Politics

[MauserM03Blog]

the mistake you make is “believing” that everyone should agree with you.

I don't believe people should agree with me. I believe you and I are on the same page in this respect. People should assess carefully prepared and responsibly presented analysis, from a multiple of sources depending on the importance of the matter, and decide on what their actions will be. I used this process to advise my government. Not enough people follow this method though. They keep listening to news that suits their mood, in echo chambers. Not good. Nor is having leaders who surround themselves with sycophants and loyalists, as per Putin in Russia and now Trump in the US.

“Man made climate change” is a code word for socialism. If the facts clearly pointed for a coming catastrophe as you claim then I would be onboard. I agree with you on this point, what I believe is irrelevant as is your beliefs. Everyone should look at the evidence and make their own decision. Start with your own life and lead by example if this is important to you. What changes are you making to interrupt the catastrophic chain of events. I think I will have another cigar.

Socialism is a word Americans use for what everyone else calls cooperation.

If you're not seeing clear information about rapidly increasing temperatures and the effects, you might be in an echo chamber.

What am I doing? At the personal level, through design and effort our household uses a fraction of the energy, water and fuel compared with our neighbours. My wife and I went blue-water sailing after retiring. That helped us hone our skills in conserving resources. Our adult children see the point and cooperate (sorry, that should be socialismate).

At a community level, I am developing a platform which will encourage and enable city dwellers to personally contact and sponsor farmers, who will plant trees in their name. City folk will be able to personally offset carbon emissions they cannot presently avoid, such as from air travel or driving classic cars. Having a tree or many with your name on it will mean more to people than paying a random, voluntary or mandatory carbon offset charge. Farmers will have a new source of income, from the payments and from the timber down the track. Some farmers will find it more lucrative than running cattle or sheep, especially when manufactured meat disrupts the livestock industry and rural land prices fall. Ooof.

Leading by example? Perhaps.

 

[Mark A Ouellette]

This YouTube video discusses new European support for Ukraine's fight against Russia.

Even US SHOCKED by UK, EU and Turkey's Surprise Bold Move for Ukraine​

Here is an article on the same;

France and Britain to propose one-month truce in Ukraine, Macron says

France and Britain are to propose a one-month truce in Ukraine “in the air, at sea”, Emmanuel Macron has said following talks in London on Sunday.

www.telegraph.co.uk

And it seems that Russia is not happy about this;

Russia To Wipe Out European Troops In Ukraine? Lavrov's Big Warning To Europe After London Summit​

I cannot personally verify the information presented but is seems logical.

I don't claim to be an expert at stragegic planning but maybe, just maybe we should give bad orange man President Trump some credit for waking up Europe? Perhaps Trump studied Zelenskyy's modus operandi...

How many times has Zelensky walked away from signing the Minerals Agreement?​

What say you?

 

[Neophyte]

I think I’ll stick to diesel trucks.
If for no other reason than to piss off the nose ring wearing purple haired androgynous transsexuals that want to “save the planet.”

 

[Wishfulthinker580]

I don't believe people should agree with me. I believe you and I are on the same page in this respect. People should assess carefully prepared and responsibly presented analysis, from a multiple of sources depending on the importance of the matter, and decide on what their actions will be. I used this process to advise my government. Not enough people follow this method though. They keep listening to news that suits their mood, in echo chambers. Not good. Nor is having leaders who surround themselves with sycophants and loyalists, as per Putin in Russia and now Trump in the US.

Socialism is a word Americans use for what everyone else calls cooperation.

If you're not seeing clear information about rapidly increasing temperatures and the effects, you might be in an echo chamber.

What am I doing? At the personal level, through design and effort our household uses a fraction of the energy, water and fuel compared with our neighbours. My wife and I went blue-water sailing after retiring. That helped us hone our skills in conserving resources. Our adult children see the point and cooperate (sorry, that should be socialismate).

At a community level, I am developing a platform which will encourage and enable city dwellers to personally contact and sponsor farmers, who will plant trees in their name. City folk will be able to personally offset carbon emissions they cannot presently avoid, such as from air travel or driving classic cars. Having a tree or many with your name on it will mean more to people than paying a random, voluntary or mandatory carbon offset charge. Farmers will have a new source of income, from the payments and from the timber down the track. Some farmers will find it more lucrative than running cattle or sheep, especially when manufactured meat disrupts the livestock industry and rural land prices fall. Ooof.

Leading by example? Perhaps.

Self righteous and deluded is more like it The cottage industries built around leftist virtue signaling really are impressive Talk about a gold rush…

Make no mistake, you are a true believer..

“One person’s socialism is another person’s neighborliness.” Don’t ya know?

 

[Neophyte]

I don't believe people should agree with me. I believe you and I are on the same page in this respect. People should assess carefully prepared and responsibly presented analysis, from a multiple of sources depending on the importance of the matter, and decide on what their actions will be. I used this process to advise my government. Not enough people follow this method though. They keep listening to news that suits their mood, in echo chambers. Not good. Nor is having leaders who surround themselves with sycophants and loyalists, as per Putin in Russia and now Trump in the US.

Socialism is a word Americans use for what everyone else calls cooperation.

If you're not seeing clear information about rapidly increasing temperatures and the effects, you might be in an echo chamber.

What am I doing? At the personal level, through design and effort our household uses a fraction of the energy, water and fuel compared with our neighbours. My wife and I went blue-water sailing after retiring. That helped us hone our skills in conserving resources. Our adult children see the point and cooperate (sorry, that should be socialismate).

At a community level, I am developing a platform which will encourage and enable city dwellers to personally contact and sponsor farmers, who will plant trees in their name. City folk will be able to personally offset carbon emissions they cannot presently avoid, such as from air travel or driving classic cars. Having a tree or many with your name on it will mean more to people than paying a random, voluntary or mandatory carbon offset charge. Farmers will have a new source of income, from the payments and from the timber down the track. Some farmers will find it more lucrative than running cattle or sheep, especially when manufactured meat disrupts the livestock industry and rural land prices fall. Ooof.

Leading by example? Perhaps.

I’ll eat real beef and not your laboratory manufactured crap.

Your attitude about the environment is prevalent among Europeans I have met and a big reason why I don’t care about Europe. I’d gladly let Russia run over Europe so long as they leave America alone.

 

[mark-hunter]

What say you?

4 days before presidents Trump inauguration, president Zelensky signed a deal with UK. 16 january?
Details are not yet publicly known, but the way I read:

100 year partnership, and support for 3 billion, per year (for as long as it takes)
It s 3x100 = 300 billion in next 100 years.
I wouldnt be surprised, minerals are somewhere mentioned in a small print. This in theory could explain president Zelsneky walking away from deal with president Trump.

quote/unqoute
Today’s announcement builds on the £12.8 billion package of support the UK has given Ukraine, including £7.8bn of military assistance, a commitment for £3bn in military aid until as long as it takes,
source

UK and Ukraine sign landmark 100 Year Partnership to deepen security ties and strengthen partnership for future generations

The UK and Ukraine will sign a historic partnership, as the Prime Minister travels to the country to meet President Zelenskyy.

www.gov.uk

Regarding Uk troops in Ukraine, I think it is beating around the bush to see who will join and how it turns out in response
UK needs support from US to send troops. If US doesnt send cavalry, this is hardly to be accomplished.
This was published on several outlets.

UK army would be destroyed in ‘six months to a year’ in war, says minister

Alistair Carns, the minister for veterans' affairs, told a conference in London that the current size of the British Army meant its forces would be out of action within 12 months if there was a conflict on a similar scale to the war in Ukraine. He said around 1,500 Russian soldiers were killed...

rusi.org

 

[MauserM03Blog]

I think I’ll stick to diesel trucks.
If for no other reason than to piss off the nose ring wearing purple haired androgynous transsexuals that want to “save the planet.”

Oh crikey. Now you’ve ear-wormed me with that song from the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

‘I’m just a sweet transvestite. A transsexual, Transylvanian.’

 

[MauserM03Blog]

I’ll eat real beef and not your laboratory manufactured crap.

I eat real beef too, for the moment. But not a lot in comparison to others.

When the laboratory manufactured crap turns up, I’ll give it a try. It’s called being open minded. If it’s better in all respects and cheaper, I think we’ll keep buying it. So will most. Real beef will become niche. I’ll enjoy it in fancy restaurants from time to time.

 

[MauserM03Blog]

Make no mistake, you are a true believer..

No, actually I’m not. I’m a pretty standard Australian; a hunter and shooter like you. We don’t have the intense political divide the US has. When we discuss politics, it’s without the heat. We’re glad about this. It’s part of what makes for a really nice country to live in.

 

[rigbymauser]

Oh crikey. Now you’ve ear-wormed me with that song from the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

‘I’m just a sweet transvestite. A transsexual, Transylvanian.’

Leave this guy(or girl) alone. Its a (russian)troll who just stirre up s@#%. He is no more american than Karl Marx was. They pop up like corkscrews from time to time.

 

[Neophyte]

Leave this guy(or girl) alone. Its a (russian)troll who just stirre up s@#%. He is no more american than Karl Marx was. They pop up like corkscrews from time to time.

You’re funny.

I’m not a Russian troll and have kin buried in France thanks to WWII. What I am is someone that doesn’t want to be the rich uncle giving money to the ungrateful nephews and nieces. That’s what Europe is.

 

[WAB]

Thanks for this. You've highlighted the problem. You've used the word 'believe'.

'Believe' is for religion, other cults and some football fans. 'Despite all indications to the contrary, I believe we're gonna win this year.'

Scientists do not use the words 'believe' or 'not believe'. Climate scientists do research, assess the results, then present their conclusions for review by expert peers. If it all holds up, it's published and adds to our knowledge. You can be thankful for this process when the wings of your plane don't fall off. Or when the drugs pumped into your wife's veins cure her cancer. Believing is not relevant.

Research. Results. Conclusions. Considerations. Decisions. These matter. What you believe is irrelevant.

You have left out a key point of true scientific method, an attempt to disprove your thesis. The climate is, and always has been, changing. Very few debate that. The dispute is on a causal link between human activity and climate change. The appropriate approach to this analysis would be to adopt a thesis for or against the link and attempt to prove AND disprove said thesis. I have yet to see any paper that takes this approach. In fact, quite the opposite. It is so bad that anyone who suggests a true scientific method be adopted is branded a heretic and accused of not believing the science. This disingenuous approach by politicians parading as scientists is nauseating.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

Leave it to Senator John Kennedy to come up with a suitable phrase for all occasions:

https://www.instagram.com/mosheh/reel/DGRV6ujRku9/

"Vladimir Putin is a gangster....He makes Jeffery Dahmer look like Mother Theresa."

"Never get between a dog and a fire hydrant'

Words to live by!

 

[Hogpatrol]

The ignore function is our most trusted friend.

 

[Pondoro]

I’ll eat real beef and not your laboratory manufactured crap.

Your attitude about the environment is prevalent among Europeans I have met and a big reason why I don’t care about Europe. I’d gladly let Russia run over Europe so long as they leave America alone.

Would you gladly let Russia run over America as long as they leave Europe alone..?

 

[LivingTheDream]

manufactured meat disrupts the livestock industry and rural land prices fall

Can we post this on a lighter note. Thanks for the laugh. You will have to tell me about the science on this one.

 

[Neophyte]

Would you gladly let Russia run over America as long as they leave Europe alone..?

Nope.
But like I said earlier, Until Russia is at the Mexican or Canadian border I don’t care what they do.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

Nope.
But like I said earlier, Until Russia is at the Mexican or Canadian border I don’t care what they do.

And that is why you are a Neophyte.

 

[Vashper]

Thanks for this. You've highlighted the problem. You've used the word 'believe'.

'Believe' is for religion, other cults and some football fans. 'Despite all indications to the contrary, I believe we're gonna win this year.'

Scientists do not use the words 'believe' or 'not believe'. Climate scientists do research, assess the results, then present their conclusions for review by expert peers. If it all holds up, it's published and adds to our knowledge. You can be thankful for this process when the wings of your plane don't fall off. Or when the drugs pumped into your wife's veins cure her cancer. Believing is not relevant.

Research. Results. Conclusions. Considerations. Decisions. These matter. What you believe is irrelevant.

Modern science has been testing hypotheses by experiment since the time of Roger Bacon. An experiment that can be repeated in another place and at another time. Anything that is not verified by experiment is unscientific or not entirely scientific. This is how modern science differs from ancient or medieval science, even though there were great thinkers there.
In climatology (as well as in economics, by the way), the opportunity to conduct experiments is limited. At best, these are pre-Baconian sciences, like philology. It is possible to find and discuss patterns, but you can make informed predictions only at your own risk.

 

[Doubleplay]

Lastly, I don’t agree with the ambush part. Zelensky came to sign a minerals deal and lost his cool and when he decided to debate JDV. He knew he was on shaky ground with the Trump administration and there was no reason to go off half cocked like that when he had so much to gain—and to lose.
I wonder if you and I might agree, however, that if there was one Churchill in the Oval Office on Friday, it was probably Randolph, in the person of POTUS.

Zelensky lost his cool?
Did you watch the debacle?