Joe Biden: "When it comes to the gas prices, we're going through an INCREDIBLE transition"

Elon Musk applauds...

 

The NYT article is behind a paywall but I can read the last line of of the first paragraph and it says Trump didn’t do enough to reduce production to meet demand, so he actually didn’t do anything wrong. Nice try sport!!!

And SA can control demand when we’re not drilling as much as we can and Russia cuts supply. I will enjoy the day when the entire ME can fall into a black hole once fossil fuels are barely needed. The entire region can starve since they serve zero purpose other than being lucky enough to be on land with oil. Otherwise they’re worthless human beings.

 

Yes. They can drill in areas where there is no oil if they want to. Now ANWR, for example, in Alaska has oil but the fed won't let them drill.

 

No he shouldn't lower the prices he doesn't have the ability what he should do is allow drilling and importing.

It's all an attempt to try and make people buy brand new meme cars that don't exist and they can't afford.

 

Doesn't care about people he wants to hurt the petrochemical industry because they support his opposition that's all this is about

 

Here is Trump reverting bad policies by Obama:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...egulatory-rollbacks-under-trump-idUSKCN1VJ2BP

Here is Biden adding more red tape:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...ew-oil-and-gas-leases-amid-legal-battle-.html

 

Ammo. Have you seen the price of bullets lately!!

 

No, he did EVERYTHING wrong. You think that because you can read the last line in the first paragraph you absorbed the meaning of the whole article? What a gift!! Hey sport, one thing before you take your victory lap. Go back and look at the date(s) of the article. It was originally published in April 2020 and UPDATED in November 2020. The dates are significant given the state of the world at the time.
It really isn't hard to find other articles about the same subject from different sources but you won't do that now......will you.

 

FFS......those leases and permits were open for years and NO ONE WANTED THEM!! It's too expensive to go there and drill. Look it up.

 

I find it interesting that it is only lefties like you who ever bring up this "Qanon" thing... Hmmmmmmm... I'll just let a post from a forum friend of mine speak for itself:

https://politiplex.freeforums.net/thread/128/qanon-debunked

 

Climate change is an undefined buzzword. It is used to cause panic in people who do not understand logic, science, or mathematics... and the goal of "green energy policies" is not to "save the planet", but rather to implement systems to track and control your every move (such as carbon credits and digital identity).

 

thank you for voting for this disaster

 

You would have been better off just saying you're not kidding and left it at that. Now you've shown everyone how.............far off you are.

 

What am I "far off" about?? Why is that??

Say something of substance for a change...

 

But what you think is "substance" is, in my opinion, utter nonsense. To deny climate change and give your reasons as logic, science and mathmatics is beyond just having an opinion on a subject. There is no way to use those principles to prove your case and to belive you can is denial of all three.

 

You know Republicans will.

Biden's serendipitous fit of candor ranks right down there with Terry McAuliffe's faceplant before the Virginia gubernatorial elections last November...

McAuliffe says parents shouldn’t tell schools what to teach, handing Youngkin a campaign ad
https://news.yahoo.com/mcauliffe-says-parents-shouldn-t-173500644.html

...and we all know that worked out....



Dumbass....

 

Okay, I will present evidence for each one then... I would gladly provide further elaboration for each one of these if you want to dive deeper into the particulars:

LOGIC: AGW zealots reject logic because they form their argumentation around words which are circularly defined (such as "global warming" and "climate change"). Circular definitions do not work; they are meaningless, as they do not make reference to anything outside of themselves. Thus, any argumentation based on such a circular definition is a void argument.

SCIENCE: AGW zealots also reject science, typically rejecting the laws of thermodynamics as well as the stefan boltzmann law. They have two main arguments: the "magick blanket argument" and the "bouncing photon argument". These arguments attempt to make heat flow uphill (from cold to hot instead of hot to cold, in violation of the 2nd LoT), and also attempt to decrease radiance of Earth while increasing temperature of Earth (the SB Law states that radiance and temperature are directly proportional).

MATHEMATICS: AGW zealots reject mathematics when they claim that a "global temperature" can be accurately measured using current technology. In actuality, there is no way to measure it to any usable accuracy. The Earth is about 197 million sq miles. NASA (if I recall correctly) makes claim to about 7,500 land based thermometers (which are NOT uniformly spaced nor are they simultaneously read by the same observer, as required by statistical mathematics, but for sake of argument, I will assume that they are). That would mean that each thermometer covers an area of approx. 26,266 sq miles, or similar to the size of West Virginia. Now, do you really think that one thermometer can accurately measure the temperature of anywhere within West Virginia? Obviously not... especially when one thinks about the range and variance of temperatures... Temperatures have been observed to range from -128deg F to 134deg F (262deg F range) and have been observed to vary by as much as 20deg F per MILE and 49degF per TWO MINUTES. This shows the importance of close proximity and simultaneous reading of thermometers to get any sort of semi-accurate result. Thus, in order to bring the margin of error down to any sort of usable level, we would need well beyond 200 million thermometers (billions, actually), many more than NASA's 7,500...

BUT, but what about magickal satellites??!! Well, satellites do not measure absolute temperature; they measure light. The issue with converting that light reading into a temperature reading is that we don't know the emissivity of Earth. We don't know how much light is a result of Earth's radiation nor how much is a result of starlight, moonlight, etc... In order to figure out the emissivity of Earth, we would need to know what we are trying to figure out in the first place, the temperature of Earth. Thus, a chicken and egg issue...

IN CONCLUSION: AGW is nothing more than a religion based on a circularly-defined buzzword. It is a void argument. It rejects laws of science. It rejects the rules of statistical mathematics. I see no rational reason to believe in a religion which requires me to reject logic, science, and mathematics at the outset...

 

Hes worthless

 

Even this statement isn't logical. Your playing semantics with different science terms. A false argument.
I'm not going to bother with the rest.

 

So first you say that I "can't do it", and then when I actually do it, you say "I'm not going to bother with the rest"... Seriously?? Oh well. Can't force a horse to drink water, as the saying goes...

My position is perfectly logical, as described. Buzzwords are meaningless.

 

I wasn't born then, so no idea. Govt clearly didn't force anyone's hand then though .. since many less wealthy people were still using horses into the mid 20thC.

 

Not only that, they frequently come from the demographic with the largest carbon footprint of all. Middle class urban Progressives do the most travel - number on the climate sins list. They also live in such a way that everything they consume or acquire is mass-produced in some way. Food, clothing, furniture, etc etc. They also pay for the most services (food, domestic labour, entertainment, personal care, etc) .. yet another industry sector pummelling the planet to death.

Never take a middle class urban Progressive seriously when they talk about the climate. It's the equivalent of taking moral advice from Beelzebub.

 

He's beyond worthless...

 

I try to be nice.
My point is that you didn't do anything. Your answers bordered on nonsensical and for that reason, I'm not going to bother explaining why, I did for the first one to prove the point. Your position has little to no logic to it and goes off into ridiculous so-called "scientific" reasons.
I don't know what you're drinking but it isn't clear, cool water.