may be rude

i wish he wasn't him too

definitely curvey. perpetually undulating heaviness. difficult to penetrate but that's because the uninitiated cannot enter. and maybe that's for your own protection aside from london b which is its own thing and awesome. concur shit slaps yellow wins the internet

public service climate is an apocalyptic problem without a solution, and the needed solution involves the US federal government. policy is what's needed. it's the bottleneck. we don't start solving the problem until we get climate policy stabilized. and there's a lot to do after we start actually working on it. we need new ways to do concrete, steel, plastic, fertilizer, and meat. that's all. not even talking about heating, powering the grid, and transportation people of the year 2060 hate us.

welcome to page 241 should we start a new US politics thread and seal this one off for eternity?

are people thinking london b is more or less a jam?

thought damogen were his max system

he's not someone with a careful mind for system design, out there trying to fix the system. he's someone who seems strangely bent on leveling the government and replacing it with authoritarianism. the departments he purged were State Dept and EPA. that tells you where his motivations are coming from. he courts foreign interests and the oil lobby because he knows they want to infuse him with cash. he uses the term deep state as a cover for attacking the government. he uses it as cover for attacking the justice system, which is one of the crucial pieces of the system of government that the USA pioneered. without a DOJ, governments deteriorate into authoritarianism. the president trying to overthrow our country is not good. i closely follow a lot of serious people and none of them take the concept of the deep state seriously. it's honestly an internet conspiracy trope, i'm sorry to tell you. sure, there are many employees. sure, secrecy is an inescapable part of some government work. sure, many employees are career professionals. sure, the military industrial complex has contracts and private companies and stuff going on. that's a nice setting for someone to make up a bogeyman of a deep state. it's not falsifiable. these are where tricks come from. you find something that's hard to disprove. but serious people don't take it seriously. the system is replete with checks and balances. there's not a runaway invisible monster. i guess that should be good news for you. it's just us. it's just dumb voters, lawyer politicians, and career professionals trying to work with what they've got. and a lot of public servants acting on the feeling of service to their society that most people feel, though they act on it in different ways. if anything... the invisible monster consists of voters having their minds jacked by junk narratives disseminated by special interests....................................................

biden's fine. i always loved him, under obama. still love him, i think he's doing great. i like that he left afghanistan. he's handled ukraine impressively. the only thing anyone can say is he's on the older side. that should tell you that there's not much real bad you can say.

square push imminent

wrong wrong ... from invading neighbor countries? you're reveling in not knowing what the fuck and indulging in fantasies that are spoon fed to you. some people know how to figure out what's real. this totally unnecessary war is the work of none other than putin that was a lot of tired horse shit you just treated us with you think this is a clown party? they're repelling an invading army. that's defense. i'm glad you're asking this question. allow me to answer. resolve discrepancies. compare different reporting. don't ostrich your head from the "MSM". have the balls to read the A fucking P. that's the Associated Press, in case you haven't heard of it. understand that info paths migrated and the nascent environment is being jacked from a million angles that didn't exist before. don't be an easy mark. read the news from actual journalism. 4 chan is not the good stuff.

wild that musk personally prevented a major ukrainian attack https://apnews.com/article/spacex-ukraine-starlink-russia-air-force-fde93d9a69d7dbd1326022ecfdbc53c2

we got digitals for those, you know. they're out there. just not sold anywhere, anymore. those 64 tracks are really good to shuffle through.

they're the digitals for vinyls

zip tie guy sentenced to 57 months that's his mom in the background

what should i call it

so, is the prophecy fulfilled? 3 vinyls? would love digital vinyls of the 2... any reason to hope for more?

the government made a website where they post ufo videos. https://www.aaro.mil/ click "official uap videos" to get the list of videos

the rate of change is different. it's not that. there's nothing mysterious about greenhouse gases or their impact. the observations match the predictions. greenhouse gas causes warming. it's not remotely controversial. it sounds like you would be really unhappy to learn about the most powerful industry in history, oil, and the deceptions they trick or pay people to spread... since you're so interested in the arctic ice extent, here: i am informing you that the most recent image you posted (on the last page) is misleading because it compares the minimum ice extent for one year with an image that is not at the minimum extent of another year, 2017. it seems like the only people who would put a comparison like that out are people intending to mislead. here's 2017: why are you posting so much inaccurate information that is so easy to disprove? and where are you getting information that is so basically wrong? it's honestly hard to be mistaken on such simple things as whether or not greenhouse gas causes warming, and whether or not the arctic minimum ice extent is shrinking dramatically.

all the middling things we can/are doing are a good, but they won't be near enough to make any significant changes quickly enough. we've been talking about solar panels in America since at least Jimmy fucking Carter put them on the White House, and by and large they're a good. same for all kinds of wind power that's grown, etc. but unless we stop dredging up oil, stop billions of people driving/flying everywhere constantly, stop expanding our population, there's not enough solar panels/wind power/other 'green' tech that's going to save us. a greater sense of responsibility for waste among individuals i think will be an unavoidable social norm of the future. establishing alternatives has major obstacles. stopping use of fossil fuel requires establishing alternatives, first. wind and solar don't simply stand in, it's not that simple. major legislation is necessary, in order to solve the problems in a managed way. it's going to have to fall under some agency. and we can't have republicans like trump coming and gutting the EPA like he did. the necessary solution consists of the public awareness moving and consequently public policy moving. that's why i'm out here. posting on watmm is something you can do. it's not a paralysis narrative, it's the truth. solar panels and electric cars and whatever else is going to be nothing in the long term. we should still be actively doing all we can in that direction, but it's going to amount to not much/nothing. in 100 years, do you really think the population of 10+billion are going to be all like 'wow, i'm sure glad in the 2020s that 0.5% more of Americans used solar panels and a total of 6% of the American population used electric cars!* that was really the trigger that got things rolling to save the world and allow for our current utopia!" if there's any narrative it's that the changes need to be exponentially more sweeping and implemented immediately, without fail or reason or recourse. this would would lead to suffering/harsh changes/likely lots of deaths in the knock on effects, but it's better than the alternative which is to keep the status quo but 'oh, i'll buy the eco-friendly 7% recycled plastic ziploc bags instead' your statement was so simplistic it was nonsensical. the situation is not as simple as "there's nothing we can do until we contain existing practices." yet there you are telling people there's nothing to do. why are you doing that? the best things people can do now are raise awareness and organize for political action. it's possible to achieve impact in election results, and election results make a difference. right now we're bottlenecked by policy. proportionality of solutions is important and it's one of the central things of gates's book that i link above. kind of seems like a deliberate strawman, which i don't appreciate. the solution is societal and sociological. it's a really hard problem and we need people working on it, not telling people there's nothing to do the problem exists because people aren't doing enough

i'll never say every dem is great. it's a bunch of humans. politicians tend to be lawyers first. that's the politician vibe: lawyer. if people don't like the politician vibe, i mean i think maybe we need to accept that that's the way it is. some of these lawyers are more prone to rationalizing bad decisions. i addressed the proportionality of donations from the oil sector, which is starkly weighted toward the republicans. i addressed above the scraping of votes on ACA. but you make a good point about the factor of industry donations. certainly that's something those legislators were thinking about, regarding their votes. i'd be all for someone unfucking the mess of healthcare in america. yeah, this is definitely a relevant dynamic. the federal level elected republicans, i believe, operate largely by deceit. so, by the nature of that, they must align their stories. hence the block solidarity. that also helps explain their intense focus on strategic advantage. like i mentioned above, they're a minority power managing to game the system in their favor. their whole game is calculating the most advantageous strategy play, because they are playing for power, not for serving the people. i view this as a consequence of the nature of the parties. the dems are more of an actual party of representatives of the people, however imperfect. so, yes, as a big tent party, it is difficult to get everyone aligned. and, by the nature of it, they are not focused on power strategy as a chief priority. dems are commonly criticized for this, and some awareness of the problem has penetrated their leadership and they seem aware of the disadvantage. i don't think it makes sense to expect them to have the strategic power focus of the gop. we need to be aware of the dynamic and yes also criticize them to keep them vigilant to mitigate the disadvantage. again, i just view this as the army we have. these bunch of goof balls are the ones who we need to give as much support as possible, if we want to make as much progress on climate as possible. speaking just about carbon dioxide, we output 50 billion tons per year, and we need to get that to neutral. it's a major project. i'm not even talking about methane and nitrous dioxide. this is by far the most challenging thing humanity has ever attempted to do. replacing fossil fuel with renewables is... there are no words that describe how extensive of an undertaking it is. the earth has never had a species undertaking what needs to happen. that's what makes the situation look so scary., how impossibly hard it is to avoid the bad scenarios. and we're not even trying. we need innovations we don't have. that's why people look at 2050 as a target for changing course. we need to change how we make cement, plastic, steel. we need to totally redo grids. we need to get cold fusion working. we need to invent carbon capture. but yeah we need to get started immediately. and yeah the reality has followed the worst side of projections from the past, consistently. like, off-the-charts, on the worst-case-scenario side of the range of climate forecasts from past decades. his approach to the situation is by the numbers. like, with carbon, it's 50 billion tons per year being outputted. he breaks that down into what the big pieces are, what the alternatives are, etc, including example calculations for comparisons. he identifies gaps in technology, and provides language for discussing the relevant dynamics, such as the "green premium" which is the cost offset of moving away from fossil fuels. the green premium of a specific technology or plan serves as the key metric for analysis, for each specific case, and tells you how realistic and close or far we are from various solutions. there's also methane and nitrous oxide, which he also covers. he discusses things like the seasonal and day/nighttime intermittency of renewables like wind and solar, and the limits and cost of batteries. nuclear really comes out looking strong, out of all the current technology alternatives. like, right now, cold fusion looks like maybe one of the most important things going on in the world.

we are reliant on the power that fossil fuel gave us. zipping around town is a nuts ability that we take for granted. finding a replacement is extremely difficult. fossil fuel is just an efficient way of producing power. but there's plenty we can do now. please don't voice these paralysis narratives that paid posters are whispering in people's ears

eh, the climate project... is more than 10 years... i would like to think it's a 30-50 year project. that is the optimistic hope, that, by 2050, we will be seriously transforming the energy infrastructure of the planet, and by 2070 we will have completed it. now that i've written that, and you've read it, i think we both know that the force of human stupidity will prevent that best case scenario, which we are already badly behind schedule for meeting. unfortunately, the climate project is a 100 year project. the question we have, at this point in time, is how bad will it get, once we're further into it. i wonder if people in the future are reading this or not. both sidesism is a narrative tactic that's widely deployed, imo. the numbers don't show an equality, when you look at donations from the oil sector. i have to push back on statements that equate the two major US parties. i also have to push back on statements like "the system is broken" because i find it inaccurate, unhelpful and actually counterproductive. also there, i suspect narratives are deployed to distract peoeple's attention and energy away from effective channels and toward ineffective channels talking about how the whole system is no good. it sure is fucked up right now, of course we can agree on that. i know better than most exactly what kind of a monster we have on our hands. i just don't see any path that makes sense aside from utilizing the mechanisms of the system, which seem perfectly adequate. while there are malfunctions, i think that's kind of how these things go. governments are grotesque, lovecraftian beasts. inaction is actually part of the objective. the system is designed to default to doing nothing. it's actually taoist. when both parties can't agree, nothing happens. only the shit that everyone agrees on gets through. it's funny when a few pieces of legislation actually get bipartisan support, these days. they're like "yeah of course we need to do something about ufos." balances of power can shift. things are getting shaken up. do you know where we are right now? we are in a societal realignment. a reordering. the magnetic poles are moving and so is everything else. lol. yes, the best people we have are fallible humans who will do imperfect work. the best legislation we can realistically hope for will suck in some ways, while being good other ways. this is the best path available to us. this is the way. yes, we are behind schedule and it won't be enough. yes, we are heading into a fucked up storm of human history. i mean you can't really debate with me about a book you haven't read. gates's book How to Avoid a Climate Disaster is an invaluable resource. every staffer in congress should have a copy. he does a good job of analyzing the situation and providing a distillation of the significant information. i mean technically a lot of climate legislation already passed is designed to be long term, even if it may need to be renewed, because that's how legislation works. but i know what you mean, you mean the real legislation that we need for the long term solution. we will incrementally increase and improve the climate legislation, and it is a zig zag line of progress. president desantis or christie would set us back 4 or 8 years yet again. that's why the path to a solution just clearly seems to me to be raise awareness about politics in america and climate so that the gop can be cleansed by purging as it needs and the left can hold power for long enough to instill a sane climate policy regime. there have been, interestingly, overtures from the right on capital hill! they are starting to test narratives to change posture on climate. changing talking points to the best way to address climate, rather than pretending climate doesn't exist. we already see congress members on the right sometimes slow roll their evil, showing some modicum of conscience. hopefully they'll allow themselves to continue suffering losses, reform, and let the left do what it needs to do. it will be the special interests that want the party to hold power, more than the members of the party, themselves. that is already the state of things. the congressional right looks like a lot of sociopath lawyers on painkillers sweating over how their drug deals are threatening the integrity of society itself. anyway, yeah, it's a question of do we manage to make that happen, or do we wait until the volcanos are going off. the situation is so complex, that why gates's book is so important. you're right. but there are just so many things that need to happen. yeah it will be a while before we are on the real path to a solution on this. i really wonder what things will look like, in the later half of this century. not hard to imagine droughts, fires, superstorms, floods, tornados, food shortage, water shortage, economic depression, earthquakes, volcanos, political instability and war. people may need to see some shit, first. this is a common misconception. when you barely hold power, it's not true that you can do whatever you want to do. it means that your primary fear is losing the power that you tenuously hold, so you must choose your battles, constantly, and conservatively spend political capital. this is substantiated by looking at how obama's terms went - he needed to pinch pennies on his political capital, the whole way. of course i agree that DOJ leniency toward the powerful is bad and should be remedied. again, they were scraping by for votes to get what they got. notable that this is an example of how more dems would make things noticeably better. single payer getting edited out is an example. i'm not saying the dems are a perfect remedy for everything... if this were a boat then i'd be saying steer it that way. out of the available paths, i think the move is a hard push for the left to have firm control for a while. and it's a significant coincidence that this is also the true proportion of voters to parties - the dems get more voters, by popular vote. the gop is a minority party cheating their way to competitive power and they should be put in their place. maybe it will turn out that you were right. i think we are doing permanent harm, for the future, already, in terms of the destabilization that will continue to unravel. the question is how bad do we make it.

the above is sculpted horse shit the above account is a disinfo account, as i've said for years weird fucker doing info work for who knows who. my guess is china

i think it's as simple as tipping things left, enough. politicians learn when elections are lost. the gop needs to by cycled. my view is that corporate powers like oil have dragged policy far from its natural state. simultaneously, the gop are overextended, chaotic and brittle. i think the play is: let the gop rubber band back to the minority status they truly represent, and give the left enough cushion and stability to really fix shit. gerrymandering legislation, etc. then long-term climate legislation can occur. in terms of what needs to be done, gates's 2021 book How To Avoid A Climate Disaster is an invaluable resource. every congressional staffer in the country should have a copy. he takes a system designer's systematic problem solving approach to the actual problem, and the book is his output, which constitutes a policy guide and primer.

yeah. in the US we pass some climate legislation, try to pass more that nearly passes but doesn't, and don't even try on stuff we know doesn't have a chance. that range can move. it doesn't take much for things to shift, sometimes. it's becoming more and more recognized that the senate filibuster is an archaic excuse for inaction and it's unconstitutional. both parties routinely bypass it when necessary. a couple years ago the dems just went and tried to pass a rules change that would have allowed them to pass the Freedom to Vote/John Lewis Voting Rights legislation. 2 votes - manchin and sinema, sunk it. good legislation is possible by voting democrat. actually, this is a crucial part of the solution, so i'm glad you brought it up. policy is necessary. that's why it's so important to vote for democrats. the republicans transparently serve the oil industry. donations cross the aisle but proportionally it's much more on the republican side, as measured on open secrets investing in the needed innovation, updating the grid and other infrastructure, removing subsidies for oil! etc - all possible in capitalist USA minus fox "news"