Burnt or shredded, the end result is precisely equivalent with respect to the information contained within.

But, you wouldn't understand that without me pointing it out for you.

You're welcome.

Yes, when things are manufactured incorrectly, the raw materials are commonly recycled. What is your concern?

 

The book’s three authors all hold doctorates and taught climate or related science at the university level.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/04/h...oks-written-by-climate-deniers/#ixzz4doGdec2V

The complainers:

Congressman Bobby Scott, D-VA(3) - from his official webpage
Congressman Scott was born on April 30, 1947 in Washington, D.C. and grew up in Newport News, Virginia. He is a graduate of Harvard College and Boston College Law School. After graduating law school, he returned home to Newport News and practiced law from 1973 to 1991. He received an honorable discharge for his service in the Massachusetts National Guard and the United States Army Reserve.

Congressman Raúl M. Grijalva, D-AZ(3)
No education listed on his official webpage
On the wiki page ... He attended the University of Arizona and earned a bachelor's degree in sociology.

Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-TX - from her official webpage
- Congresswoman Johnson distinguished herself as a dynamic scholar soon after beginning her studies in nursing at Notre Dame University’s St. Mary’s College, School of Nursing.
- She later took advantage of expanded educational opportunities by enrolling in Texas Christian University, where she completed her studies for a bachelor’s degree in nursing.
- While serving in the Texas State House, Congresswoman Johnson remained committed to her educational goals and received her master’s degree in Public Administration from Southern Methodist University in 1976.

Interesting juxtaposition between the authors and the Congressional Complainers.

 

Yes, when things are manufactured incorrectly, the raw materials are commonly recycled. What is your concern?

So at this point I have to ask,
Why exactly do you hang out online when it's painfully clear you don't like to read much of anything and when it comes to what obviously limited things you do read you continually show yourself to get a very poor to outrightly incorrect context and meaning from it?

Given your quoted comment here I get the very strong impression you did not read the link and thusly know nothing about what it was about being the subject matter has nothing to do with recycling practices.

So why participate in a form of communication that's based entirely on one's ability to read and gather proper and implied relevant contexts and meanings of the subjects covered, plus write them, when up to this point your long term interactions with others clearly show you have very little interest and or intellectual capacity to do so let alone any want or will to improve either?

You regularly play the grammar nazi, yet fail miserably at it and it application in your own writing (that you have 100% control of) most every time, so what is your goal?

You regarding your implied views of most everything rarely bring anything helpful, informative or educational to light, which to be honest, given your overwhelming impression you make with what you do, you have very poor reading and cognitive skills to the point it makes some of us wonder if what you do say even means or relates to what you think it does.

So what's the game?

You have made it very clear you don't like to read (how many times have you complained about my and other peoples long posts) and you constantly fail to get the most likely implied meanings and contexts out of common words so....

Why hang out online where every bit of communication is based entirely on something you clearly don't like and have little capacity and skill at above upper grade school level reading abilities (which for most any functional adult who has been online as long as you have is really rather pathetic) plus don't want to improve your abilities in either?

 

So at this point I have to ask,
Why exactly do you hang out online when it's painfully clear you don't like to read much of anything and when it comes to what obviously limited things you do read you continually show yourself to get a very poor to outrightly incorrect context and meaning from it?

Given your quoted comment here I get the very strong impression you did not read the link and thusly know nothing about what it was about being the subject matter has nothing to do with recycling practices.

So why participate in a form of communication that's based entirely on one's ability to read and gather proper and implied relevant contexts and meanings of the subjects covered, plus write them, when up to this point your long term interactions with others clearly show you have very little interest and or intellectual capacity to do so let alone any want or will to improve either?

You regularly play the grammar nazi, yet fail miserably at it and it application in your own writing (that you have 100% control of) most every time, so what is your goal?

You regarding your implied views of most everything rarely bring anything helpful, informative or educational to light, which to be honest, given your overwhelming impression you make with what you do, you have very poor reading and cognitive skills to the point it makes some of us wonder if what you do say even means or relates to what you think it does.

So what's the game?

You have made it very clear you don't like to read (how many times have you complained about my and other peoples long posts) and you constantly fail to get the most likely implied meanings and contexts out of common words so....

Why hang out online where every bit of communication is based entirely on something you clearly don't like and have little capacity and skill at above upper grade school level reading abilities (which for most any functional adult who has been online as long as you have is really rather pathetic) plus don't want to improve your abilities in either?

You are thinking too much, @tcmtech. Let me make it easy for you. Here is a photo of @GopherT and his entourage:

Disruption is his game. Shutting down the discussion of opposing ideas is his purpose.

 

Why exactly do you hang out online when it's painfully clear you don't like to read much of anything and when it comes to what obviously limited things you do read you continually show yourself to get a very poor to outrightly incorrect context and meaning from it?

Says the guy with poor reading comprehension. If it doesn't fit with YOUR view of the world it doesn't deserve to be thought or said.

 

You are thinking too much, @tcmtech. Let me make it easy for you. Here is a photo of @GopherT and his entourage:

Disruption is his game. Shutting down the discussion of opposing ideas is his purpose.

Perhaps but playing stupid to to the point of discussion stalemates to do it is pretty low/dumb in my book.
Even basic suicide bomber terrorists are have enough sense to not use that approach.
It's like being a suicide bomber that blows himself up in an empty plowed field on the edge of town to prove he has the right to act stupidly anywhere for whatever reason he so chooses. Zero gains for the cause plus no real damage to anything but the cause to show for it and the farmer gets his field plowed and fertilized for free.

Teenage ODD, (Oppositional Defiance Disorder) perhaps? Those he wishes to defy continually show themselves to be of intelligent mature rational coherent mindsets so his/their game it be the very opposite of that in every way possible?

http://www.alternet.org/story/75081/how_teenage_rebellion_has_become_a_mental_illness

RAther looks and sounds like the basic liberal dogma and tactics we have came to see nationwide in the last three months to me. When you can't muster the capacity on any level to go against organized rational intelligence just keep blowing yourself up in the empty parking lot for no gains to defy it then blame the the opposition for making you do it to yourself!

 

 

Perhaps but playing stupid to to the point of discussion stalemates to do it is pretty low/dumb in my book.
Even basic suicide bomber terrorists are have enough sense to not use that approach.
It's like being a suicide bomber that blows himself up in an empty plowed field on the edge of town to prove he has the right to act stupidly anywhere for whatever reason he so chooses. Zero gains for the cause plus no real damage to anything but the cause to show for it and the farmer gets his field plowed and fertilized for free.

Teenage ODD, (Oppositional Defiance Disorder) perhaps? Those he wishes to defy continually show themselves to be of intelligent mature rational coherent mindsets so his/their game it be the very opposite of that in every way possible?

http://www.alternet.org/story/75081/how_teenage_rebellion_has_become_a_mental_illness

RAther looks and sounds like the basic liberal dogma and tactics we have came to see nationwide in the last three months to me. When you can't muster the capacity on any level to go against organized rational intelligence just keep blowing yourself up in the empty parking lot for no gains to defy it then blame the the opposition for making you do it to yourself!

I know you didn't like the last one I gave you so give this one a read. I'm sure there is help for you!
Think positive!
http://www.psychguides.com/guides/anger-symptoms-causes-and-effects/

 

"YOU CAN"T CHANGE WHATS GOING ON AROUND YOU UNTIL YOU START CHANGING WHATS GOING ON WITHIN YOU."

That's idiotic and a falsehood.

The proof of the idiocy is the state that we are in now.

We have changed EVERYTHING.......................EXCEPT what is within.

 

"YOU CAN"T CHANGE WHATS GOING ON AROUND YOU UNTIL YOU START CHANGING WHATS GOING ON WITHIN YOU."

That's idiotic and a falsehood.

The proof of the idiocy is the state that we are in now.

We have changed EVERYTHING.......................EXCEPT what is within.

I would disagree. The intent of that concept is to make the world a better place by becoming a better person and holding yourself and that which is around you to a higher standard. However, the reality is that those who want to drop to or live at the lowest levels stupid are and by doing so their own inner stupidity is slowly leaking out into the world they interact with and dumbing it down as well.

Just look at how the overall forum attitudes and civility has dropped in the OT section and starting into elsewhere now since the powers that be dropped back on getting after people acting like idiots for the sake of derailing threads they don't agree with or understand with unsupportable drivel and petulant child level harassment of anyone that does see the world from their ignorant petulant child's perspective. Personally, I've got two members I once respected for their knowledge on my permanent ignore list now for being so petty that just treating them as if they don't exist here anymore was the only rational thing to do to avoid interacting with them and being drug down to their levels of stupid.

3 - 4 months ago anyone acting as they did, and I am guessing still do given the replies to what I see as nothing, would have gotten anyone kicked out. Now stupid does and stupid wants (mostly from what? ~3 people out of how many regulars now?) has free run here to harass and infect/insite anyone it can without reprimand over whatever it disagrees or can't understand or that would just take a tiny bit of effort to understand since those who have power to call them out on either 'put up, shut up or get kicked out' do nothing.

So I say, YES! That which is in us very much affects, and thully changes, that which is around us for better or worse. The key is are you the type that wants to make the world better place by making yourself a better person from within or, do you want to drag the world down to your level so that you don't have to work so hard to relate to anything that is above you no matter how low that standard you set for yourself is?

 

3 - 4 months ago anyone acting as they did, and I am guessing still do given the replies to what I see as nothing, would have gotten anyone kicked out.

Says the guy that twice in the same thread started name calling and swearing, when he didn't get his way. Real mature TMC.

 

Oh, snap. That's gonna put a damper on some important climate research.

 

Fear our power, Kim Jong Un.

 

Fear our power, Kim Jong Un.

Who writes that crap?
"It doesn't work at night when we need lights." Lame author.

A completely unsubstantiated claim (and with no adjacent context), "Solar and Wind energy are bad for the environment." Try again, author.

"The best proxy for Camp Riply's sunshine days is Duluth, MN". What? A city known for its fog and haze because of its location on the shore of the coldest lake in the country - just 77 sunny days according to the article. "Sunny day" is described as less than 30% cloud cover. The author obviously dug to find Duluth from all of the sunny locations in Minnesota. In fact, Minnesota is one of the sunniest states. Just 40 miles south of Camp Ripley, where a National Weather Service station exists (St. Cloud, MN), claims 196 days per year as "Sunny". Also remember, Sunny is not required for solar panels. Try again, author.

"Generals shouldn't be thinking about energy, they should be thinking about China, Russia and North Korea". The site is Minnesota National Guard, controlled by the STATE! Try again, author.

Read the comedic piece for yourself.

 

Read the comedic piece for yourself.

And yet they accuse us of giving bogus links.

 

And yet they accuse us of giving bogus links.

Once Team-Right decided mainstream news was unacceptable, where else can they get their content? They painted themselves into a corner and must now rely on Fringe outlets, one-man outlets trying to get Google ad revenue by posting outrageous stories, "news" written by Some of Russia's troll team (and then "liked", "retweeted", "cross-posted" and commented on by the rest of the 1000 to "validate" the story).

At least some of us admit when there are holes in the mainstream media reporting but our loyal right guys will defend these anti-solar-type stories with their last breaths.

 

Once Team-Right decided mainstream news was unacceptable, where else can they get their content? They painted themselves into a corner and must now rely on Fringe outlets, one-man outlets trying to get Google ad revenue by posting outrageous stories, "news" written by Some of Russia's troll team (and then "liked", "retweeted", "cross-posted" and commented on by the rest of the 1000 to "validate" the story).

At least some of us admit when there are holes in the mainstream media reporting but our loyal right guys will defend these anti-solar-type stories with their last breaths.

Posted on April 14, 2017 by John Hinderaker in Climate, Environment
Solar Power: An Environmental Disaster
If we devoted a fraction of that space to a natural gas, coal or nuclear facility we could produce 100 times the energy–even at night time, when people need to turn lights on.
they all seem to try and use this one. I didn't have room for a nuclear facility so I use solar on my roof.

 

I didn't have room for a nuclear facility so I use solar on my roof.

You anti-environmentalist!

On a side note:
I love how the author suddenly becomes an environmentalist tree-hugger (for one full sentance anyhow).

 

You anti-environmentalist!

On a side note:
I love how the author suddenly becomes an environmentalist tree-hugger (for one full sentance anyhow).

The power companies here are starting to cry because the energy sold back to them is starting to hurt. They want a "line charge". I guess that's fair for using them as batteries. The air conditioning costs here are high so it's a really good match. The pay for is about 7 years then you get about 18 years free. Can't do that with coal.