Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change

1235

Comments

  • Blu82Blu82 Member Posts: 1,668



    Now, tell the rest of the story.

    Al Gore sold "his" TV network to Al-fucking-Jazeera.

    Ponder that, motherfucker. The mouthpiece/propoganda arm of Al Queda and Bin Laden.

    But but Trump....Russians.....Kavanaugh.

    That is some dirty fucking money. And that goddamned mansion is a carbon footprint nightmare.

    Fuck Al Gore.

    And that horse he rode in on.
  • greenbloodgreenblood Member Posts: 14,559
    edited August 2019
    2001400ex said:

    Um buying stock, unless involved in an IPO or pre IPO, gives nothing to a company. That's the dumbest thing I've ever read in here.
    So a company isn’t allowed to sell additional shares after an IPO? I’d like to see the law that says that. Please triple down on stupid.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    So a company isn’t allowed to sell additional shares after an IPO? I’d like to see the law that says that. Please triple down on stupid.
    For sure they can. But Al Gore was given his stock. Then I'm sure he reinvested in mutual funds and shit.
  • greenbloodgreenblood Member Posts: 14,559
    edited August 2019
    2001400ex said:

    For sure they can. But Al Gore was given his stock. Then I'm sure he reinvested in mutual funds and shit.
    You sure? I think only Al knows for sure. But what difference does it make how he invests? Company stock purchased through a mutual fund still helps the company. Supply and demand
  • WestlinnDuckWestlinnDuck Member Posts: 17,166 Standard Supporter
    Hondo and Krugman seem to have the same view of free markets and love of chicoms.
  • ClaraSorrentiClaraSorrenti Member Posts: 73
    Gwad said:

    https://skepticalscience.com/consensus-boston-u.html

    When do 97% of people agree on anything, even ice cream? In scientific circles, consensus is a rare trophy, held to famously exacting standards. When a scientific consensus is finally reached — e.g., the Earth orbits the sun; water freezes at 32°F, 0°C; blood is red — a new fact joins the foundations of human discovery.

    Under normal circumstances, a 97% consensus of the world’s leading scientists on anything would establish it as fact and compel action if needed. But our circumstances are not normal. Only 12% of Americans realize that that the scientific consensus on climate change is greater than 90%. Even among people who are Alarmed or Concerned about climate change, the consensus is somewhat unknown. Of the Alarmed, 84% understand the scientific consensus on climate change (16% do not); and 73% of the Concerned (27%).

  • bigccbigcc Member Posts: 900

    I'm not

    I'm a logician and I believe in real science

    Not half truths and phony stats

    The climate changes. We all know that. Its your religion that we dont agree with and that has no consensus
    https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/4/graphic-dramatic-glacier-melt/

    Very normal stuff, https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2908/landsat-illustrates-five-decades-of-change-to-greenland-glaciers/

    Is it overstated? Probably, but denying it is absurd, it will certainly create issues for our offspring, but probably not ourselves
  • HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Member Posts: 5,999
    bigcc said:

    https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/4/graphic-dramatic-glacier-melt/

    Very normal stuff, https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2908/landsat-illustrates-five-decades-of-change-to-greenland-glaciers/

    Is it overstated? Probably, but denying it is absurd, it will certainly create issues for our offspring, but probably not ourselves

  • bigccbigcc Member Posts: 900



    I'm willing to bet you don't question sources about the great replacement the same way

    Funny how you types like to cherry pick your sources so lackadaisicallly
  • HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Member Posts: 5,999
    bigcc said:

    I'm willing to bet you don't question sources about the great replacement the same way

    Funny how you types like to cherry pick your sources so lackadaisicallly
    Sources? I Googled Greenland melting. And would a snapshot of an individual iceberg at 2 different times to make sweeping statements be defined as a "cherry pick" of data?
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,993

    So a company isn’t allowed to sell additional shares after an IPO? I’d like to see the law that says that. Please triple down on stupid.
    Buying a company's stock from the company raises capital. Obviously.

    Buying a company's stock on the market from other investors provides demand for the company's stock, helping to support the stock price. This is important for several reasons, not the least of which is that it establishes the stock's value on the market so that when the company needs to raise capital, the public equity markets are an attractive option.

    Yes, a company is obviously allowed to issue and sell stock after the IPO. It's called a secondary offering. I've worked on more of those than IPOs.
  • PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 47,656 Standard Supporter
    edited August 2019

    Buying a company's stock from the company raises capital. Obviously.

    Buying a company's stock on the market from other investors provides demand for the company's stock, helping to support the stock price. This is important for several reasons, not the least of which is that it establishes the stock's value on the market so that when the company needs to raise capital, the public equity markets are an attractive option.

    Yes, a company is obviously allowed to issue and sell stock after the IPO. It's called a secondary offering. I've worked on more of those than IPOs.
    I knew we were more honeys than just joob brothers.

    Reg A me, bitch.

    Don’t touch my reverse merger share exchange ratios though.
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 112,440 Founders Club
    So do we have 11 years or are we still endangering our grandchildren?

    Can you guys make up your fucking minds?

    We have science on our side - APAG
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 112,440 Founders Club
    Gwad said:

    https://skepticalscience.com/consensus-boston-u.html

    When do 97% of people agree on anything, even ice cream? In scientific circles, consensus is a rare trophy, held to famously exacting standards. When a scientific consensus is finally reached — e.g., the Earth orbits the sun; water freezes at 32°F, 0°C; blood is red — a new fact joins the foundations of human discovery.

    Under normal circumstances, a 97% consensus of the world’s leading scientists on anything would establish it as fact and compel action if needed. But our circumstances are not normal. Only 12% of Americans realize that that the scientific consensus on climate change is greater than 90%. Even among people who are Alarmed or Concerned about climate change, the consensus is somewhat unknown. Of the Alarmed, 84% understand the scientific consensus on climate change (16% do not); and 73% of the Concerned (27%).

    So was this a troll job or a trigger job snowflake?

    Pussy
  • bigccbigcc Member Posts: 900

    I don’t give a fuck if climate change is real, not real, man caused or not man caused. What I do know is government will only fuck things up more if they are involved. Higher taxes and artificially raising energy costs (which hursts the poor) will save us! Fuck off.

    And if you’re a big green new deal person and don’t think nuclear is a major component of getting off carbon, then you need to kill yourself because you’re a hypocrite and not serious about getting off carbon. So double fuck off.

    The fact that Bernie didn't include nuclear in his plan is disappointing to say the least

    Coming from a staunch supporter
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 36,740 Standard Supporter

    Bernie is a bumbling old commie who thinks China has it right when “helping their poor”.

    He’s a clown. It’s not surprising he thinks nuclear isn’t an option. He loses his ability to control people if energy is cheap and abundant
    A link for "helping their poor".......to die.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/51135/sanders-praises-communist-china-ted-cruz-crushes-hank-berrien?utm_source=cnemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=082919-news&utm_campaign=position1
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Sledog said:

    A link for "helping their poor".......to die.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/51135/sanders-praises-communist-china-ted-cruz-crushes-hank-berrien?utm_source=cnemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=082919-news&utm_campaign=position1
    Sanders told Hill.TV’s Krystal Ball, "China is a country that is moving unfortunately in a more authoritarian way in a number of directions. But what we have to say about China in fairness to China and its leadership is if I’m not mistaken they have made more progress in addressing extreme poverty than any country in the history of civilization, so they’ve done a lot of things for their people."
Sign In or Register to comment.