Very true.Quote:
Originally Posted by big dick
Canada just does things betterQuote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
Printable View
Very true.Quote:
Originally Posted by big dickCanada just does things betterQuote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
Lol at all the Saudis that funded the "resist Trump" movement being locked up in a hotel and their assets frozen....
:lol4
COINCIDENCE?
:lol2
WHERE ARE THE THOUSANDS OF RESISTERS THAT WERE GOING TO TAKE THE COUNTRY BACK
:lol4
OH THATS RIGHT NO ONE THERE TO PAY THEM
You just cant make this shit up....
Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkongerVery true.Quote:
Originally Posted by big dick
Perhaps so. Or perhaps not.
New Tars Sands Impact on Air Pollution Found
Scientists discover yet more aerosols emanating from oil sands production
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...llution-found/
Speaking as someone who worked in the oil & gas industry for years, this isn't supposed to happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkongerVery true.Quote:
Originally Posted by big dick
Canada has more stringent environmental laws but this spill happened in the USA so it will be cleaned up according to their laws not ours so being a Canadian company has no bearing whatsoever on it.
Straight oil spills, which this is, are actually pretty easy to clean up.
Emulsion spills, raw production straight out of the ground with a mix of oil & produced water, or straight produced water, salt water that is produced with the oil & then separated & then re-injected, is another story. They are basically impossible to clean up completely. This spill is at least 99.5%, but is definitely much closer to 100%, oil for it to be in a pipeline designated for delivery.
I'm waiting to find out the cause because that will tell a lot.
Why is it a preferable form of transport?Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkongerI supported the pipeline and still do. This was one of the things I disagreed with Obama about. The owner of the pipeline is a Canadian company so they'll clean it up. Pipelines are still preferable to transportation of crude by rail.Quote:
Originally Posted by GambleBotsSatire
Wow, the live longer study did not need to be part of that story. I guess they threw it in to support the awful headlineQuote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
Less risk of spill compared to rail, less environmental impact of running a pipeline compared to railroad (diesel fuel, etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by limitlesWhy is it a preferable form of transport?Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkonger
It's true we are happy to oblige the world's addiction to oil, and that has environmental consequences. On the other hand over a quarter of Canada's electricity comes from hydro and Canada is phasing out coal entirely within 3 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadlyQuote:
Originally Posted by hongkonger
Perhaps so. Or perhaps not.
New Tars Sands Impact on Air Pollution Found
Scientists discover yet more aerosols emanating from oil sands production
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...llution-found/
bump
Quote:
Originally Posted by BetCheckBet
I thought that was an unwritten rule? I know I wouldn't spend a dime on anything trump
speaking of which trump is now unable to spend his political slush fund on his russia legal fees. its all supposedly his own money from now on.
:popcorn
Lefty Gutierrez literally tried to enter a mother jones article into a Senate hearing record........like im not making it up.....its on video
https://youtu.be/kdgAo3i0-yQ
At the 4:00 minute mark
:lol4
I like lefty, he's got balls I'll say..
Jeff Sessions with the ether...
Mother Jones is far more factual and trustworthy than Fox News, Drudge or any of the other right wing fake news bubble propagandists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
I'm not impressed with the journalism at Mother Jones, they seem basically like a news aggregation portal where they just do hack left wing rimshot takes on other journalists work.
The best journalism 2k17 is devidee just posting super anti jew memes and honestly they get funnier
that is not sarcasm for the record the senate testifying one was incredible
Every. Single. Time.Quote:
Originally Posted by lol wow
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexmor.../#322e3a7675e0
ty todge
Morally questionable stance re the world's addiction to oil, wouldn't you say? With that perspective, one can't really fault Mexico for providing most of the heroin consumed in its North American neighbors, now could one.Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkongerIt's true we are happy to oblige the world's addiction to oil, and that has environmental consequences. On the other hand over a quarter of Canada's electricity comes from hydro and Canada is phasing out coal entirely within 3 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
Perhaps so. Or perhaps not.
New Tars Sands Impact on Air Pollution Found
Scientists discover yet more aerosols emanating from oil sands production
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...llution-found/
Also, I don't think it is 2027 yet. Or is it and nobody told my iPhone's Calendar app about that?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7430471.html
Nothing wrong with Drudge. I actually really liked the setup with headlines and hyperlinks. Much easier to navigate than CNN, which is just a bunch of videos I am not going to watch.Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkongerMother Jones is far more factual and trustworthy than Fox News, Drudge or any of the other right wing fake news bubble propagandists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
Sometimes the hyperlinks link CNN, sometimes they link USA Today, sometimes they link Infowars. its pretty easy to guage how partisan the source of any particular article is. All else being equal Drudge is one of the easiest sites to navigate and I actually don't think it is as extreme right wing partisan as its reputation. I think it is certainly center of Fox News.
Oil and heroin aren't comparable, but I don't blame Mexico for providing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadlyMorally questionable stance re the world's addiction to oil, wouldn't you say? With that perspective, one can't really fault Mexico for providing most of the heroin consumed in its North American neighbors, now could one.Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkonger
Also, I don't think it is 2027 yet. Or is it and nobody told my iPhone's Calendar app about that?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7430471.html
Yes you're right re 10 years.
Trump voters - You guys good with the tax bill ? I want to hear what you guys think of it.
They know fuckall about it, but they're going to take it in the ass along with the rest of the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by big dick
You're right, but the oil/cheap fossil fuel addiction is worse over the long run. Heroin addiction won't cause the need for massive migration of people and industry away from rising sea levels. It also won't cause dangerous acidification of the oceans, with the worst case scenario being massive anoxia events that make vast swaths of the ocean uninhabitable for sealife.Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkongerOil and heroin aren't comparable, but I don't blame Mexico for providing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
Yes you're right re 10 years.
he then went on to retweet people praising him for reversing his big game hunting decision
https://i.imgur.com/12DgLEC.jpg
what a weird fucking guy
Quote:
Originally Posted by big dick
No, candidly, it is too generous for the ultra-rich and too stingy with the rest of us. Huge tax cuts were promised for everyone. They did not deliver on this. The special interests still get theirs, the only thing that has changed is which special interests. More of the same. But at least it is not a tax increase like some of us felt with the last administration, so there is that.
Meh. I personally think big game trophy hunting is abhorrent, but I also think making it economically viable to have preserves is the only way all the big game doesn't go extinct, so I have no problem with it on those grounds.
If some rich retard like Donald Trump Jr. paying $10k to murder an elephant and take its head home is the only economically viable way to keep the preserves going, than I am ok with it as an economic necessity.
The second I saw both houses of Congress and the executive were Republican I could have told you the next tax bill would be too generous of the ultra-rich and too stingy for the rest of us. This should come as a surprise to absolutely no-one, and is independent of Trump. This is what the Republican Party has been doing whenever they get a chance since the 1980s.Quote:
Originally Posted by TellafriendQuote:
Originally Posted by big dick
No, candidly, it is too generous for the ultra-rich and too stingy with the rest of us. Huge tax cuts were promised for everyone. They did not deliver on this. The special interests still get theirs, the only thing that has changed is which special interests. More of the same. But at least it is not a tax increase like some of us felt with the last administration, so there is that.
I hate to break it to anyone, but the rich guys are always going to win no matter who's in office, i am not shocked by this, if you're waiting for politicians to change your life then you might aswell kill yourself now........
Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaard
Naw people have dedicated a lot of resources to solving issues like this and ultimately the best plan is to have well defended, well funded preserves combined with pan-national suppression of smuggling routes, hiring locals, leasing farm lands, and billing families for the bullet that gets delivered to the base of poachers skulls.
There is an argument for allowing private 'zoos' where exotic animals are raised for slaughter but honestly until we get China to stop thinking anything rare makes a great dick pill, those sorts of proposals wont really address the issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatineQuote:
Originally Posted by verminaard
Naw people have dedicated a lot of resources to solving issues like this and ultimately the best plan is to have well defended, well funded preserves combined with pan-national suppression of smuggling routes, hiring locals, leasing farm lands, and billing families for the bullet that gets delivered to the base of poachers skulls.
There is an argument for allowing private 'zoos' where exotic animals are raised for slaughter but honestly until we get China to stop thinking anything rare makes a great dick pill, those sorts of proposals wont really address the issues.
Surely you didn't miss his part about how to have well funded preserves. So I don't get your post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TellafriendQuote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
Surely you didn't miss his part about how to have well funded preserves. So I don't get your post.
The distinction is that preserves by definition should be hunting-exclusion zones.
Kinda cool 20 year timelapse of the Earth & the effects of "global warming":Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadlyYou're right, but the oil/cheap fossil fuel addiction is worse over the long run. Heroin addiction won't cause the need for massive migration of people and industry away from rising sea levels. It also won't cause dangerous acidification of the oceans, with the worst case scenario being massive anoxia events that make vast swaths of the ocean uninhabitable for sealife.Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkonger
Surprised it wasn't too big a file for this 7th tier site. Druff must be spending some money since this place is blowing up YUGE the last couple days.
Taken from: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/weather/to...id=mailsignout
I love how both Donald Trump and you are too stupid to see the massive irony in that. Since the election, Trump has tweeted about Hillary 54 times- more than once a week. He's also spoken about her pretty much constantly.Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
Here's Trump leading a crowd of Retards in a "lock her up" chant two months ago, before failing to influence Alabama Republicans into voting for his chosen candidate.
http://www.msnbc.com/brian-williams/...-1053209155852
You realize if the economy stays strong, Trump will win going away in 2020? You understand this correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtyBI love how both Donald Trump and you are too stupid to see the massive irony in that. Since the election, Trump has tweeted about Hillary 54 times- more than once a week. He's also spoken about her pretty much constantly.Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
Here's Trump leading a crowd of Retards in a "lock her up" chant two months ago, before failing to influence Alabama Republicans into voting for his chosen candidate.
http://www.msnbc.com/brian-williams/...-1053209155852
Welcome back!Quote:
Originally Posted by Scandinavian Bob
FPS_RUSSIA IS THIS TRUE?
Quote:
Originally Posted by big dick
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjOiTxJPL2k