There’s no paradox, there no such thing as “infinity” in reality.
Infinity is an unreal mathematical concept like “i” (imaginary numbers that are the square root of a negative number).
Useful in calculations but really it’s just a placeholder for our lack of understanding about how the universe works (or a simplistic lie to evade giving a difficult, long, and incomplete explanation) , it’s not something found in nature.

Why not a mobius toroid? …or maybe a multidimensional toroid that’s (somehow) a donut in every direction? …or maybe both at once? Have some imagination, physicists. Don’t limit yourself to only the dimensions you perceive or how you see them
Time/space could be something like this and we only perceive the point where all 3 axis converge….

😂 THE JURY IS ALREADY BACK IN! 😂
$83,300,000.00 MORE for Carrol…on top of the $5 million in escrow now awaiting his first appeal. LOSER!

Trump has to pay before he can appeal…you think he has it?

She could legitimately already have another case for what he’s said about her publicly during trial, let’s see if this is enough to shut him up. I doubt it, so get ready for more.

Being a douche bag rapist sure is expensive!

Edit: As a bonus, the financial monitor in his business fraud case has made her report, saying even under court monitoring his financial statements are either/or completely missing, incomplete, repeat with errors, and/or contradictory. Estimates for the judgement are topping $500,000,000.00, and complete divestment from his businesses/properties in New York. He doesn’t have it. Better make more donations.

That’s a random non sequitur. What does that have to do with the blatant disgusting “not as I do” hypocrisy and total incompetence of Ziegler or the rape committed by her husband? Nothing.

Wanna finish your thought?
Or was that it…an incomplete thought/brain fart you just needed to get out? 🤦‍♂️

To be clear, your party absolutely believes being fired for being gay IS NOT WRONG. They fought hard and long to try to keep it legal to discriminate against citizens based on sexual orientation, and have not stopped trying since they lost that fight in the 80’s. You still fight constantly for the right to deny service based on sexual orientation. You yourself have equated homosexuality with active pedophilia and clearly it’s ok to fire someone for being a child sex abuser. Your logic and consistency are completely absent, because you don’t believe anything you say, you just need to spout nonsensical accusations constantly to feel better about yourself. 😂


I’m guessing you meant to say “being fired for having sex at work ISN’T.”? Do you think there’s anyone disagreeing? He was fired immediately without objections once discovered, what are you saying? More fighting paper tigers and windmills. Go Don Quixote!

“ my solution would be every able bodied Jewish man and woman join the French (or Polish, Russian, British) army and fucking fight…”

I agree that’s the noble thing to do, but I can’t condemn the ones that choose to seek safety in numbers with Jewish Palestinians as exclusively invasion minded aggressors. My 6 million tag was maybe a bit sharp, but you also know that the Nazi’s took Paris and as much as it sucked to be French or European under Nazi occupation, you also know adding Jewish to that carried a lot of extra consequence and danger to your family.

My POV is agnostic of everything save Isreali people today having a right exist as a nation. Which at this point from my POV leaves 1947 as somewhat academic.

It’s your insistence that Jewish people, and the existence of Israel, have always fundamentally been invaders that I was objecting to as it is so intensely at odds with factual history.

You gave a brief nod on not being a scholar of Palestinian history, but then proceed to just count all Jewish refugees as good as Zionist aggressors from day 1(or close enough), and the local Arab population as nothing but pure, kind caring victims of these invaders.

I will state again, that is ahistorical propaganda and NOT what actually happened. And for my POV, its enough generations back as to be Academic, but for your POV it is fundamental because without being able to writeoff Israel as invaders from day 1, nuance enters the calculus and suddenly the conflict is flooded with shades of grey because lots of parties all contribute to the bloodshed, and many with reasonable motivations from both sides yet too.

Please find me any reputable sources to refute the reality of 1920-1940s Palestine:
-Mass Jewish immigration fleeing European oppression raised tensions between Jewish and Arab Palestinians.(as one must expect)
-Arab palestinians were already chaffing and resisting British colonial rule(as one must expect)
-These tensions led conflict, initially more ‘civil’ with the Arab majority trying to refuse all business, sales and trade with all Jews.
-Escalation followed throughout that time, but in drips and drops and NOT a ‘surprise the Zionist army has arrived’! style of aggression

The violent escalation was a fight here, a beating there. Little individual fights, escalating into deaths. Retaliations slowly grew, with each side exchanging small escalations.

-the culmination of this was eventually all out civil war, and the Jewish side immediately accepting a UN mandated 2 state solution

-this culmination coinciding with the end of WW2 and revelations of the true extent of the holocaust can’t be ignored, it certainly shaped the Jewish mindset in the conflict.

-Their mindset was pretty clearly not inaccurate either, as the immediate response of all neighbouring Arab nations was a declaration of war on the new ‘state’, with bold claims of how quickly the Jews would be swept into the sea. The confidence was so high, a call was sent it for ALL Arab palestinians to abandon and flee the entire region of Palestine to better enable the complete cleansing of the land.

The above is all pretty much inarguably factual, and I’d bargain you could get an Arabic and Israeli scholar together to more or less agree on those facts which is saying alot.

——
Propaganda from both sides would like to declare that the Arabs harboured deep Nazi sympathies, and thus Israel was pure and true in all it did. Or from the other side, more or less your narrative of Zionist bad guys launching invasion from day 1(ish).

Both though are just sprinklings of half truths, with anti-British resentment naturally breeding some leanings towards the axis, and even genuine Nazi cleanse the Jews believers. And absolutely Zionists featured prominently within the Jewish population. Neither of those partial truths though make the propaganda of either side true, but instead just an incomplete and intentionally biased picture.


Again, please find me sources demonstrating I’m terribly wrong on all that, but the only ones I can find are clearly biased and the accurate accounts paint the picture above, the propaganda very, very clearly copies the real story more or less with just deletions of inconvenient bits

You are so dumb you didn’t notice they were reading some allegedly repeatedly copied document so blurry and incomplete even they couldn’t read parts of it and are pretending it’s an official record. You might be gullible enough to buy that nonsense, but courts sure aren’t.

You are so incapable of following along that you likely didn’t notice they are simply misstating the accusations by a disgruntled ex employee….accusations already 100% debunked at trial.

Just like every single bootlicking excuse you’ve given for these murderous cops and every prediction you made about this case, another “L” for Bobby and his idiotic tantrums.

But you knew this before you posted it. Your goal is never to present factual information, it’s to throw any nonsensical lie you can come up with at the wall and hope it sticks unnoticed. That’s what you call a “win”…it is as close as you get. It’s an “L” bob.

Edit: Just a side note, when used for anesthesia the correct dosage of fentanyl is 10-20 ng/ml…so even if this was an actual autopsy report (hint-it’s not) 11ng/ml is FAR from a lethal dose…it’s the low end of the advised amount that just makes you sleepy…for people with no opioid tolerance. If true, it would only prove that Floyd wasn’t ever fighting them, because he was sedated then unconscious when they murdered him. You never EVER consider the implications of your mensonge du jour, and as a consequence they are rarely what you seem to expect.

Your. 🤦‍♂️ Every time you display your intelligence level while being so dumb you think you’re smart.
If I take it out and ponder this….what? Another incomplete thought vomited into the ether.

Why? Because that only happened in your delusional little brain and ridiculous propaganda outlets, not reality.

In reality, Clinton and Hunter have been under endless investigation for purely political reasons for years to decades, not a slow walk, hundreds of millions spent with every partisan investigation finding absolutely nothing despite the screamed accusations and protestations from the tin foil hat brigade.

There were no serious crimes by private citizen Hunter (minor tax evasion and a ridiculous never charged gun infraction, both of which he admitted), and none at all by Clinton. 5+ years of Republican investigation for Hunter for purely political reasons and 15+ years of Republican led investigations of Clinton for the clear political motive of stopping her from winning the presidency (and never forget she won the vote by 3 million votes anyway) all found absolutely nothing prosecutable or criminal.
Edit: and based on actual EVIDENCE-
Trump broke hundreds of serious treasonous laws ON TOP OF the same crimes Hunter plead to, way more than just tax evasion and lying on a public form but definitely both of those.
Trump stole hundreds of top secret documents, lied about it, refused to return them, ignored a subpoena, lied again about returning them, actively hid them from searches, lied about them again, all the while keeping them unsecured in publicly accessible areas and sharing them with actual known Chinese agents that work for him!
Trump also tried a violent coup to subvert democracy and turn America into a dictatorship.
Trump also defrauded the election with multiple illegal schemes to toss out the legitimate vote and/or steal the election with fake electors or by Pence just declaring him president.
Trump also lied on sworn official documents trying to hide his payments for sex, and committed numerous business and tax frauds in the effort.
Trump also committed tax and wire fraud to the tune of well over $250 million in NY.
Trump also paid millions for his racist redlining.
Trump also ran a fraudulent charity for injured veterans he used as personal spending cash.
Trump also raped a woman then lied about her to try to hide from repercussions…and continues to do so despite it costing him (by which I mean you, he uses donations for legal bills mostly) $5 million already with way more to come.
If Don JR has a gun, he also lied on the application about drugs…likely true of Don too…Sudafed addiction counts.

If Biden had commitment the same crimes, he would have been indicted, tried, and shot by now….but Joe committed no crimes.

Pedal to the metal!?! 😂 The investigations started well before the latest campaign. One started Jan 7th while he was still president! 🤦‍♂️
It’s blatantly obvious that Trump is only running to try to escape the charges against him. He doesn’t want the job again and is incapable of doing it. You know it, you just won’t admit it…the courts know it too. I won’t insult you by pretending you are so delusional or stupid that you believe the nonsense you just said…but you are so dishonest that you pretend to.

Just for show…. Ok, sure. Then why not lean in? Ask for quick trials to prove it? Wouldn’t that guarantee a win? Wouldn’t that destroy the libtards and put MAGA in charge again? Winning all these cases quickly and exposing the frauds is what any Alpha or Sigma male would do, or any innocent person…whining it’s unfair and trying to delay them forever (or at least until Trump’s death) is what a cucked cowardly beta male or guilty as sin person does. 😂
Trump wants all cases delayed until he either dies, wins the election and pardons himself, or flees the country to Russia the day after the election. Not the actions of an innocent man who wants to clear their name, those are the actions of a terrified trapped rat hoping more time will expose some unseen escape route.

Trump is losing in every real poll by way more that 3% buddy. 😂 He only wins in polls of just Republican voters, because MAGA cucked the republicans and the nuts now run the asylum. Too bad that means the “sane” republicans now vote blue. Try again.

Lol. “No crimes”. Aaaahahahaha! How’s that theory working out? How’s it working in court? You might want to tell all those courts and prosecutors and Trump appointed judges that have ruled there’s overwhelming evidence of hundreds of serious crimes against the American people, government, and laws, because they seem confused. :Joy:

You apparently forget, the FBI reopened the Clinton investigation in mid October 2016 after 12 partisan investigations and hearings had not just failed to find her guilty of anything but in fact totally exonerated her, with absolutely zero new evidence to warrant it, then admitted there was no reason to reopen it weeks later besides hurting her campaign.…you call that a “slow walk”? 😂 Let’s slow walk Trump’s investigations then…with the same $200000000+ budget and only democrats allowed to participate in investigations, and a never ending time line no matter what the results are or how many times accusations fall flat. Agreed? 😂

You also forget Barr investigated Hunter starting 2017 (and he’s been under investigation ever since) and Trump’s DOJ found absolutely NOTHING. Try again loser.

Spreading dick pics of your rival’s son to children is what the right has devolved into. Toothless inbred hicks with no education or teeth find that behavior degrading.

PS- you need another list of 25 elected republicans convicted of child sex crimes? I can provide sets of 25 any time you need…for as long as you need. There’s no shortage.

Lol. I’M narrow minded?!? ROTFLMFAHS!!!

Who told you that?! They lied.

Wiki-Five House Committees (Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, Judiciary, and Oversight and Government Reform) initiated their own inquiries soon after the attack. The Republicans on these five House Committees delivered an interim report to the Members of the House Republican Conference on April 23, 2013. The interim report, which contains the conclusions of the Republican majority staff, signed only by the five Republican chairmen of those committees and stated "This staff report has not been officially adopted by the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, or the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and therefore may not necessarily reflect the views of their Members," was critical of the Obama Administration's actions before, during, and after the attack. Among dozens of findings, the report states that:

"Senior State Department officials knew that the threat environment in Benghazi was high and that the Benghazi compound was vulnerable and unable to withstand an attack, yet the department continued to systematically withdraw security personnel"
The "[Obama] Administration willfully perpetuated a deliberately misleading and incomplete narrative that the attacks evolved from a political demonstration caused by a YouTube video."
"... after a White House Deputies Meeting on Saturday, September 15, 2012, the Administration altered the talking points to remove references to the likely participation of Islamic extremists in the attacks. The Administration also removed references to the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa'ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya ..."
"The Administration deflected responsibility by blaming the IC [intelligence community] for the information it communicated to the public in both the talking points and the subsequent narrative it perpetuated."
Democrats on the five committees criticized the report, which they said had been written without Democratic input, as a "partisan Republican" work that was "unnecessarily politicizing our national security".

Also “ Democrats on the committee certainly say this was political and politically constructed. They say there were many witnesses whose testimony wasn't released because it supported the administration and particularly supported Hillary Clinton.”

There were 8 Benghazi investigations, 7 of which were only done as political attacks on Clinton to hurt her presidential run, admitted by McCarthy and others on tape. That’s why, even though their Republican led investigations found no wrongdoing he called it a win against Clinton because the accusations hurt her politically.

You get what you call one point of view because one side, the anti democracy pro-sedition side, refuses to testify, ignores subpoenas, and hides and destroys evidence….the same “side” that boycotted the investigations and refused to authorize a non partisan outside investigation, then whined they weren’t being allowed to participate…the treason side….your side.
They have absolutely been able to present another side…under oath. Trump has an open invitation, as do all his co-conspirators that ignored subpoenas. They refuse, or are incapable.
There have been plenty of Trump officials who did give their point of view, and every one has said Trump was clearly attempting a coup, knew he lost the election early, knew his plots were absolutely illegal, and many quit on Jan 6 when it became obvious he was willing to violently attack America and his own VP intentionally to retain power by any means.
You know this, you just hope someone else is as dumb as you act and can be fooled into believing your nonsense that this is a partisan politically motivated hatchet job, not an investigation into the worst attack against America on the mainland since the Southern Insurrection (otherwise known as the civil war).

I have a complaint to register here, gentlemen, about a CERTAIN LACK of recognition for the single greatest accomplishment of mankind since the invention of language; the very reason carbon self-assembled; the reason a tiny speck of nothing exploded into a universe simply waiting for that golden moment on March 4 2016 when the fruition of all that is good and hopeful in the human -- nay, UNIVERSAL -- race was unveiled! How soon they forget! How soon do they receive their salvation than they turn their backs on it, forgetting the hypernova of joy and laughter that burst upon the world on that Day of Days! Such woe to thee, oh Babylon, for turning your back on the 1 hour and 48 minutes that banished all doubt of man's reason for existence! DAMNATION ON TO YOU WHO HAVE FORGOTTEN THE GREATNESS YOU SHOULD FALL TO YOUR KNEES AND BLIND YOURSELF LEST TO SEEK TO BEHOLD SOMETHING GREATER! ALL HELL AND TORMENT! ALL EVIL AND VILENESS FOR THOSE HORRID, HORRID SOULS WHO HAVE LEFT THIS SO-CALLED "VIDEO" INCOMPLETE! DAMN YOU! DAMN YOU TO HELL!!!

Look, I just like Zootopia a lot, alright?

DON'T JUDGE ME, YOU BASTARDS!

Source?

I know these are bullshit statistics Bob, because there have been 212 already this year with over 250 deaths in 5 months. Nice try, another easily debunked lie.

Edit: There we’re another 9 killed (and 63 more injured) in 14 mass shootings just this weekend, including 6 kids under 15 in just one.

the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey puts the number of citizens who prevent crimes by using guns much lower than 2.5 million the NRA often claims -- about 67,740 times a year….and in the vast majority of those they never shoot those guns.
Edit: The CDC report you cited said maybe 108,000 times per year guns were used in defense, not 750000- 1.5 million….but noted the statistics they used were incomplete and unreliable….and also noted that accidents and suicides alone vastly outweigh any positive statistic.

the Violence Policy Center statistics showed that in 2012, there were 259 justifiable self-defense homicides in which victims turned the tables, not 2 million.
They also show the theft of about 232,000 guns each year -- about 172,000 of them during burglaries. That’s a ratio of one justifiable homicide for every 896 guns put into the hands of criminals. Is that what you call “successful policy”?

By the end of 2019, there were 417 mass shootings in the U.S., according to data from the nonprofit Gun Violence Archive (GVA), which tracks every mass shooting in the country. Thirty-one of those shootings were mass murders. What is your definition of “mass shooting” because it’s clearly not any time 3 or more are shot by one person.

Abortions account for 0% of deaths each year….but it was targeted with outrageously regressive misogynistic laws that make women incubators without any rights including no rights to contraception. A bit more draconian than having to get a background check to buy guns, don’t you think?

On average, more than 360 people in the USA are shot every day and survive – at least long enough to get to a hospital.
In 2017, some 39,773 died from gunshot injuries, an average of nearly 109 people each day. Per capita, this is significantly higher than in other industrialized countries. The rates of gun homicide are much higher in states with higher gun ownership. More guns equate to higher crime and murder rates, not lower. That is consistent over time.

No, bob….that’s according to the NRA, not the CDC….unless you count any crime stopped or caught by police because they all have guns, but that’s not what you claimed.

900 mass shooting fatalities in what timeframe bob?

Where do you get these insane statistics bob? Your behind?

Bob, no country slaughters more of its citizens than the US thanks to guns.

It’s almost 3 times as likely someone in your home will be shot if you have a gun.

In 2020, 54% of gun homicides are suicides. (Pew)

Again, cite your sources. I know you can’t because it would be too embarrassing for you to admit they came from THE NRA, Glen Beck, or some other nut job liar….or straight from your own ass.

….and now, CyberNinjas, the propaganda company hired by AZ Republicans for their boondoggle, spending $12 million+ on a worthless, unprofessional, incomplete vote review that ended up finding zero evidence of fraud (besides individual Republican frauds) and widened the gap Biden won by by about 300 votes, is still refusing to comply with court orders to turn over all their documents and work product from months ago, and have stopped responding to anyone including Ms. Karen Fann who hired them. This puts HER in contempt of court and facing massive fines and jail time.
I love it when a plan comes together.

One more massively wasteful Republican fraud, one you want to repeat at least 50 times if not more, at a cost of $12 million +…..only to lose even worse and find nothing. It’s not the only one, too. Others are finding more votes for Biden, or disqualifying votes counted for Trump. None are finding Democrat fraud, none are finding votes for Trump.
Oh, and Trump isn’t using your donations to fund them, he knows he lost fairly, but he’s sure as fuck fundraising using them to sucker hundreds of millions from rubes like you. Check on it, he hasn’t spent a dime on election fraud.

@bcglorf Here's a tome for you....


It's certainly not (the only way). Converting to green energy sources stimulates the economy, it doesn't bankrupt it, and it makes it more efficient in the future thanks to lower energy costs. My solar system paid for itself in 8 years, giving me an expected 12 years of free electricity and hot water. Right wingers would tell you it will never pay for itself....utter bullshit.

Every gap in our knowledge I've ever seen that we have filled with data has made the estimates worse. Every one. Every IPCC report has raised the severity and shrunk the timeframe from the last report....but you stand on the last one that they admit was optimistic and incomplete by miles as if it's the final word and a gold standard. It just isn't. They themselves admit this.

The odds of catastrophic climate change is 100% in the next 0 years for many who have already died or been displaced by rising seas or famine or disease or lack of water or...... and that goes for all humanity in the next 50 because those who survive displacement will be refugees on the rest's doorsteps. Don't be ridiculous. If we found an asteroid guaranteed to hit in the next 50-100 years, and any possible solutions take a minimum of 50 years to implement with no surprises, and only then assuming we solve the myriad of technical issues we haven't solved in the last 100 years of trying and only if we can put the resources needed into a solution, not considering the constantly worsening barrage of smaller asteroids and the effects on resources and civilisation, we would put all our resources into solutions. That's where I think we are, except we still have many claiming there's no asteroid coming and those that already hit are fake news....including those in the highest offices making the decisions.

Every IPCC report has vastly underestimated their projections, they tell you they are doing it, only including data they are certain of, not new measurements or functions. They do not fill in the gaps, they leave them empty. Gaps like methane melt that could soon be more of a factor than human CO2, and 100% out of our control.

The AR5 report is so terrible, it was lambasted from day one as being incredibly naive and optimistic, and for not including what was then new data. Since its release, those complaints have been proven to be correct, in 5 years since its release ice melt rates have accelerated 60 years by their model. I wouldn't put a whit of confidence in it, it was terrible then, near criminally bad today. I'll take NOAA's estimates based on much newer science and guess that they, like nearly all others in the past, also don't know everything and are also likely underestimating wildly. Even the IPCC AR5 report includes the possibility of 3 ft rise by 2100 under their worst case (raised another 10% in this 2019 report, and expected to rise again by 2021, their next report), and their worst case models show less heat and melting than we are measuring already and doesn't include natural feedbacks because they can't model them accurately yet so just left them out (but noted they will have a large effect, but it's not quantitative yet so not included). Long and short, their worst case scenario is likely optimistic as reality already outpaces their worst case models.

Again, the economy benefits from new energy production in multiple ways. Exxon is not the global economy.

It took 100 years for the impact of our pollution to be felt by most (some still ignore it today). Even the short term features like methane take 25+ years to run their cycles, so what we do today takes that long to start working.

If people continue to drag their feet and challenge the science with supposition, insisting the best case scenario of optimistic studies are the worst we should plan for, we're doomed....and what they're doing is actually worse than that. The power plants built or under construction today put us much higher than 1.5 degree rise by 2100 with their expected emissions without ever building 1 more, and we're building more. Without fantastic scientific breakthroughs that may never come, breakthroughs your plan relies on for our survival, what we've already built puts us beyond the IPCC worst case in their operational lifetimes.

There's a problem with that...I'm good with using real science to identify them without political obstruction and confusion, the difference being we need to be prepared for decisive action once they're identified. So far, we have plans to develop those actions, but that's it. In the event of a "surprise" asteroid, we're done. We just hope they're rare.
This one, however, is an asteroid that is guaranteed to hit if we do nothing, some say hit in 30 years, some say 80. Only morons say it won't hit at all, do nothing.
Climate change is an asteroid/comet in our orbit that WILL hit earth. We are already being hit by ejecta from it's coma causing disasters for millions. You suggest we don't start building a defense until we are certain of it's exact tonnage and the date it will crash to earth because it's expensive and our data incomplete. That plan leaves us too late to change the trajectory. The IPCC said we need to deploy our system in 8-10 years to have a 30-60% chance of changing the trajectory under perfect conditions....you seem to say "wait, that's expensive, let's give it some time and ignore that deadline". I say even just a continent killer is bad enough to do whatever it takes to stop, because it's cheaper with less loss of life and infinitely less suffering than a 'wait and see exactly when it will kill us, we might have space elevators in 10 years so it might only kill 1/2 of us and the rest might survive that cometary winter in space (yes at exponentially higher cost and loss of life and ecology than developing the system today, but that won't be on my dime so Fuck it).' attitude.

If they get bored and stop listening, they'll get confused, won't they? I think they often get bored because they can't follow along, it's incredibly boring to have someone drone on using statistics and measurements you don't grasp and won't remember on a subject you also don't grasp.

I agree, but so far, measurements have consistently been outpacing the estimates, almost never the reverse.

What they tend to do is come from that incomplete data and incomplete analysis to model the absolute best case scenario to dictate policy, not the worst. That's absolutely what the U.N. report does, and it's not clear to most how much is left out, like infinitely better melting models (the measured melting in Greenland is already at the rate not predicted to be reached until 2075 in the UN's published estimations) and feedback loops we already see in action like melting methalhydrates and permafrost, both outgassing massive amounts of methane. Sane policy makers DO assume the absolute worst modeled outcome, then suggests policies to avoid it, at all cost when that worst case is extinction. Since measurements are consistently as bad or worse than the worst case scenario modeled, the only rational thing to do is assume that will continue and plan for the worst....you know, like they taught in preschool, hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

Your house burning down is an unlikely worst case scenario, but I bet you have smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, and support the fire department. Good planning is to assume you WILL have a fire and plan to minimize the damage.
Or, terrorist attacks. The likelihood you'll be killed in a terrorist attack is exceptionally low, but we spend untold billions and sacrifice liberties to combat a worst case but unlikely scenario.

Prudence is the better part of valor.

Edit: as to most problems society faces, I suggest they are likely ALL a function of overpopulation....no question imo when it comes to the apocalyptic problems. Pollution, resource mismanagement, ecological destruction, etc. None would be disastrous with 1/10 the population.

*Heavy sigh*
No. They don't say that. The science has evolved in the last 5 years. (Edit: Might check how old and out of date that ipcc report is, btw. Please note you ignore all science done since the 2014 IPCC report you reference that used melting equations and extrapolated rather than measured data sets, data and models they admit are incomplete. They have not updated their sea level estimates since the fifth assessment, which itself raised them approximately 60% over the fourth, which raised them significantly from the third...... Other nonpolitical scientific groups have adjusted the findings to include up to 6.5' or higher rise by 2100 under worst case conditions, the path we're firmly on today.)

Even if you were correct, and I don't agree one bit you are, is just under a 3' rise not bad enough for you in the next 70 years? That's at least 140 million people and all coastal habitats displaced, with more to come. I and others expect worse, but surely that's disaster enough for you, isn't it? The world couldn't deal with one million Syrians, 140 million coastal refugees, and whatever number of non coastal climate refugees fleeing drought or flood sure seems an unavoidable planetary disaster. That doesn't consider the two billion people who rely on Himalayan glaciers for their water, glaciers in rapid retreat.

I guess you dismiss the science from NOAA based simply on it being presented in Forbes without reading it then....so I should just dismiss the IPCC, another non scientific economically focused group discussing science?

Here's some more science then. Edit: Seems most CURRENT projections using up to date data are more in line with my expectations than yours.

https://phys.org/news/2019-05-metre-sea-plausible.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48337629

https://time.com/5592583/sea-levels-rise-higher-study/

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5056

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/10/sea-level-in-the-5th-ipcc-report/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise
Note the updated chart near the top showing more current projections compared to ipcc predictions.

*my content?*

Ok...i should have said "all but guaranteed under all BUT the most wildly optimistic projections". Got me.

Since, time and time again, the UN "collaborative summary" has had to be revised upwards, and recent measurements show current melting rates it claimed won't be seen until 2075 in Greenland, yes, I have a low opinion of their political/scientific consensus...but the scenarios I mentioned are not the most extreme I can find, just the most likely if you look at data rather than projections based on the conglomeration of incomplete, cherry picked, and non peer reviewed science as well as full scientific studies.

The IPCC does not carry out original research, nor does it monitor climate or related phenomena itself. Rather, it assesses published literature including peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed sources. Thousands of scientists and other experts contribute on a voluntary basis to writing and reviewing reports, which are then reviewed by governments.
They are not the scientific community, they are an international political body chaired by an economist that makes suggestions hopefully based on real honest science, but not necessarily.


There is plenty of consensus that the IPCC estimates are low....NOAA gives up to a 2.5M rise estimate for RCP8.5...the no mitigation, business as usual model we are outpacing already. Based on their numerical system, we're looking at RCP 10+ because emissions are rising, not flatlined, certainly not lowering.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/uhenergy/2018/06/15/is-the-ipcc-wrong-about-sea-level-rise/#712580f03ba0