*ban1.0
Globe Business Media Group
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BzT3skiurU

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Decline-of-the-US-and-the-rise
*ban2.0
Globe Business Media Group
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCGjJ0oVMLA

If you read my other reply two posts up, it's clear that I'm not left leaning.

Your linked slaughter statistics are for the USA alone, and as far as I know GLOBAL warming affects the whole globe....so we should count the global amount of farmed animals.

Your statistics also only count slaughtered animals, and not farmed animals like dairy cows, which there are more of at any one time. Around 9 billion dairy cows in the USA. So already in the US alone we have 13.9 billion farmed animals(4.9b slaughtered + 9b dairy cows). It's not hard to see worldwide that figure reaching 50 billion.
And that's still not counting a bunch of animals (read the small print of your link).

The thing with methane too, it traps over 29 times more heat that co2....and most trees don't absorb methane. So even if we had enough trees to absorb co2 (which we don't) then all of methane from farmed animals would remain up there anyway.


80% of tree's aren't gone, 80 % of forests are gone:
https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=how%20much%20of%20the%20world%27s%20forests%20have%20been%20destroyed


How much renewable energy tax do you pay BTW? Where I live I pay $0. But the government does give some $4 billion of our tax money to the coal industry. So if anything the big tax scheme is from non-renewable.


EDIT:
Oh I forgot the most important bit. Scientists can tell between natural co2 and man-made co2. They have differing amounts of carbon. So it's actually really easy to tell between how much carbon dioxide humans have put into the atmosphere vs naturally occurring carbon dioxide.


Also lions and bears are going to live in nature regardless of human activity - we've added 50 billion large, methane producing animals to the world that wouldn't be there otherwise. Granted the destruction of habitats might have reduced the lion and bear populations, but not by 50 billion. Perhaps a few million at most.

alcom says...
@kingmob The right-wing conspiracy of convenience says that the data has been adjusted to heighten the urgency and panic and perpetuate their scientific fraud. This is a misunderstanding of flux adjustments that used to be made to climate models in the 90's and early in the 00's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_circulation_model#Flux_buffering

Recent improvements in modelling equations mean that they no longer rely on flux adjustments, but hearing that they had to made adjustments at all sounds sketch.

Because the "hockey-stick" model was an overshoot based on the peak in 1998, deniers tend to either:

a) Argue that the "warming hiatus" between 1998 and 2013 disproves AGW theory. This fallacy disproved itself in the last 2+ years as global surface and ocean temperatures have exceeded the 1998 record year on year.
or:
b) Attempt to discredit scientists arguing that their own funding depends on the alarming data that they publish. Far-right conservatives continue to demonize scientists as a cabal of billionaires working in concert to sway public opinion. If that was true, then the whole hiatus period sure didn't help their cause, but the graph hasn't moved.

This is sound science, and denialism is collapsing under the weight of its own bullshit. At the time of posting, NOAA said that July 2016 also marked the 15th consecutive warmest month on record for the globe. That is the longest stretch of months in a row that a global temperature record has been set in their dataset.

@kingmob The right-wing conspiracy of convenience says that the data has been adjusted to heighten the urgency and panic and perpetuate their scientific fraud. This is a misunderstanding of flux adjustments that used to be made to climate models in the 90's and early in the 00's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_circulation_model#Flux_buffering

Recent improvements in modelling equations mean that they no longer rely on flux adjustments, but hearing that they had to made adjustments at all sounds sketch.

Because the "hockey-stick" model was an overshoot based on the peak in 1998, deniers tend to either:

a) Argue that the "warming hiatus" between 1998 and 2013 disproves AGW theory. This fallacy disproved itself in the last 2+ years as global surface and ocean temperatures have exceeded the 1998 record year on year.
or:
b) Attempt to discredit scientists arguing that their own funding depends on the alarming data that they publish. Far-right conservatives continue to demonize scientists as a cabal of billionaires working in concert to sway public opinion. If that was true, then the whole hiatus period sure didn't help their cause, but the graph hasn't moved.

This is sound science, and denialism is collapsing under the weight of its own bullshit. At the time of posting, NOAA said that July 2016 also marked the 15th consecutive warmest month on record for the globe. That is the longest stretch of months in a row that a global temperature record has been set in their dataset.

Not exactly... grams measure mass, not weight. Imperial Units have the 'slug', which doesn't change based on where you are measuring.

The metric system DOES have units of measurement that change based on where you are at on the globe, called newtons.

The persecution of others to the exclusion of all but the primary religion is a tact shared with many major religions, and yes, Christianity has left its scorching mark upon humanity as a terrifying blot.

However, it is not, on this day, nor in these recent years, the acts of Christians, or Catholics that most burns a hole in our hearts and minds. Indeed, it is the acts of Radical Islamism, which is no more than a literal taking of their Koran brought to life by hate and malice.

And no, Islam is not a religion of peace, neither is Christainity-based religions for that matter. It is a matter of choice, and now, it is the choice of these Muslims, being great in number at this point in the Human Timeline, to continue the exploitation and caging of Women as sex slaves, to behead hundreds of thousands in the name of their God, and to spread their holy war to every corner of the globe until all is ruled by Islam.

That is fact, sir, as they(ISIS) have stated, as they show their brand of religion to state, as they act, and chose to carry forth action.

Sir, yes, all religions have committed to horrible deeds, but, it is always the purview of those of us that realize this to deny the growth of violence-via-religion, and now, in this day and age, that primary religion which we must stop from continuing violence is radicalized Islam.

You don't think that Trump won't make an unfair system even worse? Do you know what kind of scam operations he runs? Read up on Trump University, and if you don't think a mind like his won't immediately start eroding the as of yet intact elements of our government, then I have a bridge in the bay area to sell you. Not to mention that Scalia is not my definition of 'bright' by any standard. Bloviating quasi intellectual douchenozzle, sure, but not exactly a contributor to constitutional scholarship.

Hillary will be a boring drag; an uninspired and predictable apparatchik, but not remotely as harmful as the narcissistic psychopathy that's absofuckinglutely going to get us into severe confrontations around the globe that a Trump administration would bring.

Think about it. Yesterday the Russians put out a sabre-rattling presser about a US destroyer in the Black Sea (its international waters). Under Obama or Clinton, I can be pretty confident that any ruffled feathers will be smoothed and that things won't escalate. With Trump, if he has a bad morning because the viagra didn't kick in on time, or Ivana talks back or whatever, god knows what his decisions would be.

She's not addressing the media, she's talking about what the Republican candidates are saying.
The candidates are playing on people's fears by telling them that by accepting refugees will create an opportunity for terrorist groups to enter the country. She talks to people inside the system that determines who gets let through and where they go.
They demonstrate that it would be an extremely slow and inefficient way to move terrorists around the globe. It's all just a show to keep people focused on external threats, real or imagined.

I don't know if he was giving her the finger, although she did cut him off to some degree.

From what I can tell, the report is about a large number of illegal immigrants who just got caught living under false names in the apartment block there, which tends to be an emotional issue across the globe. I wouldn't be surprised if that's what was getting to him.

It could otherwise just be someone behind the camera, or someone talking in his ear while he was trying to introduce the spot.

Someone with better Russian might be able to confirm/deny my wild unfounded allegations.

He was far and away the best thing about the Golden Globes.

Some seriously awkward "comedy" and huge ego trips this year.

But I watched the whole thing. Because Gervais.

So...I go to John Lewis if I'm an old man who wants to look at little girls through a telescope?


The Man in the Moon had silver shoon
And his beard was of silver thread;
He was girt with pure gold and inaureoled
With gold about his head.
Clad in silken robe in his great white globe
He opened an ivory door
With a crystal key, and in secrecy
He stole o'er a shadowy floor;

Down a filigree stair of spidery hair
He slipped in gleaming haste,
And laughing with glee to be merry and free
He swiftly earthward raced.
He was tired of his pearls and diamond twirls;
Of his pallid minaret
Dizzy and white at its lunar height
In a world of silver set;

And adventured this peril for ruby and beryl
And emerald and sapphire,
And all lustrous gems for new diadems,
Or to blazon his pale attire.
He was lonely too with nothing to do
But to stare at the golden world,
Or to strain at the hum that would distantly come
As it gaily past him whirled;

And at plenilune in his argent moon
He had wearily longed for Fire-
Not the limpid lights of wan selenites,
But a red terrestrial pyre
With impurpurate glows of crimson and rose
And leaping orange tongue;
For great seas of blues and the passionate hues
When a dancing dawn is young;

For the meadowy ways like chrysophrase
By winding Yare and Nen.
How he longed for the mirth of the populous Earth
And the sanguine blood of men;
And coveted song and laughter long
And viands hot and wine,
Eating pearly cakes of light snowflakes
And drinking thin moonshine.

He twinkled his feet as he thought of the meat,
Of the punch and the peppery brew,
Till he tripped unaware on his slanting stair,
And fell like meteors do;
As the whickering sparks in splashing arcs
Of stars blown down like rain
From his laddery path took a foaming bath
In the ocean of Almain;

And began to think, lest he melt and stink,
What in the moon to do,
When a Yarmouth boat found him far afloat,
To the mazement of the crew
Caught in their net all shimmering wet
In a phosphorescent sheen
Of bluey whites and opal lights
And delicate liquid green

With the morning fish — 'twas his regal wish —
They packed him to Norwich town,
To get warm on gin in a Norfolk inn,
And dry his watery gown.
Though St. Peter's knell waked many a bell
In the city's ringing towers
To shout the news of his lunatic cruise
In the early morning hours,

No hearths were laid, not a breakfast made,
And no one would sell him gems;
He found ashes for fire, and his gay desire
For choruses and brave anthems
Met snores instead with all Norfolk abed,
And his round heart nearly broke,
More empty and cold than above of old,
Till he bartered his fairy cloak

With a half waked cook for a kitchen nook,
And his belt of gold for a smile,
And a priceless jewel for a bowl of gruel,
A sample cold and vile
Of the proud plum porridge of Anglian Norwich —
He arrived much too soon
For unusual guests on adventurous quests
From the Mountains of the Moon.

I don't use Twitter so I was wondering how she continued to get Tweets after she blocked him. The Globe article claims that her friends got messages from him and then send them along to her, even after she blocked him? I'm wondering why her friends didn't simply block him as well, wouldn't that make her friends complicit?
This just makes no sense whatsoever. If he was stalking her in the real world as well however, that puts it on a new level.

After months offline I just wanted some cat videos and now this...

You know, Bob, I think you are right. I may not be a US citizen but I think there should be an international law, enforced by the UN.
As a species we can not allow morally bankrupt people to define what marriage should be, especially if that definition is ethically questionable and radically diverging from what the Bible, Torah or Quran describe.
Not only are we subjected to this bizarre propaganda of how normal this sickening behaviour is, this agenda is being sold to children as well. Even if we ignore the risk factors and possible fallout from this dangerous interaction with our youth, I think we can't deny that letting somebody that unstable adopt children isn't the best of ideas.
As you point out, this minority has a strong grasp on the media and an even stronger grip around the neck of political systems around the globe. Even our economy isn't safe of their influence which everyone can see everytime they hurt american businesses with their boycotts. Like disgusting, entitled children, they throw tantrums everytime they don't get their will, no mattere what the cost.
You're right, mankind shouldn't capitulate to their demands. I say annul their existing marriages or domestic partnerships and make it illegal for those people to marry. Worldwide.
According to Wikipedia (yes, I know, Wikipedia) there are 7.2 billion humans on earth and the GOP has around 30 million members. That's only 0.4% of the world population. You're right. Why should any society capitulate for such an insignificant demographic group? Why should we allow republicans to marry or recognize their marriages as legally binding? Nobody needs them to procreate.
Having said that, as far as I'm concerned, George W. Bush is a bastard, even by westerosi standards.

I would love to spend less time thinking about the US and how messed up parts of it are. Unfortunately, I live in a world where that's not possible.

At least until China buys you out, the US is still the biggest influence on the rest of the world.. economically, politically and militarily.

Right now, NZ is part of the TPPA talks that will directly affect the way country is run.

So yeah, I comment on the US.

Besides, this is the 21st century. The people in my life are not decided by anything as archaic as national boundaries or even geography. I have friends and family all over the globe.

And @Mordhaus Norway has
- 6th highest per capita income (US is 10)
- 3rd highest educational attainment (US is 5)
- 5th highest on the anti corruption index (US doesn't even make top 10)
- 10th on environmental health (again, US doesn't make top 10)
- 8th in the "Good country" index (US is 21)
- 7th on Forbes list of "best for business" (US is 18)

On pretty much any ranking you look at, Norway is rated as a great place to live. Objectively, it outperforms the USA on almost every metric. As does NZ and Ireland

The US is actually a great country. It has an amazing natural landscape, has fantastic science and technology and the people are (for the most part) incredibly friendly. But it's held back by its refusal to acknowledge its faults and its frankly appalling political system. You do lots of things extremely well, but self-reflection is not one of them.