brenthutch

That is great, thank you. I learned something interesting today, the same cannot be said for my ten year old daughter who is reading over my shoulder...horrified.

Perhaps not, but you have to admit that bit on polar bears and the NW Passage was a real gem.

Write it down folks August 6, 2019 5:16 EST BillV was trolled by the IPCC.

I know it can be hard to keep track sometimes. The flaws in AGW theory present a target rich environment, as do its “solutions”. So, do you agree with the IPCC with regard to AGW and floods, droughts and tropical cyclones?

So do James Hanson, John Holden and Michael Mann. Since you are a big fan of the IPCC, I assume you would agree there is “low confidence due to limited evidence, that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and the magnitude of floods” and “low confidence in the sign of drought trends since 1950 at a global scale” and “there is only low confidence regarding changes in global tropical cyclone numbers” All from the IPCC’s 2013 climate assessment

Politicians make policy not the IPCC.

There are a lot more folks making predictions other than the IPCC. I really don’t care what a bunch of U.N. bureaucrats have to say. I am more concerned about who policy makers listen to, like James Hansen, Michael Mann and the New York Times. (BTW, theories are no more confirmed than the accused are found innocent)

That’s the point. If AGW predictions were accurate we would be sailing the North West Passage impeded only by the carcasses of dead polar bears, the Midwest would be a dust bowl and Florida would be underwater. To paraphrase Richard Feynman, “it doesn’t matter how smart you are or how beautiful your theory is (or if 97% of climate scientists agree). If it doesn’t agree with observation IT IS WRONG” (going to Wilmington BTW)

Funny you mentioned hurricanes. According to some we just had THE HOTTEST MONTH IN HISTORY!!!! Yet hurricane related losses = $0. Things that make you go hmmm.

I’ll take that as a “no”

FIFY

You are correct, I should have said the trump would not be president and our streets would not be running AS red with the bold of innocents. On a side note, do you or don’t you feel that out country should follow its laws?

Can you point to an example of how such bans have lowered gun violence rates in the past? I’m sure that gun violence dropped precipitously after the assault weapons ban implemented in the 90s. You are clearly a rational man, I look forward to your data.

If only we had operational control of our boarders and adhered to our own immigration laws, Trump would not be president and our streets would not be running red with the blood of the innocent.

Not quite yet brother, I am very concerned about the historically high Greenland ice melt. I have rented a beachfront house for next week. I am terribly concerned if it will still be there, after all we are talking about imminent catastrophe. I understand that it is easy for me to poo poo the imminent threat of catastrophic man made global warming when I am nestled comfortably up here in Happy Valley, it is another thing entirely when I have a five figure investment on the line. You may have a convert in two weeks.....yet again you may not

You are right, I am wrong. Gang violence has little to no impact on the murder rate in the US. Banning “assault style” weapons and high capacity magazines will make the United States much safer than eliminating gang related murders. I stand corrected.

Or have a second amendment right to keep and bear lawn darts.

I will have to look at more deeply than I have time now. Of course if I am wrong I will admit it.

I never said getting rid of gangbangers would get rid of the “entire gun murder problem”. I said it would be significantly reduced.(we can quibble to what extent) BTW I am all for looking at “assault style” rifles. I am for looking at them, buying them, possessing them and most of all shooting them. As a retired Army Ranger I spent two decades with one in my hands, I am well trained and my guns are stored in a safe just like millions of other responsible gun owners.

The gorilla in the room that Kallend is referring to must be handguns, which account for the vast majority of firearm deaths. It is curious though that he brings this up in the context of a shooting involving a long gun. I’m sure he was just confused. Obviously anyone advocating for a “ban the most dangerous guns” policy would want to ban the guns that kill the most.

What lefties struggle with is the solution that Coreese has so clearly illustrated. It is the efficacy of a program that doesn’t involve a big government solution is what lefties are unable to wrap their brains around.

Thank you Bill for adding detail to my statement

Yes, and when our uniquely high gang-related gun violence is accounted for, our murder rate drops precipitously. While I agree reading comprehension is important, so is sentence structure. That can be forgiven though, as English is obviously not your native tongue. Get some sleep

Miami is sinking more than the sea level is rising.

Thanks to your Tesla and solar panels