You're essentially saying Dont look at the crime statistics in places like SF, or read the policies being put in place like not charging "low level offenses" or decriminalizing theft under 950 dollars, dont watch the videos of store take overs or of them being ransacked, and dont pay attention to the people and businesses fleeing these places and everything is okay.
Everything is fine if you stick your head in the sand. Just like this rail project
Sticking your head in the sand.... there is a new word to describing be people that do that. Ostriching. If you never look, you'll never see any problems you don't want to see.
Standing mile in <21 seconds. 0-250mph in <22 seconds.
berkeley.
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:Sticking your head in the sand.... there is a new word to describing be people that do that. Ostriching. If you never look, you'll never see any problems you don't want to see.
You mean like people that think that global warming is a hoax? The earth running out of oil is a hoax? Those people?
VolvoHeretic said:AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:Sticking your head in the sand.... there is a new word to describing be people that do that. Ostriching. If you never look, you'll never see any problems you don't want to see.
You mean like people that think that global warming is a hoax? The earth running out of oil is a hoax? Those people?
LOL. Just because you believe the equivalent of the Nigerian prince scam every time the TV tells you to, doesn't compel me at all. The peak oil theory itself is older than I am. Here I am and here we all are and there is plenty of the stuff. Should I post the list of climate hoaxes that I have survived to date? I do have this list in a convenient to share photo. I'm absolutely positive most of the crowd here would want my head on a stick for sharing it. They never refute it, but censorship will be demanded!
I find it ironic that you somehow think the people that can't balance or pass a budget are going to save the planet from impending doom.
Conflating activism with science didn't work out well for "the pandemic." Most of the people screeching "science" are the same ones that stopped taking math and science classes in middle school because it was too hard.
how old are you anyway?
VolvoHeretic said:AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:Sticking your head in the sand.... there is a new word to describing be people that do that. Ostriching. If you never look, you'll never see any problems you don't want to see.
You mean like people that think that global warming is a hoax? The earth running out of oil is a hoax? Those people?
Wasn't the original Peak Oil Theory based on us never producing more oil than we did after 1975?
This is in no way in support of AnthonyGS, just pointing out how economics change as new technologies are discovered and harnessed.
VolvoHeretic said:how old are you anyway?
WTF does that have to do with anything?
Explicitly lay out what you are implying, or, and depending on your answer, you need a timeout for discrimiating based on age.
In reply to z31maniac :
"The peak oil theory itself is older than I am." No reason, just wondering.
VolvoHeretic said:In reply to z31maniac :
"The peak oil theory itself is older than I am." No reason, just wondering.
Younger than the theory.
https://gardner.utah.edu/peak-oil-theory-revisited/#:~:text=The%20term%20%E2%80%9Cpeak%20oil%E2%80%9D%20is,would%20enter%20into%20terminal%20decline.
An astute scientist would also note it's a theory, not a law of science. Almost 70 years and no one has proven the theory.
People love Georgia Tech here. Maybe you can explain to me and everyone else how all the climate alarmists are right and Judith Curry is wrong.
https://www.biznews.com/global-citizen/2022/10/05/climate-change-2
And yet again, I can make many more pressing matters that actually threaten humanity and life on Earth more than climate change. The climate has always changed. Why did the doomsayers have to repackage the ozone layer, global warming and next ice age as climate change anyway? Maybe it's because every prediction they made has been wrong.
In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
"She agreed that the Earth is warming, largely due to human-generated greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, and that the plausible worst-case scenario is potentially catastrophic."
Sorry, Judith Curry lost me when she said:
"Pre-industrial is held up as some sort of golden age that we’re supposed to go back to. Well [in] pre-industrial [times] the weather was horrible. This was at the end of the little ice age. It was the coldest period of the millennium. There were horrible famines, extreme weather and extremely, terribly cold winters and springs and things like that."
Yep, all of that suffering with just a 1 degree C drop in temperatures.
"[Viewed] hemispherically, the "Little Ice Age" can only be considered as a modest cooling of the Northern Hemisphere during this period of less than 1°C relative to late twentieth century levels.[3]"
Like I've already said and even so did Judith Curry, rapid Climate Change is detrimental to life on Earth and especially to Human life. Warmer or colder, it won't be pretty and we need to do everything possible not to contribute to it.
Just wait until the world's population reaches 10 billion in a mere 34 years (as far into the future as they will try and predict) and the world's temperatures rise 10 degrees F by the end of the century. Like you said, Ostriching, good luck with it.
Worldometer.info: World Population: Past, Present, and Future
"The latest world population projections indicate that world population will reach 10 billion persons in the year 2057."
Climate.gov: Climate Change: Global Temperature
"According to the 2017 U.S. Climate Science Special Report, if yearly emissions continue to increase rapidly, as they have since 2000, models project that by the end of this century, global temperature will be at least 5 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the 1901-1960 average, and possibly as much as 10.2 degrees warmer. If annual emissions increase more slowly and begin to decline significantly by 2050, models project temperatures would still be at least 2.4 degrees warmer than the first half of the 20th century, and possibly up to 5.9 degrees warmer."
Edit: Lets look again at the CO2 emissions chart for good measure, it pretty much follows the world population chart above:
I think that's the fifth time Anthony has posted a "source" he clearly didn't read that disproves his major point. I like how they keep trying to talk down to everyone while dragging in as many random culture war things as possible; now Anthony's trying to drag in COVID while opti's talking crime statistics:
Opti said:You're essentially saying Dont look at the crime statistics in places like SF,
... which I've seen only ends in modern propaganda about cities up to and including bannable 13/50 comments. Dogwhistle ho!
In reply to z31maniac :
Kinda yeah. I'll admit I only know so much, but the whole "peak resource" thing assumes that we won't find more, that the price won't alter prior unprofitable sources, and that technology won't open new avenues (fracking, for instance). Groups were trying to spread "peak lithium" for a little bit even but companies like LG/Samsung kept announcing new plants and refineries, and since you can pull lithium from anything from seawater to carbonates it was hard for them to propagandize it that way- instead it gets lied about in false comparisons to oil refineries and falsifying pictures of it, which Curtis showed in the first few pages.
Interestingly, the Peak Oil thoughts also show why oil prices will never drop no matter how much production increases or consumption eases; eventually the companies will just begin shutting off pumps that aren't needed or are too expensive to run to keep the cost at a stable rate.
Don't forget to look up Wikipedia.org: Global Dimming which has been depressing global warming because all of the sulfur particulates have been reflecting sunlight and cooling the earth counteracting CO2's infrared warming. It basically says that even if we were to completely eliminate all hydrocarbon burning, the particulates would quickly be removed from the atmosphere while CO2 takes much longer to be removed, thus accelerating global warming.
So we agree peak oil is bunk? And that price is the driving factor in oil supply?
That's an improvement. We can talk about climate data later and "overpopulation." Just look at the graphs though and the wife variance in possible scenarios. That is exactly what you get when you run statistical simulations a range of outcomes. No one actually KNOWS what will happen.
And as for overpopulation; it's a big city problem. The main thing I see is people are more dangerous to other people than anything else on the planet. Other people are more likely to harm you than anything else. That's a great reason to avoid big cities.
In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
Peak Oil is an oxymoron. We have known that all of that shale oil was down there since the 1950s, it just wasn't until around 2005 that GPS horizontal drilling was developed and it was possible to drill and extract.
GIRTHQUAKE said:Opti said:You're essentially saying Dont look at the crime statistics in places like SF,
... which I've seen only ends in modern propaganda about cities up to and including bannable 13/50 comments. Dogwhistle ho!
I have see no mention of race in this thread or linking it to crime, especially not from me. If the first place your mind goes when crime is brought up is race, I find you dishonest and disgusting and I don't care to carry on the conversation with you. I hope one day you're able to replace that prejudice with love.
VolvoHeretic said:In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
Peak Oil is an oxymoron. We have known that all of that shale oil was down there since the 1950s, it just wasn't until around 2005 that GPS horizontal drilling was developed and it was possible to drill and extract.
It's a false theory and always has been. Laterals and horizontals have been drilled since well before 2005. But yes the technology to geosteer well paths horizontally now is quite cool. And Dr Q Passey's work on source rocks (shale) didn't really start until the 1980s. He updates his tech paper every few years.
So we all agree there isn't a shortage and that doesn't make transitioning a necessity?
Want to talk the goal of zero coal while we are at it and why that too is false?
I just read a cool article on CA high sided rail too. About $10billion spent some far and zero miles of track. Maybe the problems aren't technical at all......
You literally brought up crime statistics and knew what my "13/50" reference was about- nail meet hammer lmao
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:And as for overpopulation; it's a big city problem. The main thing I see is people are more dangerous to other people than anything else on the planet. Other people are more likely to harm you than anything else. That's a great reason to avoid big cities.
No that's someone else's words that you're parroting. Fear of cities is apart of common propaganda, make you scared instead of understanding an issue to better combat a problem- the rural/city devide is now just a new axis.
---
Speaking of peak oil; another forum I'm on someone posted this video from a dude named "Arthur Berman" and on a whim I decided to search the guy, since the video is over an hour long but the poster was pontificating on how it details the differences between things like light/heavy crude and sulfur content. I quickly found This massive, heavily researched list linking directly to all his points by minute to government sources on energy. It's huge, but more importantly it underscores that all energy used in America currently requires some amount of oil and thus, it's use should be restrained. What I'm seeing so far I'm really liking, so I'm posting the video up now so I can watch it more in-depth later.
In particular, one of his many sources is this image, which details the differentiation between light versus heavy crude and the amount of sulphur within it. Apparently the light, sweet stuff America pumps is largely turned into plastic bags.
Opti said:You're essentially saying Dont look at the crime statistics in places like SF, or read the policies being put in place like not charging "low level offenses" or decriminalizing theft under 950 dollars, dont watch the videos of store take overs or of them being ransacked, and dont pay attention to the people and businesses fleeing these places and everything is okay.
Everything is fine if you stick your head in the sand. Just like this rail project
You do realize that the police and jails are paid for with local taxes. So if the people of LA or SF want more of that they can simply vote to ncrease their taxes.
My personal bias is that unless someone shows me how time in Jail results in lower crime levels I won't get excited about what happens there.
My bias is I live in an extremely crime free community. The last serious crime was a multi millionaire who owned several nationally successful businesses and a couple of medium sized banks. His wife had severe dementia and rather than live without the love of his life it was a murder suicide.
With a population under 6000 we spend 3 million on police. Response time is seldom more than 2-3 minutes.
In the other hand we have 3 jail cells that nobody ever remembers being occupied.
You realize stolen goods are paid for with increases in prices to the people who don't steal, right?
In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :
I think that's the fifth time Anthony has posted a "source" he clearly didn't read that disproves his major point. I like how they keep trying to talk down to everyone while dragging in as many random culture war things as possible; now Anthony's trying to drag in COVID while opti's talking crime statistics:
Opti said:You're essentially saying Dont look at the crime statistics in places like SF,
... which I've seen only ends in modern propaganda about cities up to and including bannable 13/50 comments. Dogwhistle ho!
This is why it's hard to take anything you say seriously, but thank you for illustrating the larger issue. Rather than debate the issue- you showed zero evidence to refute Opti's claim- you called him racist. Even though there was zero racial element in anything he said. Just questioning- not even questing but pointing out- crime, makes you racist and discussion needs to be shut down. In the same way questioning the highly questionable and debatable subject of climate change makes you a climate denier or science denier. Don't you see the irony of calling Anthony out on on dragging in "culture war things," while introducing racism into the discussion?
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
80% of American's live in or near a major city.
Big cities concentrate poverty into certain areas. Which results in high crime.
Arrest everyone breaking the law and you'd better hope you're never are followed by the police. Regardless of how careful you are, you'll break a law within 25 minutes or sooner.
The reason some cities may go easy on crime, is if you remove one person from the family. 50% of the guidance is gone, 50% of the income is gone, & 50% of the support is gone.
If you want an iron clad guarantee that the children will grow up as criminals. Put them in the foster care system.
We have hard working mothers working 5-6 jobs to take care of their kids because the husband is in jail.
Most of the time those kids have no parental supervision.
That is reality.
Jails rarely "fix" the problem. The most that can be hoped for is the violent ones are warehoused safely away
Caperix said:I think frenchys account has been hacked by Elon Musk. Tesla has been promising things that will probably never happen for almost a decade. I would not take there promises of what is coming too seriously.
Too bad you can't be objective. I personally hate Elon Musk's politics.
However I'm in absolute awe of what he has achieved.
His newest thing is the hairpin electric motor. It's a lot more powerful and weighs less than regular electric motors ( plus it's smaller and uses less material. ). Including, no rare earth metals. Yet Efficiency is up significantly.
Before that he switched monitors from a variety of voltages from 5.5- 48
Switched everything to 48 volts. That will use a lot less copper, and increase range. ( plus save about 10 billion dollars of cost).
In addition he is looking right now at sodium batteries. While some range will be lost at the same size. Life span will drastically go up from 20 years to perhaps as much as 35 years.
plus weight will go down. While battery costs will go Down dramatically.
His Giga presses are making cars with as much as 100 fewer parts. Saving 50% of the labor used to build the new model 3.
Prices on his cars are coming down. The model 3 last night came down another $250.
His goal is to produce the model 2 for $25,000 and be fully eligible for the $7500 IRS rebate. The motor in that car will cost $1000 while the battery will only cost $5000 while lasting much longer
To that end he is now building the biggest auto factory in the world. ( previously held by the Texas Giga factory).
On that site he's installing a massive battery to not only run the plant but sell excess power to Texas when they are facing brown outs and power loss.
Yes it's big enough for both.!
Speaking of that, Elon musk's factory workers are making over $35/. Hr.
He's also installing a battery like that in England so they can be 100% renewable.
Australia is now 75% renewable.
as is New Zealand.
Texas to make the new Tesla Pickup truck. Preproduction models are seen around and the first production ones should be coming off the Texas plant in Sept /October.
Annual production is expected to be 250,000.
Its bigger than the. GM. (4&1/2' bed) ford, 5&1/2' bed) Tesla will have a 6&1/2 ' bed. Interior room is bigger than both GM and Ford.
The numbers don't add up because Musk is saying annual production to be 500,000 ( Ford F150 is about 700,000+.).
I'm personally not excited, unless Elon Musk figures out how it can tow more than 100 miles on a charge. If I've got the battery size right it would take as much as 8 hours to recover a full charge?
In reply to frenchyd :
You're general theory isn't wrong. Things in a similar vein were written by the founding fathers, it's why we have things like no cruel and unusual punishment, and volumes were written about overly harsh punishment. It's also partly why you have the right to a jury by your peers. Part of the original thought was if you acted technically outside of the law and you were judged by a group of moral people from your community they can take into account exigent circumstances that the written law cannot properly adjudicate amd determine a just fate for you.
I don't disagree with much you said, but the problem is the execution.
You've only stated a theory it's application would be a spectrum. In the places wear we have gone too far in that direction, with good intentions, we have had bad results.
I agree we need massive criminal reform, we need to get back to innocent until proven guilty, but we also need to enforce laws protecting people and property, and we really need to focus on rehabilitation (I'm not saying that is the only goal of jailing people, as you mentioned some people need to be removed from normal society, but right now we have almost no focus on rehab and our recidivism rate shows it)
PS - not enforcing laws doesn't rehabilitate people either
This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.
