Good dog, Cujo! Also, you know that mutt drops a log the size of a baguette at least twice a day and it practically takes a snow shovel to fling it into the neighbor's yard.

I use to have a tragically retarded Cocker Spaniel (and, to note, there is no other variety of that breed) and it was like the Goose that Laid the Golden Egg, only with dogshit. At least three times a day, this golden-furred, floppy ear'd mongrel would scarf down a can of Alpo, a cup of kibble and whatever food was left lying on the table -- the same table the cat always got smacked for climbing on, but the dog ... ohhh, no! It's CUTE when the dog does it! -- then make a beeline to the back lawn where it'd crap Mt. Everest. I'd have to trudge out the the back yard, shovel in hand, while the guy next door shot me the stink-eye because he was tired of fishing dog turds out of his swimming pool every day during the summer. This task is odious enough, but it's a thousand times worse when you're stoned and it's a million degrees out and you'd much rather be floating on your waterbed listening to Dark Side of the Moon in headphones while blissful AC-cooled air wafts over your twice-weekly washed body and not fighting your way through a black fog of Horseflies to reach a 1:1 scale model of Mt. Doom made entirely of a too-quickly digested overpriced slurry of meat scraps and offal that the canners couldn't fob off on Mexico.

It might not have been as bad as all that, but in my hazy recollection, it was pretty darned close.

I'm not sure why I told you all this, to be perfectly honest, but I did. So there.

I think they should scrap their navy and arm those tankers.

One way to scrap the barnacles off.

Sad. The reason is because the seal is so bored. They could at least feed him live fish for food, but they throw him scraps of dead fish. No wonder he is bored.

To be fair, the electoral college system does make a lot of votes pointless. A Texan Democrat and a Californian Republican don’t really have a say. It’s just a fundamentally broken system and should be scrapped immediately.

There really is no defence for it.

The Russians played around with this sort of design a lot during the cold war. They never really got satisfactory results.

See "Ekranoplan"

Ultimately the program was scrapped because there were too many limitations on how the vehicles could operate.

Bob's pretty much right, by the only numbers that matter (electoral votes). Is that a stupid system, that both sides should be clamoring to resign to the scrap heap? Yes. But they aren't, in spite of the D's getting screwed by it twice in very recent memory, and even the R "beneficiaries" have had to try to deal with some uncomfortable infighting and internal strife as a result (cue world's tiniest violin).

I don't think Trump is some sort of super genius and that he "played the game under the existing rules" better than Hillary or anything. He won by a technicality, just as you say -- but the mere fact that anyone can actually win by such a technicality ought to be an unbearable affront to our very conceptions of Democracy and Government. Instead, entirely too many of us seemed too complacent and apathetic to give a fuck, moments later. I really wish I could muster some surprise at this point.

I don't agree with Bob's other assertion that Trump stands a great chance of beating anyone that gets the D nod in 2020. On the other hand, 2016 proved the old adage about what happens when we assume.

I do completely concur with (both of) you that President Oprah isn't the answer.

Wow. I didn't realize the difference in prison populations since the 70's was so large. That is completely insane.
I think it speaks volumes that GW sells his paintings for charity and gives the money to the Carter Center. Carter is the only president in my lifetime that I have respect for or feel was honestly working in America's best interests rather than his own. Had we followed his policies instead of scrapping them with Regan, I believe our country would be in incredibly better shape, as would much of the rest of the planet.

I don't support our pulling out of the Paris Accord. I think it was the wrong thing to do. And I don't mind GDP growth for other nations, even China. What I do mind is the notion that the world's greatest polluter can increase its amount of Co2 emitted and still be touted as successfully contributing to reduced Co2 emissions worldwide.

"Telling China to limit their total CO2 emission to pre 2005 values is like telling a teenager in the middle of puberty to limit their food consumption to the same amount as when they were 9 years old. It's just not an option."

Who's telling China to do that? I only suggested that China's pledge to reduce their Co2 emissions to 60-65% of their 2005 levels as a ratio of GDP isn't all that it's made out to be. Your analogy is faulty because food consumption is necessary for life, but spending billions on destroying coral reefs while making artificial islands in the South China Sea is not. The CCP certainly has the funds necessary to effect a bigger, better and faster transition to green energy. Put another way, I believe that China has the potential to benefit both their people through economic growth and simultaneously do more in combating global climate change. I simply don't trust their current government to do it. I've been living in China now for over 19 years...and one thing that strikes me is the prevalence of appearance over substance. Perhaps you simply give them more credence in the latter, while my own perception seems to verify the former.

"But their total emissions is still increasing! This is just a farce and they're doing nothing!"

The second half of your statement is a strawman. They are doing something, just not enough, imho. And China's emissions have yet to plateau, therefore it's not an achievement yet.

"Now you may say "China's not putting funds towards green energy!" Well, that's also not true. China already surpassed the US, in spending on renewable energy. In fact, China spent $103 billion on renewable energy in 2015, far more than the US, which only spent $44 billion. Also, they will continue to pour enormous amounts of resources into renewable energy, far more than any other country."

This is also misleading. What I'm suggesting is that China could do more. It's certainly a matter of opinion on whether the Chinese government is properly funding green initiatives. For example, both your article and the amounts you cite ignore the fact that those numbers include Chinese government loans, tax credits, and R&D for Chinese manufacturers of solar panels...both for domestic use AND especially for export. The government has invested heavily into making solar panels a "strategic industry" for the nation. Their cheaper manufacturing methods, while polluting the land and rivers with polysilicon and cadmium, have created a glut of cheap panels...with a majority of the panels they manufacture being exported to Japan, the US and Europe. It's also forced many "cleaner" manufacturers of solar panels in the US and Europe out of business. China continues to overproduce these panels, and thus have "installed" much of the excess as a show of green energy "leadership." But what you don't hear about much is curtailment, that is the fact that huge percentages of this green energy never makes its way to the grid. It's lost, wasted...and yet we're supposed to give them credit for it? So...while you appear to want to give them full credit for their forward-looking investments, I will continue to look deeper and keep a skeptical eye on a government that has certainly earned our skepticism.

""But China is building more coal plants!" Well that's not really true either. China just scrapped over 100 coal power projects with a combined power capacity of 100 GW . Instead, the aforementioned investments will add over 130GW in renewable energy. Overall, Chinese coal consumption may have already peaked back in in 2013."

Well, yes, it really is true. China announcing the scrapping of 103 coal power projects on January 14th this year was a step in the right direction, and certainly very well timed politically. But you're assuming that that's the entirety of what China has recently completed, is currently building, and even plans to build. If you look past that sensationalist story, you'll see that they continue to add coal power at an accelerating pace. As to China's coal consumption already having peaked...lol...well, if you think they'd never underreport and then quietly revise their numbers upwards a couple of years later, then you should more carefully review the literature.

"So in the world of reality, how is China doing in terms of combating global warming? It's doing a decent job. So no "@Diogenes", China is NOT the single biggest factor in our future success/failure, because it is already on track to meeting its targets."

Well, your own link states:

"We rate China’s Paris agreement - as we did its 2020 targets - “medium.” The “medium“ rating indicates that China’s targets are at the last ambitious end of what would be a fair contribution. This means they are not consistent with limiting warming to below 2°C, let alone with the Paris Agreement’s stronger 1.5°C limit, unless other countries make much deeper reductions and comparably greater effort."

And if the greatest emitter of Co2 isn't the biggest factor, then what is? I'm not saying that China bears all the responsibility or even blame. I'm far more upset with my own country and government. But to suggest that China adding the most Co2 of any nation on earth (almost double what the US emits) isn't the largest single factor that influences AGW...I'm having trouble processing your rationale for saying so. Even if we don't question if they're on track to meet their targets, they'll still be the largest emitter of Co2...unless India somehow catches up to them.

To restate my position:
The US shouldn't have withdrawn from Paris.
China is not a global leader in fighting climate change.
To combat climate change, every nation needs to pull together.
China is not "pulling" at their weight, which means that other nations must take up more of the slack.
Surging forward, while "developed" nations stagnate will weaken the CCP's enemies...and make no mistake, they view most of us as their enemies.
The former is part of the CCP's long-term strategy for challenging the current geopolitical status quo.
I believe that the Chinese Communist Party is expending massive amounts of resources abroad and militarily, when the bulk of those funds would better serve their own people, environment and combating the global crisis of climate change.

While you can try to be idealistic and point the finger at total CO2 emissions, it's not a practical target for developing countries like China.

It's not a matter of them trying to "grow their economy faster than their emissions". They are a developing country, and their economy will grow fast, whether you like it or not. Telling China to limit their total CO2 emission to pre 2005 values is like telling a teenager in the middle of puberty to limit their food consumption to the same amount as when they were 9 years old. It's just not an option.

Now you may say "But their total emissions is still increasing! This is just a farce and they're doing nothing!" Well, saying that they're doing nothing is not true. Do you know what China's emissions would look like if they did nothing to limit them? Having China's emissions plateau is already quite an achievement, as the alternative is far far worse.

Now you may say "China's not putting funds towards green energy!" Well, that's also not true. China already surpassed the US, in spending on renewable energy. In fact, China spent $103 billion on renewable energy in 2015, far more than the US, which only spent $44 billion. Also, they will continue to pour enormous amounts of resources into renewable energy, far more than any other country.

"But China is building more coal plants!" Well that's not really true either. China just scrapped over 100 coal power projects with a combined power capacity of 100 GW . Instead, the aforementioned investments will add over 130GW in renewable energy. Overall, Chinese coal consumption may have already peaked back in in 2013.

So in the world of reality, how is China doing in terms of combating global warming? It's doing a decent job. So no "@Diogenes", China is NOT the single biggest factor in our future success/failure, because it is already on track to meeting its targets.

Don't let China distract us from our own responsibilities and how shitty of a job Trump is doing.

Wonder what the unique conditions are inside that building that allowed that to happen?

Quick search says they eat decomposing organic matter. Maybe grain or other food stuff was stored in there, and then it got closed up with enough humidity to make an explosion of decomposing scrap for them?

That's funny. Not referring to your shit joke but your poor ability in making it. Lol. Yeah, not me, or my dog.

Fantomas pointed out the location before I did (hello fellow Australian!).

BTW, I used to be a paramedic. I've scrapped lots of people up off of the road (alive and dead) from this sort of small driver error. This is just one of the reasons I'm happy about the advent of driverless cars.

Is road safety funny to you?

Congratulations! Your video, The Scrapping Of Internet Privacy: Something We Can All Hate, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 21 Badge!

The Scrapping Of Internet Privacy: Something We Can All Hate has been added as a related post - related requested by notarobot on that post.

Your video, The Scrapping Of Internet Privacy: Something We Can All Hate, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.