brenthutch

Mr. President So what do you call Trump? Because the whole point was there were a load of things in there he hasn't done. Although I am not a fan of Trump, I do agree with is energy, regulatory and tax policies. As far as what he has done or not done, we will have to wait and see. Look how long it took Obama to close Gitmo.

Mr. President

If you think there is an equivalency, lay it out. Nothing equals nothing. When Trump pulls out of NATO, cedes Ukraine to Russia and lobbies congress for ending sanctions, you will have a point. Until then it's all just tin foil hat conspiracy theory.

What do you call a person who does all of those things?

Please explain what particular problem prompted this SCIENCE investigation? www.newsweek.com/event-horizon-telescope-black-hole-image-583461 The "problem" is we don't know enough about black holes. Do we need to know more about black holes? Other than a search for knowledge I'm not sure. We certainly aren't suggesting we change our economic engine model to account for black holes. According to scientists the Heat Death of the Universe will occur in 10^10^3 years. We should start planning now. I propose a "gravity tax," we have to try something.

Then how do you explain the late Ordovician ice age with CO2 at >2000ppm? You could read this for one theory: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031018210002191 Not sure if Whatupwiththat has a coles notes version for you, sorry. From your link: "Here, we follow the hypothesis initiated by Barnes (2004) that an Ordovician superplume event occurred during the Middle to Late Ordovician. Such an event would not only have a large impact on the Ordovician biodiversification (Barnes, 2004) but it would also be responsible for the climatic upheaval during the Late Ordovician" As Paul Harvey used to say...."now for the rest of the story" "There is no direct evidence of a superplume event or of basaltic traps and the present study is therefore a hypothetical modelling approach..." Hypothetical modeling approach......hmmm where have I heard that before?

Former being the operative word. I will remind you, Obama had a Communist in his cabinet and wasn't let go until it became public.

Apparently the two never even met. Putin and Page likely never met either. Clearly that means that Page could never be an agent for Russia. He may or may not that goes the same from general Flynn. They are both out and have no demonstrable influence on policy. Why continue with your hair on fire.

Then how do you explain the late Ordovician ice age with CO2 at >2000ppm?

The Great Barrier Reef has been dying for twenty five million years. It has withstood CO2 levels many times of that of today's levels.

So? What is your point?

Apparently the two never even met.

Show me the beef!

Yes that is very, very surprising. Seems as if trump wanted to deliberately stick it to Putin. The benefits, like that of the Baltic states. Flows solely to Montenegro. But it does provide that small country with protection from the sole aggressor state in the area, Russia. It weakens Russian political influence in their "near abroad" and brings Russia arch nemesis NATO closer to its borders. Hardly a Russian friendly move.

Carter Page is a member of the Trump administration? Until you can show me some influence over actual policy this will continue to be a nothing burger.

AND your view is hopelessly wrong. "The only thing we are absolutely sure of, is that more research is necessary"

Do you mean how Trump just signed off on Montenegro's joining of NATO?

"Over the last 400,000 years the natural upper limit of atmospheric CO2 concentrations is assumed from the ice core data to be about 300 ppm. Other studies using proxy such as plant stomata, however, indicate this may closer to the average value, at least over the last 15,000 years. Today, CO2 concentrations worldwide average about 380 ppm. Compared to former geologic periods, concentrations of CO2 in our atmosphere are still very small and may not have a statistically measurable effect on global temperatures. For example, during the Ordovician Period 460 million years ago CO2 concentrations were 4400 ppm while temperatures then were about the same as they are today. Do rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations cause increasing global temperatures, or could it be the other way around? This is one of the questions being debated today. Interestingly, CO2 lags an average of about 800 years behind the temperature changes-- confirming that CO2 is not the cause of the temperature increases. One thing is certain-- earth's climate has been warming and cooling on it's own for at least the last 400,000 years, as the data below show." http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html

Are you talking about Trump's reset button? Or Trump's idle "Red Line" threat? Or how Trump refused to take action against Russia's ally Syria for war crimes? Oh you must mean when he told Russia "I will have more flexibility after my election". Or when Putin told him not to deploy a European missile defense system and he complied? I didn't know Obama was running for President in the last election. No the architect of his "Russian Reset" was.

*** 1) We have increased the concentration of CO2 (and to a lesser degree methane) in the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels and drilling for oil. This is demonstrable through simple chemistry and math. 2) We know that increasing the concentration of those gases leads to increased retention of heat. This is demonstrable through simple lab experiments. 3) We see the increase in temperature that we expect to see due to those increasing concentrations. What would we expect if CO2 levels where to QUADRUPLE.....an ice age perhaps?

Are you talking about Trump's reset button? Or Trump's idle "Red Line" threat? Or how Trump refused to take action against Russia's ally Syria for war crimes? Oh you must mean when he told Russia "I will have more flexibility after my election". Or when Putin told him not to deploy a European missile defense system and he complied?

You are half right. Putin's goal was to undermine and weaken his eventual adversary, Clinton. Clinton called into question the legitimacy of the Russian election and by extension Putin. It was just pay back time for Putin, nobody thought Trump was going to win. As he is finding out now it may have been better to dance with the Devil he new rather than the unpredictable Trump.

Putin is now refusing to meet with his ol pal Tillerson. Tillerson said the Russians were incompetent with regard to Syria and WMDs. It looks like Bills theory is starting to break down.

That is what I have been saying for years. Coincidence is not causation.

Yes that is exactly what I am saying. Whatever minuscule role man made CO2 may or may not play, is overwhelmed by natural forces.