Climate change

[ddraig]

Saw a map recently from a German TV News show. It showed the temps on June 21, 2017. Those temps were 4 to 12 degrees warmer than the same day in 2022. Hottest day ever? All they have to do is look at their own archives to debunk that info. But of course they won't because they want to scare everyone into following the "experts" and the "science!"

Sorry, 2017, not 1917. I fixed it.

[DanielVogelbach]

I heard something about how they used to take the air temps several meters off the ground, but now they are taking them at ground level to keep the psyop going. "Climate Change" is such bullshit. The key is to realize that "they" will always be looking for excuses to implement controls. Reducing carbon simply means reducing human activity. But, "they" will continue to do whatever they want including drive gasoline powered cars, use incandescent light bulbs, fly in private jets, sail in 100 foot yachts, etc.

[douche]

I'm planning to buy a newer combustible engine vehicle in the next couple of years. These idiots are planning to stop production of gasoline and diesel vehicles in an effort to force people into EVs.

From the UK:

A motorway services boss has warned the UK does not have enough power capacity for electric charging points. Charge points for electric vehicles are 'sitting there with no power' due to a lack of capacity, a motorway services boss has warned.

Ken McMeikan, chief executive of Moto Hospitality, which operates motorway service stations across the UK, said the lack of power capacity for charge points is a "major problem" facing the electric vehicle industry.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4, McMeikan revealed that charge points at four Moto locations are 'sitting there with no power', leaving EV drivers unable to use them.

He said unless targets are set for power companies to provide enough power for charging points across the country, it will simply not be possible.

"Getting the right number of chargers is not a challenge," he said. "Getting enough power for those chargers to actually operate well enough for EV drivers is a major major problem."

Ken McMeikan called for the government to issue targets on power to match targets for charging points. The government has pledged to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars by 2030 in a bid to encourage people to switch to electric vehicles.

McMeikan said: "There was a target set for the number of chargers by the end of 2023 that there would be at each motorway service area and that was a minimum of six.

"Sadly what there hasn't been is a target set for the power companies of the amount of power that's going to be required to operate those chargers and also a time commitment for the power companies of when that power would be made available ready for those chargers to start to operate.

"We have got a situation... where we've put sufficient chargers on four of our motorway service areas and the power required once the chargers were put in place is not available. So EV drivers are turning up to motorway services at four of our locations and there are chargers sitting there but no power."

McMeikan said that by 2030 around one in four or one in three motorists would be arriving at service stations in an electric vehicle - requiring the equivalent of "a quarter of all the power output from an average-sized nuclear power station."

He said with the scale of power required likely to be 12 times what it is today, he does not think there will be enough power for chargers by 2030.

"I don't believe the grid at the moment has the infrastructure and the power available at the time that it's going to be needed," McMeikan said.

"What the government needs to do is they need to set targets on a year by year basis, side by side, region by region, to ensure that there is sufficient power to be able to operate the chargers."

[Mel Bradford]

Government mandates will drive U.S. over a cliff. The social planners at State who conjure up utopian actions at our expense and think they have power over climate with the stroke of a pen are ignorant of the reality that they themselves are headed for the infernal region . How frikin ironic.
The global warming lie they perpetuate as a means of control over human activity and a stumbling block for the best interest of nations to produce their needs will induce a state of chaos where the weak and vulnerable perrish.....while Arch bishop Bill Gates jets around with his WEF devotees and exercise their planetary egos bereft of the mess they cause and the hypocrisy they exhibit. And right down to the academic who squirms away at a non profit and gets a big break to grace the evening news with the usual hyperbolic fear report all wrapped up in pseudo intellectual garble, ie the shit salesman with a mouth full of samples. The perpetual auditioning of the so-called science majors/ behavioral therapists for their chance to be a cog on the great wheel of progress.

[Donn Beach]

I heard something about how they used to take the air temps several meters off the ground, but now they are taking them at ground level to keep the psyop going. "Climate Change" is such bullshit. The key is to realize that "they" will always be looking for excuses to implement controls. Reducing carbon simply means reducing human activity. But, "they" will continue to do whatever they want including drive gasoline powered cars, use incandescent light bulbs, fly in private jets, sail in 100 foot yachts, etc.

Where air temperature is taken
https://www.climate.gov/maps-data/clima ... emperature.

[Cascade Kid]

I heard something about how they used to take the air temps several meters off the ground, but now they are taking them at ground level to keep the psyop going. "Climate Change" is such bullshit. The key is to realize that "they" will always be looking for excuses to implement controls. Reducing carbon simply means reducing human activity. But, "they" will continue to do whatever they want including drive gasoline powered cars, use incandescent light bulbs, fly in private jets, sail in 100 foot yachts, etc.

Where air temperature is taken
https://www.climate.gov/maps-data/clima ... emperature.

Likely inaccurate anyway.

https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2018/07/ ... ature.html

[ddraig]

I recently read on American Thinker that SCOTUS has before it a lawsuit to curb the power of Bureaucratic mandates. If SCOTUS rules in favor of the plaintiff, regulations will have to go through Congress, as they should. This has a win-win possibility for all of us. Regulations mandated to us will have to go through Congressional Approval, and it gives Congress more work, which would mean the actually have to do something relevant rather than something like taking junkets to the border and crying over what they see.

[DanielVogelbach]

I recently read on American Thinker that SCOTUS has before it a lawsuit to curb the power of Bureaucratic mandates. If SCOTUS rules in favor of the plaintiff, regulations will have to go through Congress, as they should. This has a win-win possibility for all of us. Regulations mandated to us will have to go through Congressional Approval, and it gives Congress more work, which would mean the actually have to do something relevant rather than something like taking junkets to the border and crying over what they see.

This won't change shit for any of us. Guaranteed.

If you're relying on your "government" to make things better, then you'll be disappointed every time! They don't work for you. They work only for the ruling class.

The way you curb the power of unjust and immoral mandates is very simple. Non-compliance. If you can get enough people to break critical mass, then the "government" is powerless. However, most people are zombie order-followers doing whatever the "government" says and thereby unwittingly enslaving themselves. They'll be the ones hoping the next Supreme Court decision or presidential election is going to usher in major changes. Nope, things will continue to go in the same direction as long as everyone continues to comply. You can vote as hard as you want. Every vote is an act of obedience and won't change the direction of government whatsoever.

[Cascade Kid]

I recently read on American Thinker that SCOTUS has before it a lawsuit to curb the power of Bureaucratic mandates. If SCOTUS rules in favor of the plaintiff, regulations will have to go through Congress, as they should. This has a win-win possibility for all of us. Regulations mandated to us will have to go through Congressional Approval, and it gives Congress more work, which would mean the actually have to do something relevant rather than something like taking junkets to the border and crying over what they see.

You mean the Cheveron deference? That's going to be a huge deal going forward on all sorts of decisions that have been made unilaterally by government agencies. It all started with commercial fisherman having to be required to pay to have contracted wardens on their boats to monitor the commerical fisherman's fishing activities.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-suprem ... 23-05-01/

[ddraig]

Yes, the Cheveron case. I just couldn't remember the name. And if it goes through, we can shizzle can a lot of these bureaucratic laws that were not passed by Congress. Keep those people busy working on laws and perhaps we can get back control from Big Government.