October 11, 2017

NY couple asks black passerby to agree Confederate flags not racist

NY couple asks black passerby to agree Confederate flag’s ‘not racist’ — and are gobsmacked when he won’t
The reporter said his neighbors then tried to prove their point by asking a 13-year-old black boy playing nearby to validate their feelings.

“Are you opposed to the flag at all?” Barber asked the teen. “Do you have a problem with the flag, as a black person?”

The teen’s answer genuinely seemed to surprise the couple, according to the reporter.

“Yeah, it is offensive to me,” the teen said. “This is the flag of people who want to bring slavery back.”

The astonished couple asked the teen to meet with them sometime so they could explain what the flag meant to them, but he declined.
https://www.rawstory.com/2017/10/ny-couple-asks-black-passerby-to-agree-confederate-flags-not-racist-and-are-gobsmacked-when-he-wont/

Ha Too funny.

October 11, 2017

Man Attacked in Charlottesville Charged With Assault in Unexpected Turn

Source: NBC News

DeAndre Harris, the black man whose beating by a group of white men in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August sparked a virtual manhunt for his attackers, was charged with felony assault on Tuesday.

A white man involved in an earlier brawl that day said he was injured by Harris, and authorities drew up an arrest warrant.

But a lawyer for Harris said it wasn’t his client who committed the assault. Instead, he said, it was a group of white men.

For weeks after being attacked, Harris found himself at the center of a social media firestorm. He’d been beaten bloody by a half-dozen white men at the “Unite the Right” rally-turned-riot in Charlottesville, where a group of white nationalists and Nazis clashed violently with counter-protesters.

Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/man-attacked-charlottesville-charged-assault-unexpected-turn-n809576

October 10, 2017

Of course you are because it's not about global warming

Its about your belief that we should all live like you want.

... you see those monster bird and bat killing wind turbines as "progress." I see them as high energy industrial consumer economy litter. Why are they there? So some consumer can feel good about their energy "choices."

Seeing as how scientists think they will play a large part in stopping global warming maybe that is why they are there.

I don't see them as choices, I don't see them as progress. They are progress the same way 19th and 20th century people saw smokestacks as progress.
Just another example of your "beliefs" not actually matching up with reality.

If your wind and solar utopia doesn't work, and if it's rejected by the high energy industrial "consumer" market, adding gas to the power mix is not the answer.
Straw man again, you,,,,just,,,,cant,,,stop,,,it. Pathetic.

My observation has been that anti-nuclear activists frequently become shills for the "natural" gas industry. I have very deep connections within the California anti-nuclear community 'seventies and early 'eighties. People I saw naked deep. People who could summon Helen Caldicott with an airline ticket, motel room and generous expenses.

Straw man yet again,,,, seriously pathetic.
The largest industrial projects on the planet today concern the extraction and distribution of natural gas. There are enough natural gas reserves to destroy what's left of the natural environment we humans inherited, and to destroy our own high energy industrial world economy.
Yup.

Personally, I've lived on many levels of this world economy, from dumpster-diving semi-homeless person living in a garden shed to affluent person who can buy a new car on credit. (My wife and I are sort of in the middle now, thanks to astonishing medical debts for random shit that fell out of the sky and student loan debts for our kids we can't always pay. Life in the U.S.A., our favorite second world perpetually developing nation, top dog banana republic of the banana republics, with nukes.)
TMI and I dont care at all.

If you want to do some speculative math, calculate how much natural gas Ivanpah will use before it is abandoned.
Why? do you see me defending natural gas? Nope, you just want to lump me into anti-nuke and pro-natural gas just because I said nuclear's shit stinks as well as solar and winds.

Here is me: Yes, global warming is seriously bad and we should use nuclear, wind, solar and whatever we can to get off of fossil fuels, btw, solar and wind do create toxic wastes but so does nuclear.

Here is you: Global warming is bad, nuclear and living as a Luddite is the answer and if you think differently then you are anti nuke and pro natural gas. btw, wind creates more gas plants even though getting rid of them wont slow down the production of gas plants. Here is a straw man, and another, and another, and another, and another, and another, and another, and another. But I'm a Luddite so I have some special experience that makes me better even though I use electricity but my use is ok. Oh yeah, people should have less kids, but disregard that I had some.

That's hilarious, you have at least 2 kids and that is the largest factor to global warming. And yet here you are with the gall to not only come on here and lecture me who decided years ago to not have kids because of global warming but you straw man me so often that you must have a straw man button on your keyboard that does it for you automatically as much as you do it. I take back calling you a fucking twat, you are a fucking hypocrite, and then a twat.

October 8, 2017

Natural gas is successful without solar and wind.

Here are the two scenarios.
1. More gas plants with solar and wind.
2. more gas plants.
If each equal 100.
Then 1. is what, 70% more gas and 2. is 100% gas with each new plant opened.
You choose. You can say whatever you want to say, we should do this or that, but this is what is happening. Right now we are buying time. Solar and wind gives us that time. Without it we have less time. Hopefully it gives us the time to figure this out, because we have to. I just want to add, for some reason countries are growing in solar and wind at a large percentage, and they are not with Nuclear. I am sure it is because of the large scale demonstrations against nuclear across the world. Could it be because it economically doesn't make sense compared to renewable energy and gas energy? I mean, we know that energy companies are real sensitive to the prevailing thought and don't follow the money. As I have stated before, I havenothing against Nuclear energy, I just don't think that it is necessarily better than solar and wind. Both have their pro's and con's. I am in the camp of lets do what is best for humanity but to ignore Nuclear problems while bashing solar and wind is the height of ignorance.

I lied, I just want to add one more thing, you put this in your post "It's apparent gas is a desirable energy source for many people, even anti-nuclear activists," and I am really tired of you insinuating that is what I believe. I am really tired of you putting words in my mouth. I just want any jury to read this entire thread before you judge what I am about to say, Hunter, you are a despicable excuse for a human. You continue to ascribe things that I have never said to me, insinuate that I am anti-nuclear, pro-gas when all I have done is argue the benefits of solar and wind while accepting the problems those pose while pointing out the problems Nuclear poses are at least equal, You use republican talking points against renewable energy and are generally just a fucking twat. You cant even answer a simple yes or no question because you know it will show your hypocrisy. If I didn't know any better I would think you were a PR person for the Nuclear industry. If you aren't, you should be, you would fit in perfectly.