I figure the simulation of the two sailboats tacking helically along the cylindrical ocean is the best representation of the forces involved.

The wheels act like a keel for the "tacking" blades.

But... but... Republicans will say they look ugly under the ocean! Just like Trump said Wind mills are eyesores!

Back to the science of it. I wonder how much energy these oscillating plates can generate Wh? Their movements don't seem to be that much. Factor in the construction cost, damage/maintenance from salt water erosion, large fish bumping into it, the weather, etc. It might be feasible for small island communities/nations, but countries with a large landmass to coastal access ratio... its contribution to the overall energy sector might not be that significant. But every little bit of renewable, environmental risk-free energy helps, so, good stuff!

Depends on your definition of "need", and your definition of "stopping" climate change.

Because I'm convinced enough natural feedback loops are in effect that there's no chance at all of stopping further climate change, and only a slight chance of slowing the rate of change and only if humanity fundamentally changes first, I find the question flawed.

I find it odd that tidal energy (different from hydro) is never considered in these debates. It's simple, relatively cheap, easy to maintain, and best of all predictable and consistent. All you need is a shoreline with a relatively large tide swing, a small inlet, and a tidal flat.

At best, nuclear is a stop gap measure that trades one planetary poison for another.....largely because we aren't responsible with it....building on shores in earthquake zones for convenience, banning fuel recycling, having no long term waste plan and handling waste insanely (Japan, I'm looking at you and your plans to dump Fukushima irradiated water into the ocean)....It's far from "green" the way we do it.

I usually say "the American voter" but since so many of these delusional traitors didn't vote, I modified it to fit the scenario. I never knew where it came from, but I knew it was a quote or paraphrase from someone.

I could hope with all my hope and it would be a thimble in an ocean of pessimism and dispare over the stupidity of any large group of humans. A person can be smart, I've yet to see evidence that people can.

There is no "try".

Well, we got the moron in the Whitehouse for 4 years, when do we reach our heart's desire? How is that even possible when the desires of the plain folk often contradict each other....they / we aren't homogeneous.

Sorry to be the little grey raincloud on this Hate The Hedges party, but you might want to understand the implications of what just happened

Y'know that fund that's getting all attention, Melvin Capital? Yeah, fuck them, right? Fuckin' shorters all shortin' and shit -- they played, they paid!

There's a reason they were bailed out and with all due haste.

Here's the issue: they were VERY good at the shorting game. So good that they actually had to turn away business. They made money like horses makes shit. When clients couldn't get in at Melvin, they went elsewhere. That opened the door to a lot of other firms basically mirroring exactly what MC was doing, which included shorting the fuck outta GME.

Fuck those guys too, right? It's their money, so why should I care?

Let's go back a few year, shall we, to the glorious chapter in finance and economics that was the 2008 Crash. Remember when Paulson lost his shit because he realized that in about 36 hours, the basic system called Western Capitalism was going to shit the bed; the bedroom; the whole house and pretty much every surface above the ocean within a planetary radius? This is sorta like that. Only worse.

The thing about short squeezes is that the losses can be infinite, and that's exactly why WallStreetBets did what they did. They knew if they bought and held -- diamond hands -- the stock would have to rise as the shorters had to cover their bets. Melvin Capital and a shit-ton of other, smaller firms had to do that and ran out of liquidity long before GME was even at $50. For every share of stock they shorted, they need to cough up another share at a higher value -- and they HAD to actually have the higher-priced share.

And here's where things get VERY ugly.

Shorting GME was such a sure thing that a huge number of shorts were placed. In fact, more shares of GME were shorted than actually existed. Oops. But hey, SURE THING, BABY and what's the worst that can happen?

Yeeeah, y'see where this is going now?

So these firms, not only are they broke, they don't have the shares, either. They need to come up with shares, pronto, at any price, because contractual obligations are a motherfucker in the finance world. But again, more shorts than there are shares and the people who have the shares, WSB and 4chan's /biz/, aren't letting them go. The longer they hold, the higher the price will go as short after short faces having to cough up the shares they borrowed.

A lot of people are about to lose a LOT of money -- the kinda losses that have so many zeros attached that looking at the number bores the eyes.

Back to 2008: the reason the whole world almost started Mad Max LARPing back then is that a narrow number of highly-important financial institutions were a wee bit thin on liquidity because they were having to pay it out by the boatload. That's bad. What would be better is if risk were more distributed, and how could that little plan POSSIBLY go wrong? Maybe a Black Swan event involving a huge amount of money that needs to be paid out by all of them due to this annoying bird.

That's where we are now, but no one even remotely knows what that figure is going to be. Again, (potentially) infinite losses multiplied by 150% times the number of shares actually available, multiplied by the dogshit risk factor on the loans and the leveraged payouts -- your best case scenario might be a loss of about $500 billion. Someone has to come up with that money, be it the Fed or other banks/investors, but that latter group has to come up with the money themselves, which is generally accomplished by selling profitable holdings. We all know what happens when a lot of people have to sell, right?

I always wanted to live in interesting times, thus proving what an utter fuckwit I am.

Wait, you said clearly that if the truth doesn’t help your case, it’s the right thing to do to lie, even under oath, only stupid people would tell the truth if it hurts their case. Now you think you have a leg to stand on calling someone a liar? Get a grip.

This points out in great clarity how biased and untrustworthy Rand Paul and most republicans are.

Investigations galore, multiple recounts, signatures were compared, over 60 cases tossed for lack of evidence, a few for lack of standing, only about what, +-70 votes actually in question for fraud now that the dominion lie has been quashed, far fewer prosecuted, and they were Trumpsters voting twice or more, the rest are cases of minor technicalities that Republicans thought meant since two people in one Republican county weren’t afforded the same help some people in other counties got like ballot curing or a chance to fix a signature that was missing or considered different from the one on file before election day (because the republicans in that county specifically disallowed it) they think those other counties must be discarded completely, a few million votes should be discarded to make up for two republicans that Republicans screwed over.

How many times did Paul lie about what Stephanopilous had just said? I lost count.

We had the debate, repeatedly. Paul is lying again.

We had thorough examinations in every state, full recounts in some, multiple in Georgia. Republicans are all liars who want to rehash the election in different ways and venues until they win, then stop the process. Too bad you lost so badly, in such a massive landslide with such a clear mandate across the board that no amount of rehashing, not an ocean of their tears could change the outcome.

The conservative Supreme Court heard umpteen challenges to election rule changes and found NONE to be illegal, Paul is just lying again.
If every single claim thrown out of court for lack of evidence was won by the right, Trump still would have lost bigly.

You are such a willing tool for the lying right. If lying were a crime, republicans would all be in prison for felony level dishonesty. Where you go one, you go all....into the mouth of madness.

I do like that you tagged this ridiculous lie fest from Paul as “lies”, and the reporting by Stephanopolis “news”. That’s a step back towards sanity.

These Guys Can Dance! (Legend Dancer | Nonstop | Dance Life) has been added as a related post - related requested by mxxcon.

Lang Lang & Marquese 'Nonstop' Scott - Ocean 12 has been added as a related post - related requested by mxxcon.

Let Your Body Drive - Marquese Nonstop Scott has been added as a related post - related requested by mxxcon.

He's super old school

*related=https://videosift.com/video/This-Guy-Can-Dance-Legend-Dancer-Nonstop-Dance-Life
*related=https://videosift.com/video/Lang-Lang-Marquese-Nonstop-Scott-Ocean-12
*related=https://videosift.com/video/Let-Your-Body-Drive-Marquese-Nonstop-Scott
There are many more here but people don't tag videos properly

That's what you have to tell yourself to get through the day....but there was absolutely no evidence produced of that.

If the election was stolen, then Democrats also control the Senate because those republican senators didn't actually win their elections. Can't have it both ways....and you can't explain how or why only the presidential portion was effected by fraud but not the rest of the ballot. If it was stolen, it would have been across the board. So asinine, little Bobby. You're grasping at straws.

If democrats stole it, they have suddenly become the ultimate Ocean's 80 million, pulling off the most intricate heist without leaving a trace. If they are that competent, they should definitely be running the country....but thinking they are that competent means ignoring their entire history.

My election was stolen in 2016 when the "winner" had over 3 million fewer votes than the "loser". When the person with the most votes loses, that's a stolen election, not when the person with millions more votes wins. Duh. This isn't Russia.

Now get out there, destroy the GOP and boycott Georgia like Trump ordered.

Genius narrator thinks a dam will hold back the ocean from SF Bay. Completely forgetting the river will fill it up to the same level behind the dam anyway. You are not going to pump all that river flow UP into the ocean. All it could help with is protection against storm surge.

The pictures this video shows does not represent a "38 cm rise by 2100" mentioned in the beginning. It would have been nice to show the actual level of rise depicted in the images and projected year that would occur.

HE SKIPPED IT ACROSS THE WATER!

HE SKIPPED IT ACROSS THE FRIGGIN' WATER AS TO THUMB HIS NOSE AT EVERYONE!! 🏌️ 🌊 ⛳ 🖕

I hear you brave young Jaybles, you are hungry for the rock
But to learn the ancient method, sacred doors you must unlock
Escape your father's clutches and this oppressive neighborhood
On a journey you must go to find the land of Hollywood

In The City of Fallen Angels where the ocean meets the sand
You will form a strong alliance and the world's most awesome band
To find your fame and fortune, through the valley you must walk
You will face your inner demons, now go my son and rock

If the remarks being contradicted are not only smug they're also ridiculous, devoid of fact, racist, and or dangerously stupid (like insisting in May that Coronavirus is a hoax that's not dangerous and is a "nothing burger", and everyone should be back at work), and contradicting them with facts and references and +- 1/4 the disrespect the original remarks contained makes people vote for Trump, that does indicate they were already trumpsters imo.

Edit: It's like Democrats have a high bar to clear, but Republicans have no depth too deep to stoop to.

Trump changes Bob's beliefs daily, every time he changes a position Bob changes his belief to make the new position seem reasonable to him. He is not consistent. No other opinion matters to him.

I don't hold beliefs, I have theories. It's easy to change your theory when given new information, I do all the time. Beliefs don't work that way, so I avoid them as much as possible.

Yes, and I eat animals because they're delicious. I would eat people if they were raised and fed better, but we are polluted beyond recovery imo.

You may be correct, but eating meat is hardly the worst thing humans are up to. Killing for sport seems worse, so do kill "shelters", puppy mills, habitat destruction, ocean acidification, etc....I could go on for pages with that list. I try to eat free range locally farmed on family farms meat, not factory farm meat. I know the difference in quality.

I gladly discuss vegetarianism with honest people, but I'm prepared when they start spouting bullshit like " eating any red meat is more harmful than smoking two packs a day of filterless cigarettes" (yes, someone insisted that was true because they didn't care it wasn't, it helped scare people, I contradicted him every time he lied.) The difference is, I could agree with some of their points that weren't gross exaggeration, I agreed that excessive meat eating is horrible for people, I agree that most meat is produced under horrific conditions, I would not agree that ALL meat is unhealthy in any amount and ALL meat is tortured it's entire lifetime because I know from personal experience that's just not true. We raised cattle, free range cattle, in the 70's. They were happy cows that had an enjoyable life roaming our ranch until the day they went to market, a life they wouldn't have if people didn't eat meat.

I've never met a vegan that wasn't a bold faced liar in support of veganism, so I'm less likely to give them a full chance at convincing me. The fact checking part of my brain goes on high alert when talking with them about health or other issues involved in meat production, with excellent reason.

Again, that would be long held theories in my case, and it's not hard to change them. Mad cow disease got me to change until I was certain it wasn't in America. No, I'm not recoiling. I'll listen to anyone who's respectful and honest.

Here's the thing, Bob consistently trolls in a condescending, self congratulatory, and bat shit crazy way. Turnabout is fair play.
As the only person willing to reply to him for long stretches, I know him. I've had many private conversations with him where he's far more reasonable, honest, willing to admit mistakes, etc. (Something I gave up when he applauded Trump lying under oath because "only a dummy tells the truth under oath if the truth might harm them, Trump winning!") When someone is so anti truth and snide, they deserve some snidely delivered truth in return. Bob has proven he's undeserving of the civility you want him to receive, it's never returned.

Bob does not take anything in from any source not pre approved by Trump. I've tried for a decade, and now know he only comes here to troll the libtards. It doesn't matter if you show him video proof and expert opinions, he'll ignore them and regurgitate more nonsense claiming the opposite of reality. He's not trying to change minds, in case you're confused. He's hoping to trick people who for whatever reason refuse to investigate his factless hyper biased claims and amplify the madness. That he comes here to do that, a site he regularly calls a pure liberal site (it's not) is proof enough to convict him of just trolling.

Trolls deserve derision.

I spent years ignoring his little jabs, insults, derisions, and whinging and trying hard to dispassionately contradict his false claims with pure facts and references, it was no different then.
While privately he would admit he's wrong, he would then publicly repeat the claims he had just admitted were bullshit. When he started supporting perjury from the highest position on earth down as long as they're Republican but still calls for life in prison for democrats that he thinks lied even not under oath, he lost any right to civil replies imo. He bought it when Republican representatives said publicly in interviews that they have no obligation to be truthful with the American people, and he applauds it and repeats their lies with glee.

Edit: in general I agree that dispassionate fact based replies with references are better at convincing people than derision, there are exceptions, and there are those who are unconvinceable and disinterested in facts that don't support their lies. How long are you capable of rebutting them with just fact and references when they are smug, snide, insulting, dangerous, and seriously delusional if not just purely dishonest?

Rebuttal?

If you're talking climate change/ global warming shouldn't you be talking global temperatures?

As to why it happened https://www.climatescience.org.au/content/868-warm-oceans-caused-hottest-dust-bowl-years

Your video, Ocean Ramsey Encounters GIANT 20ft Great White Shark, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.