I'm often confused by dating apps that pair people that are as close to carbon copies as possible. My wife and I are a great pair because we are so different that her strengths cover my weaknesses and vice versa. I can't imagine it working if we both had the same issues or all the same views and so never made the other think and evolve.

@newtboy,
Compromise implies give and take, not a one sided one way capitulation.
I'm glad to hear that, I dearly hope that both parties attempt the same. Failing both, the democrats absolutely must compromise. They need more voters and it's on them to reach out. Maybe back track on carbon taxation. Maybe allow that there is a distinction between cracking down on illegal immigration and racism against non-whites. Maybe entertain more protectionist policies on trade agreements to encourage domestic production. Regardless of any of those individual compromises being a good or bad idea, they are all ideas that resonated with voters that ditched Clinton and they at least seem potential olive branches to reach out with.

You also said:
I really think the outrage over pc thugs is a red herring. If you don't live on a liberal campus, you'll probably never meet one.
As I said, I'm from Canada so I see it daily. The over the top PC agenda and social justice fights are everywhere up here. The examples Norm gave are ones we see everywhere up here.

Example, the local university student union had an active year. They had shutdown a student club because it was pro-life and then found themselves being sued.

Our public education system bars any christian activity in schools, even so far as barring the Gideons from extending an offer of free Bibles to students who would request it. At the same time as that separation of religion from the schools is happening though, Aboriginal religion and spiritual practices and beliefs are part of the normal curriculum. And I don't mean cultural background, but as active participants in cleansing of spiritual auras and learning the function of the spirits of everything.

The silent mass of white christians up here see where the PC stuff goes and are getting a bit sick of it.

Is it that hard to agree with me?

Your just rewording exactly what I said. Your just rewording exactly what Bill Burr said. Trump didn't win by bringing out a whole bunch of brand new racist voters that stayed home when Obama was running. It was Hillary's failures, and her party's failures that were the difference in Trumps win.

I know that leads to a more uncomfortable reality were we don't have the black and white ability to blame everything on the evil racists who voted Trump in, but it is the reality. Clinton and her party LOST the votes of too many people, the numbers on the Republican side show pretty clearly it wasn't extra votes Trump gained by courting racists that turned the election.

That reality though demands a lot of self reflection from the Democratic party about how they failed and why, and they have to do it at the time when the country needs them as a counter balance the most. The trick is, if they don't get back the voters they lost they can't be a counter balance.

Here's part of the problem: people blaming Trumps win on racists voting for him, or choosing to believe that everyone who voted for Trump is a racist. That's just not the reality that is confronting you guys in the US. Most voters in this election, like all the past elections, voted their party ticket as they and their grandpa always have. That's the one of the biggest influences on how folks vote. Surveys also show that given the choice between a ideals and jobs, people choose jobs. The democratic party was promising carbon taxation at the same time as Trump was promising to bring back coal and oil jobs. Now all the counties that rely on coal or oil have a very different reason to vote for Trump outside of his racist remarks.

Oh, and check out Bill Clinton's remarks on Robert Byrd. Does that association to the KKK make it hard for racists to choose between Trump and Clinton?

People don't trust politicians in general and assume them all to be evil, corrupt and untrustworthy so dismissing some of Trumps worse parts came a bit easier for many.

Even if they DID make their own desktop sized 3D Laser Printer... it's beside the point. Those machines aren't big enough to create enough carbon monoxide to kill people. The kind that I worked on a Gerber Sabre is fucking MASSIVE. So, it has huge ventilation systems built in for that reason.

I don't think that is what he was saying. My interpretation was that he was citing (a recent slew of misinformation) of media claiming that 3D Printers are harmful and in this case the cause of death ; of which a 3D printer would not be able to cause carbon monoxide poisoning, which is way more likely to have been a laser cutter.... No, he's trying to stick up for 3D Printers, of which may contain lasers (not very likely since it's not very commercial yet) and a completely different production method (additive). Obviously, there are A LOT of people with 3D printers in the Bay Area.

These guys make a start at assessing the energy/carbon cost, but stop well short of completing the job. What is the life-cycle carbon cost of PV cells used to produce the electrons; what is the life-cycle cost of the storage of electrons prior to going into the EV, etc. Only then can you make an honest carbon balance sheet.

And here we are, just about 2017, and 'freethinkers' are still convincing themselves that sending 100 million tons of carbon up into the sky every day does nothing to the air, water and soil carbon sinks. And to suggest it does and also own a car or fly in a plane? You're a degenerate hypocrite.

Very glad you pointed this out, as the international cabal of hundreds of thousands of researchers (people who literally earn their livings by questioning established norms and developing new ideas and solutions, and are therefor pretty hard to keep toeing the line in this cabal) will certainly be angry at Neil deGrasse Tyson for owning that nice car, and flying in airplanes, and no doubt eating burgers while wearing clothes made in China. We, the cabal, definitely need to chat with Neil, as that luxory sedan only get 19 city/29 highway,... with such hypocritical actions, he may as well be handing out pamphlets telling people about our secret anthropogenic global warming cabal, and its goals to, um, regulate the human contributions to the warming of our one habitable planet.

Sorry I lost the snark there at the end because I forget what reason the conspiracy theorists give for 'AGW shills'... is it somethng to do with a moral argument against Exxon and other energy mega companies? Again, sorry, would appreciate help with that part.

They are one of the major systems for carbon storage, and because ph is a major factor that determines how their "shells" are made, they can also tell us how acidic the oceans were.
*quality learnin

This whole diatribe is exactly what pushed middle spectrum voters to actually vote against Clinton. More aggressive division and partisan line drawing is the problem, not the solution.

Anybody not 100% committed to a pro-choice stance was sick and tired of the far left calling them evil for it.

Anybody that had any thoughts that your choices regarding how to have sex and who to have it with were in fact choices were tired of being called slurs like homophibic.

Anybody who didn't believe carbon taxes or cap and trade markets were the answer to climate change was sick of being charged with hating the children and 'denying' fundamental science.

Anybody watching angry calls for safe spaces re-implementing segregation as though it was a good thing was tired of it.

Like it or not, a large part of America disagreed on the extremity of the establishment's direction on these and other areas. Trump was the one candidate nobody wanted, not the media, not the Democratic party, not even the Republican party.

I believe the divisive winner takes all approach to complex and sensitive social issues drove a lot of voters to pick Trump as the none of the above option.

For the record, I didn't vote Trump. I'm Canadian and couldn't vote at all, but if I could I'd have voted Clinton. I would have voted Clinton in spite of disliking her as a clone of her husband that actively fought to prevent action on the Rwandan genocide. Which is to say, in any other election I'd have lobbied for a vote anyone but Clinton campaign. Awful that the Republicans managed to find someone worse in Trump...

Seriously... who cares if he can read?

He's got three people closely connected with his campaign that are financially and personally close with Putin.

He throws out years of American policy and Republican rhetoric to replace it with carbon copies of Putin's policies (get rid of NATO, let Russia annex Ukraine, support Bashir al Assad).

Several former spies (including one CIA) have said, Putin recruited Trump. Trump is a Russian intelligence asset.

He has a private e-mail server exclusively communicating with one of Putin's closest confidants for months, with traffic spiking around key campaign events which mysteriously goes offline as soon as questions arise in Russia (as one analyst described it, the knee was hit in Russia and the foot kicked in Trump Tower). Days later a new Trump server appears and the first communication on the Internet is straight back to Russia.

Seriously, wouldn't it be BETTER to have a president (for life) who's a Russian agent who can't read than one who can? At least it causes some communication problems with his Russian masters and increases the likelihood he'll get tripped up.

What even happens to the US if a sitting president is found to be a Russian spy? Would he just declare martial law? Who knows, but I sure don't want to find out.

They assumed you just use electric cutouts to intimidate the Hondas and Mitsubishis. That setup doesn't actually produce any carbon, much like cake eaten after work on Thursdays isn't fattening so therefore doesn't count against your diet.

I've not watched the movie yet, so perhaps this is addressed there, but I am kinda suspicious of guilt offset schemes.

Also, the websites estimates an Australian's carbon footprint is about 50 times that of a Brit...wtf are they doing down there?

This quiz was listed at the end of the movie to compare your carbon footprint.
http://carbotax.org/

*doublepromote

I loved how he described football.

the fact that he can describe it so clinically and still enjoy it...thats awesome.

I never understood the big deal about the national anthem.
It's a song about a carbon fiber flag that survived a bombing attack.

Correlation and causation is distinguished by controlling for variables directly where the list of possible covariates or confounders is known & limited, or when it is not, using say machine learning techniques to infer a model from the data and repeatedly cross validating it with different test and training samples to ensure that it is rigorous. Read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

There is nothing about repeatability.

Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-validation_(statistics)

Repeatability has nothing to do with testing for correlation / causation. Okay, you repeat an experiment. It looks like X causes Y, like in the first test. But it turns out that Z (that you didn't consider or can't measure) is acting on X & Y at the same time, creating the appearance of a relationship between X & Y where none exists. Read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding

If anything the political hype is underblown. Politics deals with the immediate, tangible and the "what directly helps me now." With the financial crisis, politics in the US has decreed that any action on climate change that might marginally impact wages or living standards is out of bounds.

If we assume the risks are real - polluting has specific benefits (cost reduction to polluters) and incredibly dispersed costs which are almost imperceptible for decades while the damage is being done. It requires global coordination for a cost on carbon to be politically feasible. And the effects are seen at least 40 years into the future:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Climate-Change-The-40-Year-Delay-Between-Cause-and-Effect.html

That's the problem, by the time the effects are obvious, it will be too late to react. In the meantime, you have massive amounts of money, interest groups, politics and delayed effect all acting against any action being taken.