Democrats push to amend Constitution so 16-year-olds can vote

[F3SS]

24 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

And the oceans are as dead as Lake Erie????, Food rationing has taken place? 

There really was something wrong with Lake Erie back in 2010 when I visited. Nothing but large dead fish everywhere on the beaches. Carcasses and bones everywhere. Easily hundreds just from where we walked. So maybe there was something behind that statement at one point. We returned 4 years ago and the beaches were clean and lively with people everywhere. Idk what the heck was going on before.

[+Link of Hyrule]

2 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

“If we don’t change our ways”… you might notice that we did change our ways? Yo7 know… no CFCs, no leaded petrol….

We changed a bit.  But nowhere near the required targets the alarmists demanded we change by! I predict we'll fall short in the 2030 targets too, but we'll be just fine and in the year 2043 (or thereabouts) some kid who isn't even born now will become the GretaThunberg of the 40s warning us about the 2060 climate targets!

Maybe I'm wrong,  and if I am it's a symptom of not trusting those who tried to scare us over the previous few decades.

Edited January 19, 2023 by Paranoid Android

[+Link of Hyrule]

36 minutes ago, F3SS said:

There really was something wrong with Lake Erie back in 2010 when I visited. Nothing but large dead fish everywhere on the beaches. Carcasses and bones everywhere. Easily hundreds just from where we walked. So maybe there was something behind that statement at one point. We returned 4 years ago and the beaches were clean and lively with people everywhere. Idk what the heck was going on before.

I've never been to Lake Erie. According to the article I linked,  if you believe the climate alarmists in 1970, all the oceans would be as dead as that today. 

Edited January 19, 2023 by Paranoid Android

[Michelle]

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

The released water simply runs out to sea.  There is nowhere to store it.

If you've got a backhoe you can make a place to store it. I live in a county that has a problem with flooding. For years our government was really lax about developers who built in the flood plains. If the houses they built stayed above water it still caused floods in the neighborhoods around them. The developers were eventually forced to build water retention lakes. They were angry, but then they upped the price of the houses and called them waterfront property. Hell, cattle farmers even build ponds for their herds.

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, Paranoid Android said:

And the oceans are as dead as Lake Erie????, Food rationing has taken place? 

Erie or Eyre? 

 

[+Link of Hyrule]

3 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Erie or Eyre? 

 

Erie - https://www.britannica.com/place/Lake-Erie

[psyche101]

53 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I've never been to Lake Erie. According to the article I linked,  if you believe the climate alarmists in 1970, all the oceans would be as dead as that today. 

It's not climate alarmists today 

It's the majority of the scientific body. 

Pretty different.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus.amp

[psyche101]

8 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

Erie - https://www.britannica.com/place/Lake-Erie

It never dries up. 

Eyre does though. 

[+Link of Hyrule]

43 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

It's not climate alarmists today 

It's the majority of the scientific body. 

Pretty different.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus.amp

No scientist doubts the temperature is warming.  But that doesn't mean that if we don't change by 2030 we're domed.  Only the alarmists are making that claim,  and I don't believe it! The difference between climate change and climate alarmism!

Edited January 19, 2023 by Paranoid Android

[+Link of Hyrule]

8 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

It never dries up. 

Eyre does though. 

So, when Ohio's Department of Health reported in 1970 that Lake Erie was ``dead,'' environmentalists took up the challenge to clean up the 9,900-square-mile lake.

https://www.csmonitor.com/1990/0416/zerie.html

The article I was referencing about a dead Lake Erie was written in 1970! According to that article,  all the world's oceans will be like Lake Erie!

Edited January 19, 2023 by Paranoid Android

[F3SS]

1 hour ago, Paranoid Android said:

I've never been to Lake Erie. According to the article I linked,  if you believe the climate alarmists in 1970, all the oceans would be as dead as that today. 

If I go to the beach and it's jellyfish season the ocean is already dead to me. 

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, Paranoid Android said:

No scientist doubts the temperature is warming.  But that doesn't mean that if we don't change by 2030 we're domed.  Only the alarmists are making that claim,  and I don't believe it!

No, that's not it.

I assume by alarmists you mean non scientific people?

It's more like the hole in the ozone. There's a tipping point. Had we not acted when we did, it would be very serious to human life by 2060. Because we acted it will be repaired by 2060. 

These targets are generally based on long term predictions. 

It's not a natural cycle. There's no doubt that humans have had a significant impact on the planets ecosystems and climate. It's natural in that we are part of the planet, but not something that would have happened without the industrial revolution. 

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, Paranoid Android said:

So, when Ohio's Department of Health reported in 1970 that Lake Erie was ``dead,'' environmentalists took up the challenge to clean up the 9,900-square-mile lake.

https://www.csmonitor.com/1990/0416/zerie.html

The article I was referencing about a dead Lake Erie was written in 1970! According to that article,  all the world's oceans will be like Lake Erie!

 

 

 

So you mean badly polluted, not dried out up because of climate change. 

[Golden Duck]

1 hour ago, Michelle said:

If you've got a backhoe you can make a place to store it. I live in a county that has a problem with flooding. For years our government was really lax about developers who built in the flood plains. If the houses they built stayed above water it still caused floods in the neighborhoods around them. The developers were eventually forced to build water retention lakes. They were angry, but then they upped the price of the houses and called them waterfront property. Hell, cattle farmers even build ponds for their herds.

The same dam projects were proposed here during the drought.  But, when it comes to a flood the is not a way to pipe water to places that can store it.  It is simply not worth it.

A project to pump water from The Ord River to Perth is often proposed.   It is simply too expensive.

Over the last year about half of Australia has been subject to flood.  The water is simply released.

As a bit of interest, back during the critucal droughts of the mid noughties, Australian Archives produced a display on Australias need for Water that toured the country.  Part of the collection contained a propsal that made it to Federal Cabinet to construct an inland catchment area.  The method was vitrification of soil by nuclear bomb.

 

[Golden Duck]

3 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

And the oceans are as dead as Lake Erie????, Food rationing has taken place? 

You said "we" which indicated you were including yourself as part of a group not experiencing water restrictions.

You're in Sydney now?

Only two capital cities in Australia are not restricting water.

Quote

Agency	Current Restriction
Sydney NSW	Sydney Water	Water Restrictions Level 1
http://www.bom.gov.au/water/restrictions/images/minipix.png
Melbourne VIC	City West Water	Permanent Water Saving Rules
	Yarra Valley Water	Permanent Water Saving Rules
	South East Water	Permanent Water Saving Rules
http://www.bom.gov.au/water/restrictions/images/minipix.png
Brisbane QLD	Queensland Urban Utilities	No restriction
http://www.bom.gov.au/water/restrictions/images/minipix.png
Perth WA	Water Corporation	Area 3 watering days
http://www.bom.gov.au/water/restrictions/images/minipix.png
Adelaide SA	SA Water	Water Wise Measures
http://www.bom.gov.au/water/restrictions/images/minipix.png
Hobart TAS	TasWater	Stage 1
http://www.bom.gov.au/water/restrictions/images/minipix.png
Canberra ACT	Icon Water	Permanent Water Conservation Measures
http://www.bom.gov.au/water/restrictions/images/minipix.png
Darwin NT	Power and Water	No restrictions

http://www.bom.gov.au/water/restrictions/index.php

[+Link of Hyrule]

24 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

No, that's not it.

I assume by alarmists you mean non scientific people?

It's more like the hole in the ozone. There's a tipping point. Had we not acted when we did, it would be very serious to human life by 2060. Because we acted it will be repaired by 2060. 

These targets are generally based on long term predictions. 

It's not a natural cycle. There's no doubt that humans have had a significant impact on the planets ecosystems and climate. It's natural in that we are part of the planet, but not something that would have happened without the industrial revolution. 

Most of the alarmists are not scientists. Next time I'm at a computer I'll search for a video of a debate on climate change from two actual scientists, you'll easily see the difference between them and the scaremongers on telly. 

The thing about targets is that we didn't reach the targets set for the ozone layer.  We did change SOME,  but not to the extent we were told we needed to.  So i don't believe them when they say if we don't change by 2030 we're screwed.  We will teach some of the targets,  not all,  and life will continue exactly as it always has!

24 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

 

 

 

So you mean badly polluted, not dried out up because of climate change. 

The qurote from the article was "the oceans will be as dead as Lake Erie".

[+Link of Hyrule]

21 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

You said "we" which indicated you were including yourself as part of a group not experiencing water restrictions.

You're in Sydney now?

Only two capital cities in Australia are not restricting water.

http://www.bom.gov.au/water/restrictions/index.php

Are you engaging n discussion or trying to argue semantics of language? Are our oceans as dead as Lake Erie? Hours or food rationing coming along?

Edited January 19, 2023 by Paranoid Android

[+Link of Hyrule]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I assume by alarmists you mean non scientific people? 

2 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Most of the alarmists are not scientists. Next time I'm at a computer I'll search for a video of a debate on climate change from two actual scientists, you'll easily see the difference between them and the scaremongers on telly.

I highly recommend this debate between two climate scientists: 

The thing that I notice straight away is how amicable they are and how despite being on opposite sides of they agree on a huge amount of information! Imagine if these two scientists were the representatives of climate science that we see in the news?  

Edited January 19, 2023 by Paranoid Android

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Most of the alarmists are not scientists. Next time I'm at a computer I'll search for a video of a debate on climate change from two actual scientists, you'll easily see the difference between them and the scaremongers on telly. 

That's why I'm asking you. Sure I know the difference. That's why I'm not up to speed on the alarmists. I don't bother reading or listening to them. Only qualified scientists. Everybody knows who Greta Thunberg is but I can't say I've ever listened to more than one or two sentences she has said and shut off. Never heard an entire speech. Just read about them. 

Maybe it's just me. You know how I have a low opinion of vloggers calling themselves journalists, I am see these activists in the same way. Basically, white noise and not people to be taken seriously. 

2 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

The thing about targets is that we didn't reach the targets set for the ozone layer.  We did change SOME,  but not to the extent we were told we needed to.  So i don't believe them when they say if we don't change by 2030 we're screwed.  We will teach some of the targets,  not all,  and life will continue exactly as it always has!

I don't think your picking up what I'm putting down. 

We did global bans on many ozone harming products..

It was and is a very real problem. 

Had we not acted when we did, there would be several holes today and things would be changing for the worse. 

This is the same thing. A real problem that requires action. Not activists. I don't care what alarmists say about the world ending in 2030 or some rubbish like that. I'm only interested in learning about the problem, why it exists, and what measures are being taken. From the science. I wish to look at items A, B & C myself and understand them. Not hear what someone thinks of them. 

2 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

The qurote from the article was "the oceans will be as dead as Lake Erie".

Yes, my bad. I went back and read the posts again. I had thought you meant hotter and therefore dried out, but it's meant as more a picture than a comparison I now see. Not dried out, just rendered inhabitable. I'd jumped to a conclusion. That's why I asked about Lake Eyre. My mistake. 

Good thing science decided the alarmists were full of it and have been working successfully on the problem. 

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

5 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

We changed a bit.  But nowhere near the required targets the alarmists demanded we change by! I predict we'll fall short in the 2030 targets too, but we'll be just fine and in the year 2043 (or thereabouts) some kid who isn't even born now will become the GretaThunberg of the 40s warning us about the 2060 climate targets!

Maybe I'm wrong,  and if I am it's a symptom of not trusting those who tried to scare us over the previous few decades.

We changed enough. 

[+Link of Hyrule]

10 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

We changed enough. 

No disagreements.  I'm not arguing that we don't need to do anything,  this is of topic,  and the comment that originally sparked it was my assertion thst everything is probably going to be OK!

That's all I said,  I don't think it was really that controversial. 

Edited January 19, 2023 by Paranoid Android

[Golden Duck]

3 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Are you engaging n discussion or trying to argue semantics of language? Are our oceans as dead as Lake Erie? Hours or food rationing coming along?

What do you mean "argue semantics"?  Semantics is how we determine meaning.

The oceans aren't the source of water.  Like I said you live under "water rationing".

[+Link of Hyrule]

11 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

What do you mean "argue semantics"?  Semantics is how we determine meaning.

The oceans aren't the source of water.  Like I said you live under "water rationing".

Because I have quoted an article that explicitly refers to a specific climate alarmist making a specific claim about the state of the oceans compared to Lake Erie, and suggesting that America WILL be under food rationing as well as water rationing before the year 1980! No matter what else I say, or how I word my posts, this is the factual basis behind my claims! 
Are the oceans dead? Is America under food rationing? Is anyone in Australia living under food rationing? Are our oceans dead? So 1-out-of-3 is a failure rate of 66.66666%, and the water rationing here in Australia is not permanent, nor country-wide. And yet the best you can manage is to repeat blindly "like I said, you live under water rationing" as if that has any bearing at all to do with the arguments I'm making about the climate alarmists making predictions that simply don't come true! 

Climate change is a global issue, therefore it's very easy to refer to it as "we" even if it's a different country. I apologise for the use of the "we", it was not intentional and it is not intentional. So please stop harping on it. That's "arguing semantics" in order to continue an argument rather than deal with the underlying issue that alarmists have been making false predictions for decades. If this was a religion, it would be another failed prophecy.  

Edited January 19, 2023 by Paranoid Android

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

We’re not under rationing… but I’ve noticed an increased decrease in the availability of frozen veg, fresh veg, potatoes, cheese, milk, bread… so yeah. No rationing. 

[+Link of Hyrule]

13 hours ago, psyche101 said:

That's why I'm asking you. Sure I know the difference. That's why I'm not up to speed on the alarmists. I don't bother reading or listening to them. Only qualified scientists. Everybody knows who Greta Thunberg is but I can't say I've ever listened to more than one or two sentences she has said and shut off. Never heard an entire speech. Just read about them. 

Maybe it's just me. You know how I have a low opinion of vloggers calling themselves journalists, I am see these activists in the same way. Basically, white noise and not people to be taken seriously. 

I don't think your picking up what I'm putting down. 

We did global bans on many ozone harming products..

It was and is a very real problem. 

Had we not acted when we did, there would be several holes today and things would be changing for the worse. 

This is the same thing. A real problem that requires action. Not activists. I don't care what alarmists say about the world ending in 2030 or some rubbish like that. I'm only interested in learning about the problem, why it exists, and what measures are being taken. From the science. I wish to look at items A, B & C myself and understand them. Not hear what someone thinks of them. 

Yes, my bad. I went back and read the posts again. I had thought you meant hotter and therefore dried out, but it's meant as more a picture than a comparison I now see. Not dried out, just rendered inhabitable. I'd jumped to a conclusion. That's why I asked about Lake Eyre. My mistake. 

Good thing science decided the alarmists were full of it and have been working successfully on the problem. 

I get what you are saying. I'm not against change, or environmental policies! I'm against scaring people into thinking that if we don't offset our carbon emissions by 2030 we will all die! Children's mental health is suffering as a direct result of these climate alarmists, and that is not because climate change is actually a big scary issue in 2023, but because the alarmists are lying to our children about how bad it really is! 

 

Quote

If you’re worried about climate change, you’re not alone. The dire headlines and frightening predictions have lots of people on edge, and kids are no exception. In a recent survey  of young adults ages 16–25, almost 60 percent said that they felt “very worried” or “extremely worried” about climate change.

Often, the things that kids get anxious about aren’t realistic threats. Parents can validate how scary the situation feels for the child while still helping them understand that their fears are exaggerated.

With climate change, the story is different. In a situation where the threat is so clear and lots of powerful people don’t seem to be worrying enough, it’s especially hard to tell whether your child is worrying too much. And with kids often taking the lead in climate action, the boundary between activism and anxiety can get blurry.

Here are some strategies for helping your child keep their climate worries, however legitimate, from becoming unhealthy — while also navigating your own fears.

https://childmind.org/article/kids-and-climate-anxiety/

Kids shouldn't be worrying about climate change! I'd tell my kid that the alarmist predictions are just trying to scare them and they shouldn't worry about it! Because that's the logical thing to do - the alarmists have been scaring us for over 50 years, I'd show my children the alarmist predictions over the past 50 years and say "don't worry, everything's gonna be ok" (unlike this thread, I wouldn't use the word "probably" when reassuring my child)

This article, cloaked in "helping kids", is the exact kind of alarmism that is going to make it worse, not better!