Elon Musk: Departing presidential councils

[kort677]

Not if they knew they were being completely ignored. Sorry but it's obvious that Elon realized that nothing he said was getting through to Trump. Banging your head against a wall is not productive, especially for someone like Elon who's time is so valuable and can be put to better use.

really how did you gain such insight? are you one of those unnamed sources in the white house? afaik that council hasn't ever met.
can you tell me who will will saturday at the belmont?

 

[kort677]

For the intellectually challenged, a treaty n. a pact between nations which, if entered into by the United States through its Executive Branch, must be approved by"two-thirds of the Senators present," under Article II, section 2 of the Constitution, to become effective. The Paris Accord Staes goals but not any mechanism to force compliance, nor any requirement to maintain any specific stated goals. One cannot necessarily find any given country specific obligations is fraught because any country can change it's goalposts at any time, unilaterally.

Thus, for the seriously intellectually challenged, one cannot claim that the US must exit or renegotiate because it has unfair obligations. If the US wants to pay less, it is the choice of the US. If the US wants to pollute more or move back to coal, it is the right of the US to do so. The Paris Accord declared the intentions of the signatories but did not establish treaty obligations. THUS, BY DEFINITION PURSUING THE PARIS ACCORD WAS NOT AN ILLEGAL ACTION. orly for shouting. It seems some people cannot read well enough to discern the difference between a declaration of intent and a contractual obligation to perform a specific duty. The Paris Accord is a declaration of intent. Anybody whose intent is to bring coal back to where it was in, say, 1930, can do so without exiting.

Exiting is a good idea only if the intent is to yield leadership to China in renewable energy, which produces several times more US jobs than does coal, oil and gas combined.

Only one of those three is growing- guess which one.
Only one does not cause carbon pollution, and does not need any fuel that must be paid for- guess which one?
Only one can be used to make a speaker plant with less than six months notice- guess which one?

sorry but your attempt at splitting hairs isn't going to fly
U.S. Senate: Treaties
and the accord obligated the us to funding the scheme to the tune of about $500 million.
if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck.

 

[kort677]

When are you starting that 'not to be argumentative' thing you were talking about?

pardon me, I never got the memo that offering a counterpoint is argumentative, I must be stuck in the past because this is what I'm working with:
ar·gu·men·ta·tive
ˌärɡyəˈmen(t)ədiv/
adjective

1. 1.
   given to expressing divergent or opposite views.
   "an argumentative child"
   synonyms: quarrelsome, disputatious, captious, contrary, cantankerous, contentious; More
   
   I know, there are way smarter people than me on here.

 

[bonnie]

pardon me, I never got the memo that offering a counterpoint is argumentative, I must be stuck in the past because this is what I'm working with:
ar·gu·men·ta·tive
ˌärɡyəˈmen(t)ədiv/
adjective

1. 1.
   given to expressing divergent or opposite views.
   "an argumentative child"
   synonyms: quarrelsome, disputatious, captious, contrary, cantankerous, contentious; More
   
   I know, there are way smarter people than me on here.

Oh, Humorless One. I was only quoting you.

And yes, you are correct in your last assertion.

 

[kort677]

And yes, you are correct in your last assertion.

but I am able to recognize that reality, some believe their mommies

 

[bonnie]

but I am able to recognize that reality, some believe their mommies

I miss the art of thoughtful conversation.

 

[kort677]

I miss the art of thoughtful conversation.

when people are incapable of listening to divergent opinions, when the immature don't get their way the collapse of intelligent/civil discourse is just about impossible.
did you ever hear about trying to teach a pigeon to play chess?

 

[bonnie]

when people are incapable of listening to divergent opinions, when the immature don't get their way the collapse of intelligent/civil discourse is just about impossible.
did you ever hear about trying to teach a pigeon to play chess?

Yes, I'm well aware of the pigeon.

So far, in this conversation between the two of us, you've mocked people (repeatedly) who hold differing opinions, attributed words to me that I didn't say, and repeated internet rumors (that you later said you knew weren't true).

I suspect that those actions work well with you in winning arguments - get the other person worked up emotionally and you can claim a victory of sorts.

 

[kort677]

Yes, I'm well aware of the pigeon.

So far, in this conversation between the two of us, you've mocked people (repeatedly) who hold differing opinions, attributed words to me that I didn't say, and repeated internet rumors (that you later said you knew weren't true).

I suspect that those actions work well with you in winning arguments - get the other person worked up emotionally and you can claim a victory of sorts.

if you look more closely I only responded in kind to their broad attacks on those who's views didn't jibe with theirs.
as for words or statements that aren't true, check the wapo, nytimes and any of the tv outlets which are all full of "facts". now we all know that mr gore tried to imply that he was responsible for creating the internet.
I deplorable and proud of it

 

[nativewolf]

How do I put someone like kort on ignore?...he's not only boorish he's just useless as far as contributing to a conversation.

 

[bonnie]

if you look more closely I only responded in kind to their broad attacks on those who's views didn't jibe with theirs.
I deplorable and proud of it

Again, I was only commenting on the conversation between the two of us. I made no broad attacks. I disagreed with you on a specific point, which started the mocking and such. That was not 'responding in kind' to me.

 

[Mediocrates]

How clever to misinterpret the data this way.

Concurrently with cyclical planetary movements yielding have been carbon dioxide level changes. True.
Since human industrialization the absolute levels of pollutants pumped into the atmosphere have been higher than observed in geological records with two gigantic exceptions:
One, a huge meteor strike.
Two, a gigantic volcanic eruption.

Really, it is not nice to create false implications about clear evidence. People ignorant about scientific evidence often believe such drivel and don't understand that you're making an Al Franken-style joke. Some of us might even imagine that you were serious with this post. Actually, I almost think you might have been serious myself. I'm sorry if I am just gullible because I did not get the joke.

This is not a response to anything I said. My post was in regards to the carbon dioxide forcing function hypothesis for temperature.

I welcome scientific discussion about these matters, but you should endeavor to avoid logical fallacies, such as the following in your post:

1. The first half is a non-sequitur, as it does not address the aforementioned hypothesis (and my presentation of the refutation of it).
2. Equivocation of terms: "carbon dioxide" is not equivalent to "pollutants," nor is carbon dioxide a pollutant.
3. Ad hominem. The second half of your post is inappropriate to a scientific discussion and undermines the process and your presentation. I expect you (and anyone else who joins the discussion) to be able to discuss/debate the ideas alone.

If you wish to discuss CO2 as a sole/primary forcing function for temperature, we can engage that hypothesis.

If, by #2, you meant to say that CO2 levels in the past ~200 years have been higher than any known levels in geological records/proxies, we can discuss what records we have.

 

[kort677]

Again, I was only commenting on the conversation between the two of us. I made no broad attacks. I disagreed with you on a specific point, which started the mocking and such. That was not 'responding in kind' to me.

did I mock you? please accept my sincerest apology

 

[jzhan]

hmm.. this thread is getting awfully long consider one person posted like a third of the posts in the thread.
I believe Anderson Cooper has a beautiful quote that describes this situation perfectly: " If [Trump] took a dump on his desk, you would defend it."

 

[jbcarioca]

This is not a response to anything I said. My post was in regards to the carbon dioxide forcing function hypothesis for temperature.

I welcome scientific discussion about these matters, but you should endeavor to avoid logical fallacies, such as the following in your post:

1. The first half is a non-sequitur, as it does not address the aforementioned hypothesis (and my presentation of the refutation of it).
2. Equivocation of terms: "carbon dioxide" is not equivalent to "pollutants," nor is carbon dioxide a pollutant.
3. Ad hominem. The second half of your post is inappropriate to a scientific discussion and undermines the process and your presentation. I expect you (and anyone else who joins the discussion) to be able to discuss/debate the ideas alone.

If you wish to discuss CO2 as a sole/primary forcing function for temperature, we can engage that hypothesis.

If, by #2, you meant to say that CO2 levels in the past ~200 years have been higher than any known levels in geological records/proxies, we can discuss what records we have.

Responding might be very difficult. One item only: If anyone ever suggests that anything is the "sole primary/forcing function" for anything else" that person is probably not stating the question very well.
Carbon dioxide is not inherently a pollution, but becomes so when it is excessively concentrated. You can probably think of dozens of close analogies, from a number of vitamins that become injurious in excessive concentration, to water itself which can damage human health if taken to excess. Sadly, you seem to want binary outcomes and absolutes, but not too much in life actually works that way.
Anyway, it is futile to argue with pseudo-science so I'll drop out of this discussion now.

 

[K-MTG]

Elon should give Trump a sunshade before he quits...he needs it!!

 

[habanero69]

hmm.. this thread is getting awfully long consider one person posted like a third of the posts in the thread.
I believe Anderson Cooper has a beautiful quote that describes this situation perfectly: " If [Trump] took a dump on his desk, you would defend it."

Anderson Cooper is a fake. Period. Add him to Dan Rather and Brian Williams. ALL FAKES.

 

[habanero69]

So a little more than $3 per US citizen to help mitigate climate change. The horror...

Please enlighten us on exactly what that $500 mil got us? 3 Trillion $ is supposed to get us .2 degrees over many years. Laughable.

 

[kort677]

I don't agree to many of the taxes I'm forced to pay.

comments like this is the result of schools not teaching civics

 

[kort677]

Elon should give Trump a sunshade before he quits...he needs it!!

ok that's it the man has the final solution, sun shades for all