litebeam
Well-known member
Um...riiiight.Of course you are, and I thank you for that on our little friend's behalf.
The verb 'are' is correct, snowflakes.
If you are going to do the grammar-police thing, get it right.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Conservation in the Trumpocene (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter fugl
- Start date
The verb 'are' is correct, snowflakes.
If you are going to do the grammar-police thing, get it right.
Simon Wates
Well-known member
In real time in the last month Trump said he's going to build the 2 pipelines.
These 2 pipelines are to transport oil (fracking type as I understand) all the way from Canada to the blinkin Gulf of Mexico! Just to refine it, yes just to refine it.....its raving madness isn't it?
The impact on the landscape of these continent crossing pipelines will obviously be massive...and then there are people's basic rights.......
Of course the oil will make a lot of lovely money but I don't think you'll be getting any of it
IMO opinion Trump's duped you and millions - just wait.Simon Wates
Well-known member
It wasn't grammar - I was twisting your words
just tomfoolery, and it wasn't much good anyway.Simon Wates
Well-known member
Thanks, I'd thought I'd heard something - what vested interests (if any :-O) are driving this I wonder?
See, John, all you've got back from him are the usual animal noises; I told you he'd be flummoxed by your question. The thing to remember about litebeam is that he thinks very very small, everything for him being a matter of private virtue, not public policy. Thus his obsession with litter at a campsite and total disdain for conservation writ large. In this, of course, he's also a hypocrite.
Mysticete
Well-known member
Note that the Council of Environmental Quality, since its formation, has always had a place in the White House. Even G.W. Bush didn't kick them out.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...m-their-historic-main-headquarters-on-friday/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...m-their-historic-main-headquarters-on-friday/
Mysticete
Well-known member
Ranchers don't like either because they on occasional will kill livestock, while hunters don't like wolves because they seem them as competition. Over-abundant deer and elk are easier to shoot deer and elk.
There are of course programs in place to reimburse ranchers for lost livestock, but apparently that isn't enough.
Nohatch
Mad scientist
Dear Litebeam,
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...amas-climate-and-water-policies-on-first-day/
Sounds like pretty decisive action on environmental policy to me. Should I assume you support both stances?
All the best,
Joost
John Cantelo
Well-known member
Thank you for your non-answer answer. I'd have thought that after a month there would have been sufficient decisions, whether it be policy, personnel or proposed legislation to start making a judgment. I look forward to hearing your considered judgement in however many months you deem necessary.
Thank you too for confirming my instincts in staying out of this thread. Given that I merely asked a polite question, I find the tone of your response unhelpful and needlessly combative being more interested in being insulting than bringing enlightenment. I'm aware that many conservationists (not all of them 'liberals') have expressed deep concern about the direction of the new administration but the news item that prompted my question was the report that Republican politicians have scrapped a rule that stopped coal mining companies dumping their debris into people's drinking water. Doesn't this cause you concern?
Last edited:
You'll wait forever. As I've already pointed out, public policy is a foreign country to litebeam, one to which he never travels.
Of course it doesn't, he lives in Idaho, not West Virginia.
Trump to ask for deep cuts in EPA funding--
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/26/...l?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/26/...l?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
The answer to the world's energy needs seems quite simple .... http://reneweconomy.com.au/anu-wind-solar-hydro-grid-cheapest-option-australia-87796/
Will need to keep a few fossil fuel plants to feed the algae to make the fuel for aircraft though.
Jeez, now imagine the entire worlds military budget diverted to getting nuclear FUSION up and running! :cat:
Chosun :gh:
Will need to keep a few fossil fuel plants to feed the algae to make the fuel for aircraft though.
Jeez, now imagine the entire worlds military budget diverted to getting nuclear FUSION up and running! :cat:
Chosun :gh:
Mysticete
Well-known member
of course, all of the programs revolving around non-fossil fuels or making fossil fuels "cleaner" are also, in the heritage plan that is the basis of Trump's budget, also going to be cut.
So I guess the USA will just have to let other countries become the world leaders in those areas...
litebeam
Well-known member
What, no retort on your mistaken silly grammar policing?....basing subject/verb agreement on an object of a proposition? Hey, Simon says! B
And at least you're finally addressing your hypocrisy, even if subconsciously.
"Litter at a campsite"...more comedy gold. If this catastrophe were left behind by Trump supporters the outcry would be deafening, every news outlet would cover it. But this mess is common with you enviro-hypocrites and "occupy" leeches.
Funny how you guys skewer those you disagree with as being against the environment yet they are the first ones to clean up after themselves when they protest.
It's like the 'love trumps hate' bullshite. Violence, beatings, property destruction...all from the 'tolerant' left. Hypocrites all.
You whiners here have nothing on Trump at this point. You have news stories from a compromised media that loathes the man....and all they project is constant doom and gloom at every front. And you guys lap it up like kittens.
:cat:
Nohatch
Mad scientist
Dear Litebeam,
I believe a few more serious points have been raised than the mess left behind by the Dakota protesters (many of whom I'm sure will have been witless idiots). I'd be interested to hear your viewpoints on those.
I'd be very surprised if there is a significant difference in cleanliness between the two groups
Joost
I believe a few more serious points have been raised than the mess left behind by the Dakota protesters (many of whom I'm sure will have been witless idiots). I'd be interested to hear your viewpoints on those.
I'd be very surprised if there is a significant difference in cleanliness between the two groups
Joost
What, no retort on your mistaken silly grammar policing?....basing subject/verb agreement on an object of a proposition? Hey, Simon says! B
And at least you're finally addressing your hypocrisy, even if subconsciously.
"Litter at a campsite"...more comedy gold. If this catastrophe were left behind by Trump supporters the outcry would be deafening, every news outlet would cover it. But this mess is common with you enviro-hypocrites and "occupy" leeches.
Funny how you guys skewer those you disagree with as being against the environment yet they are the first ones to clean up after themselves when they protest.
It's like the 'love trumps hate' bullshite. Violence, beatings, property destruction...all from the 'tolerant' left. Hypocrites all.
You whiners here have nothing on Trump at this point. You have news stories from a compromised media that loathes the man....and all they project is constant doom and gloom at every front. And you guys lap it up like kittens.
:cat:
First "blokes", now "bullshite". Hmmm. . .. Beginning to wonder if you're even an American citizen.
Utterly damning! Thanks for the link. . ..
Nohatch
Mad scientist
The full list is pretty hard to find, but a copy (which I presume is the original) can be found on this blog post:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/02...raw-from-the-un-convention-on-climate-change/
Note that the main author (Prof. Emeritus Richard Lindzen) takes a rather narrow view of climate science using his own pet "Iris effect" theory: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13143-011-0023-x
J
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/02...raw-from-the-un-convention-on-climate-change/
Note that the main author (Prof. Emeritus Richard Lindzen) takes a rather narrow view of climate science using his own pet "Iris effect" theory: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13143-011-0023-x
J
