BTW @bobknight33, his statistics are pure bullshit, totally made up figures, pure *lies.

For instance, the actual divorce rate is 39% or less and dropping, not 67% and rising. In 2019 divorce rates hit a 50 year low, and are expected to drop precipitously when 2020 statistics are released.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/marriage-divorce.htm
https://www.businessinsider.com/alarming-facts-about-divorce-in-the-us
https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-us-divorce-rate-has-hit-a-50-year-low

It follows that, with the easiest statistic to verify so incredibly wrong-not just nearly doubled but he also got the trend totally backwards, every statistic he quotes is certainly made up in the same dishonest way with zero factual basis.....Like most everything you post.

Bob, why are you such a constant liar? Everything you post is, at best, total misrepresentations of fact and far more often, like this, pure hateful lies coming from a place of weakness and infantile hatred for anyone not a conservative white male. What happened to you that makes you abhor truth and facts along with women and non whites? No, really....what happened? It must be a good story to have this kind of impact on you.

Call it a test for a project? Or add some artwork to an empty area of a production run, or print it as a test after an ink refill.

Remember I live in what used to be a "communist" country we have very little respect for private ownership of the means of production and a high level of instinctive reluctance to follow rules.

Also breaking rules is the only way any progress gets done.

Also (see above) I have an alarm in the back of my head not to write publicly anything that might actually get me in trouble :-)

When the little girls have to pull back in alarm in the pedestrian crosswalk---not impressed by the rider.

Why is that cool?

Reminds me a lot of this video. We should all be highly suspect of anyone preaching that such-and-such group is a problem, or is planing to "destroy the country" or other vague alarming threats. All "othering," all encouragement of hatred, leads to evil ends.

Bet you that woke up the neighborhood and set off a few car alarms.

Any rocket that sets off car alarms is alright with me. Mission accomplished.

Kinda like a cigarette after boinking.

Don't be alarmed. It was just all my hopes and dreams.

So, Chris heard fire alarms and saw sprinklers. Amirite? Suspect #1 I'll bet Smith isn't his real last name either.

Sprinkler systems are useless in buildings that size filled to the brim with flammable materials.
No fire alarms, that's bad.

A building with a sprinkler system should not go up in flames that quickly.
“Within 15 minutes the whole back of the building collapsed and exploded,”
“I didn’t hear no fire alarms, I didn’t see no fire sprinklers, nothing,” employee Chris Smith said.

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/06/05/massive-3-alarm-warehouse-fire-erupts-amazon-redlands/

Nope.
Trump denied there was any danger from the beginning, no significant or hazardous infection in America, and insisted it would miraculously disappear by April. Last week he suggested ending stay at home orders next weekend! Batshit crazy and criminally ignorant at best, intentional attempted mass homicide at worst.

Trump didn't stop flights from China, airlines did. Trump restricted travel for non citizens (except family of citizens) coming from China Jan 31, well after most flights were cancelled, and only when faced with the uniform recommendation of the career public health officials at HHS.

What preparations? They seemed to start those last week, not in February, and certainly not before. Most temporary hospitals are still in the planning stage, not built or stocked, and completely unstaffed. Stockpiles were not full or being filled. It seems they weren't even making plans, just denials.

The racist part was Trump and his subordinates calling it the Chinese flu and Kung Flu.

The loudest and latest one saying it was like any flu and not a problem was Trump, here's a clip of that from less than one month ago, try again.

https://youtu.be/xcDq1jUAuI4

Trump should not have dismantled the systems in place that made us more prepared, nor should he have underfunded and defunded the health programs and organizations so vital right now, nor should he have ignored the impacts other countries were suffering and, instead of preparing, downplayed the unfolding crisis while dragging his feet on any responses, or refused WHO tests that worked in S Korea in favor of nonexistent American tests that at first didn't work at all, couldn't be mass produced so are STILL in short supply, and now seem to give false negatives 1/3 of the time because the manufacturer donated $1.5 million, but he did.

China lied and minimized (sounds familiar) until mid January, yes, but Trump dismantled the CDC Pandemic Preparedness program that was designed to protect us from exactly that likelihood...that is their M. O.. Remember, the whistle blower went public in mid December, but Trump and co. ignored it, accepting China's obvious lies. The CDCPPP could not only have verified his claims, but could have sounded the alarm earlier. (Think Brad Pitt in WWZ)

Trump calls the Chinese liars and thieves, then bases his policies on what they tell him with no method or effort to confirm it, then denies any responsibility?! Trump STILL called it the flu less than 1 month ago. Who is he blaming for hiding the truth from him until then?

That was screwed up at many levels; never blew the collision alarm blasts (five, to my recollection) so the captain/harbor pilot never even knew they were in trouble.

A good, even *quality idea....for 40+ years ago.

It took 100+ years to mortally wound the ocean by 1000 cuts. A bandaid on one wound is not going to turn it around, and we almost certainly aren't going to do it anyway. Countries that don't buy into the plan will simply harvest most of the fish left by those who do. This only works in small scale preserves that are guarded against poaching, often by a military.

Fish stocks are disappearing at an alarming rate, many going extinct. For those species, it's too late, and they are numerous, and they are largely the fish humans prefer. Many others are in such decline fishing for them is already off limits or severely curtailed, like commercial salmon, abalone, and crab fishing in California. Even those actions have failed to revive their populations year after year.

Diatoms, phytoplankton, and other similar biotas are at the limit of acidity and temperature they can tolerate, and they are the base of the ocean food web, feeding most fish when they are fry or larvae. The gasses in the atmosphere today will push diatoms over that precipice with a massive ocean extinction following soon afterwards, and we continue to add more greenhouse gases than we added yesterday every day.

Then there's habitat loss, coral reefs and kelp forests are both being decimated by temperature rise and acidification. Together they are food and habitat for 25%-50% of all ocean fish and shellfish.

Less over harvesting of the ocean is a good idea, but pretending it alone can save the oceans is pure fantasy. The ocean has absorbed as much as 90+% of the excess heat from global warming, causing oceanic heat waves that destroy habitats both directly and indirectly. There is NO plan that solves that problem, it's well beyond our capabilities under the best conditions with worldwide maximum efforts.

Just sayin'.

@newtboy,

"Every IPCC report has vastly underestimated their projections"
Hogwash

IPCC AR5 predictions we can go check out are here: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter11_FINAL.pdf

Surface temp is in Fig. 11.9 page 981. They only graph for their 'middle' 4.5 case, not the worst 8.5 case that you call wildly optimistic. You can see even at the time they graphed it, the instrumental record sat on the extreme cold end of their projections, almost threatening to leave the margins of error. If you take today's today for 2019 and check it out we are sitting about dead center on their projected path. Doesn't seem like current temperature data shows their 'middle' case scenario underestimating anything, let alone their worst case.


If you look at the same for sea level rise in AR5 here:
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter13_FINAL.pdf

You can look for fig 13.11 on page 1181. Again, it shows projections approx 100mm sea level rise from 2000-2020, which more or less matches the instrumental record as we approach 2020 to verify. Again, not grossly underestimating.

The sea level rise is especially important to your alarms over Greenland being grossly underestimated by the IPCC. If they did grossly underestimate Greenland, it seems likely they also grossly overestimated something else if they more or less are on track with the overall sea level projections.

Again, if you just cherry pick a couple results and declare everything the IPCC did has been proven to over/under estimate things so they must be ignored, you aren't helping.

@newtboy,

"bankrupting the global economy isn't the only way to plan for asteroids, now is it? What we have done is put some money towards developing solutions that could be implemented in time, with minor exceptions for super fast unknown asteroids we likely couldn't do much about if we did have a planetary defense system."

That's precisely my point though, bankrupting the global economy to reach negative net emissions tomorrow isn't the only way to plan for climate change either.

"the probability of disastrous climate change is near 100% if you take historic human behavior into account. For many it's already hit. It's only the severity and speed that are in question, and those estimates rise alarmingly with every bit of data we use to replace guesses in the equations.

And the odds of a catastrophic asteroid hit sometime in the future is near 100% too, it's just a question of how many millions of years Earth's luck holds out. Nor has every prediction or projection underestimated future warming so far, your flat wrong on that.

More to the point, the timing and severity of the changes we face is ABSOLUTELY relevant to the actions we need to take. Similarly, knowing the benefit of reducing our emissions by X% by a particular date is also extremely relevant to the actions we need to take. Unfortunately, it must be acknowledged that we have a lot of gaps and uncertainty in our knowledge on those points.

At minimum base level, we know changing global temperature on the whole will impact us negatively, that our CO2 emissions will make things warmer than they otherwise would be, and thus can easily conclude with certainty that the science dictates policies to reduce emissions are a good idea.

Now, you seem to be hell bent on demanding those policies take the shape of staring down the face of disaster 2-3 times worse than the IPCC AR5 reports absolute worst case scenario. I've got to tell you, that the uncertainties involved with that kind of prediction are too great to warrant an honest dictate that the facts support a need for economically devastating action being taken today. It's just not the case.

Even if green tech never takes over, if the next century sees us final solve fusion power and adoption of electric cars, we already get our emission outputs off the worst track scenario the IPCC projected in AR5. I honestly do believe that we will see non-fossil fuel electricity generation and electric cars as the norm in my lifetime, so I'm hopeful for a future that tracks better than the IPCC worst case. That doesn't mean we should do nothing, but it's more like we should take a similarly rational/practical approach to it like you see us doing with asteroids.