    Jun 2021
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Rowe View Post
    As annoying as it probably is for me to continuously devolve Current Events back to the most bedrock layers of abstraction, this is why I do such things. Work your way back to the beginning, and then carefully work your way forward with questions.

    Example: if all hydrocarbon fuels are formed over millions of years of entrapping organic material in the Earth's crust, why do we assume reintroducing these entrapped carbon atoms into the atmosphere will do anything but add it back into the biological carbon cycle? Do "the models" account for this? If it was all available previously, why was there no "runaway" warming when the atmosphere was 1800-3000 ppm CO2?

    I'm not being pithy or smarmy. They're legitimate questions, and from my layman understanding it looks like there would be a massive greening effect. That's it -- more living things.


    Never believe a model.
    They are legitimate questions. The Earth had atmospheric CO2 levels of 1800-3000 ppm hundreds of millions of years ago when carbon emissions (decomposition, volcanic activity) were significantly greater than carbon sequestration (sediment burial, plant capture). Why there was no "runaway" warming? Who knows, perhaps the Sun's temperature was less than it is now or the Earth's orbital cycles were different. It was a really, really long time ago. Today, in addition to decomposition and volcanic activity, we have human sources of carbon emissions that tip the emissions vs sequestration imbalance further towards the emissions side, driving an increase in atmospheric CO2. Ice cores from Antarctica provide a record of atmospheric CO2 levels going back 800,000 years. For almost that entire millennia, atmospheric CO2 levels ranged from 170-300 ppm. In 1950, we were at 310 ppm. Today, we are at nearly 420 ppm.

  4. #21284
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1,593

  5. #21285
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    48,795

    Default

    Fossil fuels are essentially concentrated solar energy. They are the end products of the effects of sunlight producing biomass over millions of years. Sunlight itself is obvious not dense enough a source of energy to use to deliver your pizza, so we use its concentrated form -- hydrocarbons.

    Much more importantly, extremely extensive glaciation occurred all over the planet in the presence of extremely high levels of CO2, 2000-6000+ppm. The relevant Wikipedia pages about "snowball earth" and the Cryogenian period have been rewritten to conform to the current CO2 dogma. But I assure you that not everyone believes that CO2 is the primary determining factor of the earth's temperature. And I'd like to remind you that "scientists" lie to keep their funding.

  6. #21286
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    433

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Fossil fuels are essentially concentrated solar energy. They are the end products of the effects of sunlight producing biomass over millions of years. Sunlight itself is obvious not dense enough a source of energy to use to deliver your pizza, so we use its concentrated form -- hydrocarbons.

    Much more importantly, extremely extensive glaciation occurred all over the planet in the presence of extremely high levels of CO2, 2000-6000+ppm. The relevant Wikipedia pages about "snowball earth" and the Cryogenian period have been rewritten to conform to the current CO2 dogma. But I assure you that not everyone believes that CO2 is the primary determining factor of the earth's temperature. And I'd like to remind you that "scientists" lie to keep their funding.
    Regarding this topic, what do you think is the best piece of information, that is easily veryfiable, that one could use in an argument with someone who just buys into the climate change propaganda with no information whatsoever? Like a regular person who tells you that EVs are better because "it's better for the environment" or that "co2 is bad because of global warming", shit like that.
    I too am incredibly ignorant on the topic, but I just simply don't trust mainstream propagandic science anymore when it's obviously nothing but a political agenda.

  7. #21287
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1,593

    Default

    Dr Tess Lawrie is a good woman!
    We told the WHO we don’t want its pandemic treaty – now what?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Fossil fuels are essentially concentrated solar energy. They are the end products of the effects of sunlight producing biomass over millions of years. Sunlight itself is obvious not dense enough a source of energy to use to deliver your pizza, so we use its concentrated form -- hydrocarbons.

    Much more importantly, extremely extensive glaciation occurred all over the planet in the presence of extremely high levels of CO2, 2000-6000+ppm. The relevant Wikipedia pages about "snowball earth" and the Cryogenian period have been rewritten to conform to the current CO2 dogma. But I assure you that not everyone believes that CO2 is the primary determining factor of the earth's temperature. And I'd like to remind you that "scientists" lie to keep their funding.
    I found this interview rather interesting.
    Denis Rancourt on the global climate change agenda - Jerm Warfare

    Here is Rancouts' work on climate change.
    Climate Change - Denis Rancourt

    Environmental Science - Denis Rancourt

  8. #21288
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,907

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Fossil fuels are essentially concentrated solar energy. They are the end products of the effects of sunlight producing biomass over millions of years. Sunlight itself is obvious not dense enough a source of energy to use to deliver your pizza, so we use its concentrated form -- hydrocarbons.

    Much more importantly, extremely extensive glaciation occurred all over the planet in the presence of extremely high levels of CO2, 2000-6000+ppm. The relevant Wikipedia pages about "snowball earth" and the Cryogenian period have been rewritten to conform to the current CO2 dogma. But I assure you that not everyone believes that CO2 is the primary determining factor of the earth's temperature. And I'd like to remind you that "scientists" lie to keep their funding.
    I was always taught (before schools stopped teaching) the Sun was the primary source of the earths temperature. Back in the 1950's we used glass houses to trap the heat from the sun where the various "greenhouse" gases and the biggest "greenhouse" gas of all water vapor contained in the glasshouse enabled plants to grow. Not all scientists lie.

    Center on Climate and Environmental Policy | Heartland Institute

  9. #21289
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    48,795

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by francesco.decaro View Post
    Regarding this topic, what do you think is the best piece of information, that is easily veryfiable, that one could use in an argument with someone who just buys into the climate change propaganda with no information whatsoever? Like a regular person who tells you that EVs are better because "it's better for the environment" or that "co2 is bad because of global warming", shit like that.
    I too am incredibly ignorant on the topic, but I just simply don't trust mainstream propagandic science anymore when it's obviously nothing but a political agenda.
    How much has sea level risen at Barry Obama's house on the beach in Martha's Vineyard? Where does electricity come from?

  10. #21290
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    420

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Unfortunately, I believe the climate hoax will far eclipse the covid hoax in terms of the masses of sheep who will follow the propaganda and the agenda with sheer outrage and hysteria directed at us "science deniers."

    Can't wait to hear the sheep telling me I "killed grandma" by driving an old Jeep with a gas guzzling V8 spewing out emissions into the atmosphere.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •