I forgot to add a really simple explanation. I mean really, reeeeeaaaaallllyyyyy simple.
(4 votes)
Climate change for trumptards
I forgot to add a really simple explanation. I mean really, reeeeeaaaaallllyyyyy simple.
Comments
(Old Spike)
I refuse to listen to any more bullshit about climate change until it's a realistic solution that's being discussed. If it's a global initiative it's pointless until the orange clown is gone. There's gotta be scientists & engineers figuring it out but without speaking Mandarin it's hard to know.
(Old Spike)
You really should inform yourself a little, "a realistic solution" (the only one, at least at the moment, actually) is significantly reducing the output of greenhouse gases on a global scale.
I don't care actually other than for the science behind it as I don't have kids and don't suffer delusions of a chance to be reborn or life after death.
(Old Spike)
You didn't offer a solution. If it can't come out of the tech sector in the form of giant air-processing blimps in the atmosphere or exhaust system tech or whatever then maybe it needs to be industrial protocols for the most polluting sectors, ones that don't inhibit developing nations' growth potential.
The current world order can't deal with it right now. The US isn't even willing to be a part of the non-binding Paris agreement. I think the public, who will just buy whatever's on the market, has been beaten over the head enough with this issue. It's next to nuclear armageddon when it comes to the leading threats to humanity - how often should we be reminded that there's a danger of nuclear armageddon?
In case you're wondering, we're currently at 2 minutes to midnight, the closest we've ever been to wiping ourselves out.
https://thebulletin.org/multimedia/know-the-time/
Speaking on these issues in partisan terms isn't constructive IMO, generally the outcome is the opposite of what you hope for.
(Old Spike)
Quite the contrary, this is the solution, what I can't offer is an implementation. Let's hope ISIS suicide bombs the shit out of the most polluting countries.
(Old Spike)
That's a solution. Per capita or in total?
This is a map of per capita CO2 output from 2005
(Old Spike)
Don't care, I live in Spain so in neither scenario I would be a target.
(Old Spike)
how do you guys get energy?
edit: nevermind, found it. Mostly wind & hydro. Here it's mostly hydro but a little less than Spain's impressive ~75% renewable.
I think the best we can hope for is a miracle - the global order can begin cooperating & decide to make an economic sacrafice of some kind to commit to hard objectives & fund real solution-based research. While the US is doing it's isolationist thing it's not going to happen until at least Trump's term is over so just sit back & relax bro.
(Old Spike)
"...decide to make an economic sacrafice of some kind..."
Would it really be much of a sacrifice? Some part of the economy may shift from producing cole to producing solar panels or wind turbines, for example. Repsol apparently are already branching out into the renewables sector.
And I personally couldn't be more relaxed, I'm 56 years old, I most definitely will not be affected by long term climate change effects.
(Old Spike)
It's extremely difficult, particularly in democratic countries because it disrupts industry and the leaders are beholden to the will of the workers & the major companies that generate income for the country. I just think it would take some real-world problems to force it through in most countries. We need to see some suffering before we agree to put people out of work etc. for the greater good, because it would no longer be the greater good it would be for survival.
A simple solution may be for countries to sign up to spend 0.1% of their GDP on generating energy from renewables & shifting their transport system to run off the electrical grid. This 0.1% is a lot of money that could be going into things like education or healthcare which not only help people in the short term but provide jobs. Maybe IP could be donated by companies for things like batteries to mitegate investment. Just spitballing but I think it's not so easy as making a decision like you suggest. We don't live under central planning to that extent.
(Old Spike)
The change has started already, just with the big western countries lagging behind. Hyundai and Kia brought out viable electric cars with 300miles+ range. Test drove one the other day, it is absolutely worth it if you have the money. In spain the government subsidising fund for electric cars has run out already for this year! In 10 years time this will probably be the norm. German car industry is following suit now, just the US (except Tesla) is still sleeping in V8 mode. Change happens, whether or not it is quick enough remains to be seen.
(Old Spike)
Personal transport is a small part of CO2 emmissions & switching only helps if your grid runs off sustainable sources. The US mostly runs on coal & gas. Gas is much better than coal & the coal plants can be upgraded to be as 'clean' as gas, as they're starting to do in China, but it's more than just driving a Tesla that is required.
Without wanting to sound like a hippy, we've spent 100 years building a consumer culture & encouraging cheap manufacturing of products that often have planned obsolescence built into them to maximise profits. This practice should be illegal IMO. We have a really long way to go & capitlalism will fight it at every turn.
(Old Spike)
I would argue that the problem goes deeper than capitalism. It is a HUMAN problem. Humans are lazy, they want it now not later, anything but later.
Humans are a disease. Diseases are human.
We consume, spread, and then explore for new consumption.
That is our way.
(Old Spike)
You could argue that humans are the least lazy animals on the planet. We're curious & engineer things. We are lazy but intelligence + laziness is responsible for some of the best innovation.
We've only seriously been exploiting the planet since the industrial age (thanks white people). I'm white btw, that's a joke. There's a good chance we'll cause our own demise, I think the planet will survive, probably with an atmosphere that can sustain life. Meh.
(Old Spike)
"Personal transport is a small part of CO2 emmissions..."
Yes but one has to start somewhere. If we all think it is not going to have an impact we might as well buy V8's, keep on burning coal and oil for electricity and wait for these resources run out and then think of something new.
(Old Spike)
Yeah we have to start somewhere but it's also a race against an expanding population & industrialisation in the developing world. I don't know much about this topic re: policy to be honest. I couldn't tell you what's in the Paris accords. Do you have any idea on whether we're continuing to increase the ghg output & at what rate?
Also, do you know what the major challenges are?
(I assume it's the coming industrialisation of Africa & others, that's a stab in the dark)
(Old Spike)
No I couldn't give you any detail. Of course 3rd world is a problem and will grow not only because of industrialisation but also much of "our" rubbish is shipped there, the latter needs to stop like now, the former needs "clean" power, which can't be that much of an effort considering the hours of sunshine they have in a day.
(Old Spike)
Developing countries will, like the rest of us, use the cheapest form of power available, for the most part. Making it cleaner would require more investment. Where should the burden of this increased cost fall?
(Old Spike)
That would be fairly simple:
Encourage empowerment of women and birth control and provide aid in the form of technical help. Costs are the same and the "uncontrolled breeding" will devrease.
Also renewable technology has become a lot more affordable, in the developed world even subsidising has decreased significantly. It has the advantage of virtually no running costs and disadvantage of initial higher investment, which, however, will pay be paid off way before the the life cycle of the product is ended.
(Old Spike)
I dunno about the birth control thing man. The only proven method of curbing population expansion seems to be affluence + the trappings that come with it like modern healthcare & education. It's also virtually impossible to effectively encourage it, it's cultural.
I think to get to where it needs to go we should be doing exactly what China is doing in Africa - helping them develop their economy & paving the way for industrialisation. Actually leaving Africa alone completely & letting China handle it would be much better than what's going on there right now. They're experts in rolling out mega-structure projects quickly & cheaply. We're experts in sponsoring rival militia for the end game of extracting resources cheaply - a recipe to keep them in poverty.
(Old Spike)
Are you using a comedy skit about Donald Trump's opinions on a single topic to ridicule conservatives, though a majority of them statistically don't share that particular opinion according to polls in the recent years even though they voted for him?
And if so, are you doing it in order to further stigmatize political diversity?
Or put differently:
Are you trying to leave a message on this website that says "we don't take nicely to your kind around here" in the guise of actually caring about the environment?
Or in another way, in the interest of diversity:
Are you virtue-signaling your self-proclaimed superior morality in order to further dissent against people with different political opinions with a topic often chosen to do so specifically by those who wish to appear as intellectuals online, you know, without the hard work, Daftcunt?
And if the response to all these different variations of the same question is "no", using "trumptard" in the title has already contradicted that as a credible answer.
But please leave your response and my misspelled ten-lettered username in an attempt to insult me or actual conservatives below. I would be fascinated to see what alternatives to "triggered much?", "tryhard" or "racist homophobe etc, etc" you are capable of coming up with.
Prediction: google search of my username with unsubstantial findings, some scavenge hunting for reprihensible comments/posts in spikednation, blame refusal to respond to questions on "giant wall of text", insinuate that I oppose climate change as reality, concluding with short insult.
(Old Spike)
Fuck saving the planet. it is GOING TO DIE NO MATTER WHAT.
Instead focus on colonization, ore extraction from space, a second industrial revolution with science at the helm. A massive military to combat the xenos we encounter. So we may step into the Imperium Of Man.
The problem is we get so wrapped up in argueing with each other that we are better. Instead let's argue with aliens about why we are better.
(Old Spike)
Are you high or drunk or both?
You are absolutely correct that not all that voted for the disgrace you call the president (or some of your peers even the "god emperor") are actually trumptards. Your comment here, however, strongly suggests which of these groups you belong to.
How's that pussy grabbing coming along?
(Old Spike)
Keep this up and the God Emperor will smite you with a stroke.
(Old Spike)
I'm currently sober.
You didn't answer the question(s).
You did however selectively pick one part out of context from those questions to insinuate that I belong to a group you identify as "trumptards", which you and many others define vaguely, perhaps to use it as widely as possible?
I wonder if I've written something about pussygrabbing that would prompt that response?
(Old Spike)
I guess you're not famous or rich enough to grab pussy without dire consequences.
Your (like fullauto's) symptom is always "being (or at least appearing) oh so offended" when topics like this (making fun of the god emperor) comes up, so it is easy to guess which part of the voter group you come from.
I don't know how many of your friends and relatives have been raped, murdered or robbed by mexicans and how long you have been unemployed because they took away your apple picking job but it must be quite hard on you, otherwise you would lighten up a little and laugh with the rest of the world that is making fun of the smpotus.
(Old Spike)
I'll grab a pussy, if she wants me to. And if I want to. Let's make it clear that I'm not grabbing any pussy, cause I've seen some now.
I can't speak for Fullauto.
I do not agree with the observation of a pattern in someone's activity online or political beliefs being described as a "symptom", as if differing views are to be defined and viewed as diseases or disorders.
I like to challenge bullshit when I see it.
Most conservatives are employed. More conservatives are therefore better off financially, and more likely to be described as wealthy than liberals. Because they are generally more wealthy as a consequence of their conservative beliefs affecting their choices in life. They are more orderly and principled, and understand the value of discipline.
They're not the ones asking for a wealthfare state.
Liberals have genuine beliefs that should be respected, but as things have progressed with the free access to information today thanks to technology, they seem completely ignorant of the fact that their liberal mindset is being taken advantage of in order to push an ideology. They're being used to achieve something that will replace and contradict their goals completely.
Applying the stereotype of rednecks complaining about their jobs being taken as a political argument today, to people living at the border who experience the direct consequences of illegal immigration, is a lazy and outdated way to defuse debate about the actual issue.
Especially when the facts, not political rhetoric or conspiracy theories, but the facts say that the illegal immigration is perpetrated by criminal organisations who require rape of those illegal immigrants, 70% of the women, and their children, as a form of payment.
Arguing for the continuity of a situation like that is borderline sociopathic.
Building a wall or heightening the security of those borders appear to be the most effective way to dissuade immigrants from taking the illegal path into the country. When Donald Trump won the election, the criminals responsible for bringing people across the border admitted that there was a marked decrease of immigrants reaching out to them to bring them across.
That is why conservatives in favor of Donald Trump and his wall support him and will cheer when he proclaims it will be built. Very few of those people in the crowds of his rallies are actually cheering because they hate Mexicans. They're cheering because they are morally justified to stop the rape of immigrants coming into the country, and the killing of many who never even reach the border. Desperate families with absolutely no papers bring a shitload of money to gangmembers in desert wastelands who promise to bring them over. Killing them is easy money. It has happened, and continues to happen because it is fucking systematic at this point.
Decreasing the massive imports of illegal drugs and weapons which can't be tracked from crimes across the border, prevents the expansion of criminal organisations into the country. Fast & Furious(not the movie) really happened!
Making Trump jokes is the easiest thing in the world to do because it takes no effort. He's an easy target, just like Bush was. Dave Chappelle, one of the funniest men in the world, said it is literally hurting comedy.
Watching an entire speech for the context after the news tells you he said something crazy and racist again and realizing what desperate lengths these assholes in the media have gone to in order to convince an entire generation that Hitler #2 is running the country, can only help you in the long run.
It doesn't mean change sides. It doesn't mean change opinions. It means someone is responsible for your ass being disappointed every single day for two years straight, when you didn't have to be. It means you'll know whose actually responsible for polarizing the country, and not just be pointing along in the same direction they are.
Are you actually going to be surprised when a Democrat is elected and he, or she will be asking for the same damned walls? Because they all have. Bill Clinton did. Hillary Clinton did. Obama did. Trump is just the only one being loud about it. And yes people do find that hypocritical and incredibly aggravating when those same politicians and the media denies it ever happened. Luckily, youtube still exists and haven't gone completely over to the dark side.
Being objective has become a choice. All it takes is to replace some of your meme and trump-bashing time with some source-critical scrutiny, and you'll see why the investigations never turn anything up on the orange bad man despite all the literature insinuating that being the case.
I would love to lighten up and continue to laugh at you, but I already have for a very long time, and eventually it got sad, but now it's just fucking scary because you've all gone so far for so long, it appears to be irreparable.
I've said before that the singularity will begin with people not being able to communicate or understand eachother, regardless of speaking the same language. If we are to continue human progress, we need to overcome current ideologies on the left and the right that don't promote diversity of opinion. We should all lean toward the middle to find a balance. Especially when ideologies can be amplified with technology we barely understand.
The most powerful communication platforms and supervisors of information in the world right now are blaming algorithms for creating psychopathic killers and extremist views. And their current solutions are to censor you and redefining language on the fly, and not change their algorithms' prime directives because it would threaten their profit rates based on people deliberately seeking certain content with enabled ad-revenue which those algorithms recommend to users. Their entire economic model is based on that being an uninterrupted process. If that ever stops, is downgraded, or even rolled back to a less effective algorithm, they will go bankrupt.
The bigger problem is that they've convinced most people that they have a stake in the survival of their companies. As if our world would fall apart without them. The reason they're still on top after so many years is because they are acquiring any company that have the potential of one day competing with them. Shutting down criticism by redefining what once was perfectly genuine views in most eyes, does simultaneously serve the forementioned ideology, which is currently dominant in Silicon Valley.
(Old Spike)
If you are trying to use this post to have a serious conversation you will fail. If you try to justify "the wall" by saying the average trump voter wants to protect mexicans you should look for help.
Also taking the "moral highground" by whining how easy it is to make fun of him or Bush does not work. It is a mirror his voters should look into and think hard about whether ot not they really got what they actually wanted
(Old Spike)
I should look for help because there is something wrong with me to have a certain opinion.
The average trump voter clearly wants to protect Americans. Conservatives arguing it will also protect Mexicans or any other people from rape, forced smuggling, human trafficking obviously are clearly morally justified using that logic to ask for a wall too.
It's lazy to make fun of the President by taking everything he says out of context. Which is why everyone is doing it and it makes it impossible to have a "serious conversation" because it is the standard liberals' excuse when confronted with hard arguments. They default to insults. Can't argue? "Orange man bad, you inbred racist."
And that behavior is the reason for polarization.
People are incapable of debating serious topics without ridiculing their counterparts. This is going on on both sides, but the left are undeniably pushing it harder using mainstream media, while the conservatives are left with one smart guy on Fox News and a collection of youtubers whose voices are currently being threatened because of the liberal bias in Silicon Valley I described earlier.
Conservatives are not the ones threatening meme-culture to suppress political diversity. That's all coming from the left. Which really got a boost from Hillary Clinton during her presidential campaign. The Alt-right had fewer members claiming to represent it than the KKK. When that word left her mouth, it never stopped being repeated. She labeled a cartoon frog racist. What the fuck?
Internationally it can be seen with the EU, pushing globalism while redefining nationalism as supremacist ideology. And currently literally attempting to ban memes.
And it's not hard to observe.
If we disagree, we were born racist.
If we vote another way, we support fascism.
If we dare question their agenda, we are white supremacists.
Even if the ones questioning them are black!
If we dare to speak out, violence against us is tolerated, even promoted.
If we are intellectuals, we are deemed alt-right nazis.
The left is running a non-stop media campaign which says not just conservatives, any differing views from theirs are to be labeled evil. There is only one opinion. One ideology. One god. And anything else is blasphemy.
Of course you're afraid to disagree with them.
You're a bitch.
It's easier to go along to get along.
(Old Spike)
See, here we go again, all offended by a post about trump, as he obviously is a climate change denier. I challenge you to show us where he was "misquoted" on the topic. His opinions on it could come straight from crowder or fox news but not from peer reviewed research (he actually would have PRIVILEGED access to, NASA is still a government agency).
You telling me people voted for the wall to "protect mexicans" diqualifies you from any serious discussion, it's a nice "alt right" propaganda, though, and you probably tell yourself that's your reason.
Your shallow criticism about the EU shows your complete ignorance on the subject and is taken straight from nationalistic propagande spread by farage and his peers.
You wanna be taken seriously? Inform yourself. Then people would't have any reason to make fun of you.
And yeah, I agree it is way easier than it should be but that is NOT the fault of those taking advantage of it.
(Old Spike)
I'm pretty sure I answered this comment yesterday in great detail. But nothing here, how delightful. I must have forgotten to post it.
I haven't defended or denied Trump's opinions on Climate Change. I, in fact, started off by acknowledging that all his voters didn't agree with him on the topic.
That question, was never answered. You made up your own question and answered it instead.
And you ended it predictably with an insult.
I went on to predict your behavior in the next comments, in true 8 Mile fashion.
But as time passed you forgot about it and continued anyway, which makes this a perfect opportunity to remind you how predictable you are.
Now some of those have already come true, insults have been written several times. Insinuated I oppose climate change as reality by "challenging" me to show "us"(LOL how many are you?) somewhere Donald Trump was misquoted about climate change, as if that is something I have written, which was not the subject I was referring to when talking about misrepresentation of the President by the media. I was talking about illegal immigration and other topics. You shouldn't skim through posts if you want to appear consistent in your own replies to them.
This whole thing started with me pointing out that you posted this video in order to misrepresent all conservatives as stereotypical racehating climate change denying rednecks.
And this is what you have continued to do.
You have no other mode. You can only represent your ideology with their most recent approved lingo. Which is why individuals can predict everything you do.
The only thing really diverse about far left ideology is the diversity of hatred for anyone who disagrees.
Hating diversity of opinion is a common trait of ideologies.
They will bunch you up with the worst they can find in a dictionary or the historybooks over trivial misunderstandings, misinterpretations and disagreements regarding politics, which are decided in the voting booths and through your elected representatives, not harassing people for their choice of hats, choice of food, choice of products, choice of beliefs.
They'll justify violence, which is illegal regardless of how unpopular or counter-productive to society someone is.
They justify their followers' stepping outside the law and taking away the rights, not just constitutional, but human rights of their opponents to stifle dissent.
The left has labeled so many people as white supremacists and nazis over political disagreements which have already existed without issue for decades, it has become impossible to identify actual true representatives of those beliefs.
And they'll throw their own people under the bus if the ideology allows it. Because it's not about individuals, it's about an idea, that sounds good when one first hears it. A common goal, with a superior morality attached to it which can't be defeated because the destruction of anyones' ability to criticize and alter it is part of its main goals.
Unachievable goals. Which will be worked towards by more and more, for they will not see an alternative.
And it always grows into a giant bubble of contradicting ideals nobody will ever live up to.
And then it bursts. Often later than sooner. And individuals are left looking at themselves realizing how wrong they were about everything, and how much time they wasted on something that would never come to fluition. The people they've hurt and forced into exile for years. Horrible acts of malice and hostility to people just like them, even into fear of their own lives. The true patrons of Hell on Earth.
And here you are. In the middle of it.
(Old Spike)
Oh boy, still so triggered.
If you do identify yourself as "conservative and trump voter but not a trumptard", why respond at all to this post (other than having a laugh). If you feel insulted by my opinion then maybe you should not reply and report me to admin instead. I never called you a trumptard btw, I simply wrote your comments suggest you are. You are not making your case better, matey.
Don't divert to the "far left", they are equally as bad as the far right, even condone violence, just for different reasons (well, almost as I don't think any of them drove a car into a crowd of opposing protesters but I gladly stand corrected if you can give examples). I am not part of either so you can't insult me by tying to put me into that far left niche. We had our fair share of horrible left wing terrorism where I grew up.
You told us trump was misquoted (in the context of the climate change) so I asked where was that? Don't pretend you meant "in genereal". There are probably quite a few cases where he actually was misquoted but is that not true for any president?
Also true for the most recent presidents is that two of them are more laughed about than another. Why is that? Because they make more sense with down to earth politics, clear policies, or because what they say is rather idiotic and not thought through, especially the latest example.
Why can people make fun so easily of them (and their supporters)? Probably because of their hollow promises and marky but unsubstantiated words, the right wingers love so much. This is so similar to farage's brexit campaign it is hard not to hose oneself.
Now VOX, the new far right party here in spain has the same rhetorik, they even want to build "a wall" now, probably to protect arabs and negroes from injury or death whilst climbing the fences.
Afterthought:
Ukraine are likely to vote for a comedian, so the godemperor will be in for stiff competition, sadly I don't speak their language.