Deranged Rhino

That's fear talking. Gotta be braver than that.

(Trimming for space, but appreciate the post and discussion ) I am curious where I lost you within those last two paragraphs, and would be happy to explain it better if you wish. Though, admittedly, that post was meant to be WAY outside the box in an attempt to discuss this (partisan charged) topic without falling into the partisan talking points/spin which both sides employ. Just a few thoughts on your comments (again only trimming for space/conversational purposes, not trying to twist your statements): I can only speak for myself, but I agree (and I think a lot do who post in this thread). Where I begin to differ, is when trying to determine to what extent humans are impacting the climate. The climate has been changing since our species first emerged -- and will continue to change long after we're gone. While I don't deny man's industrialization has played a role, I question how much we've accelerated an otherwise natural cycle. I'm certain we have (cause and effect and all), but the world has been "ten years from ending" since the 80s, if not longer. Still, for me, even that isn't the real crux of the issue. What concerns me are the extreme solutions being pushed in light of this unknown. A dramatic reshaping of our economic and governmental models seems extreme, especially when that plan alone does nothing to address other emerging nations who are in the early days of their industrialization process. Strict enforcement would need to be done globally -- yet that's never a part of the plans I see/hear about. It's usually some form of: "we'll start in the west, and the rest of the world will follow our example" -- which sounds great but is not very realistic in terms of assessing geopolitics and human nature. So that leaves me in the position of understanding there's an issue we're facing as a global community, while wanting to protect the principles of sovereignty and civil liberties that have helped make the western world a beacon of hope, freedom, and the good. I understand the logic -- I do. And I agree completely that there are two sides to this debate, and both extremes of those sides are funded by some unsavory businesses/interests who are trying to drag the debate down into partisan mudslinging and outright disinformation. But this pandemic should reinforce the fact that models can't predict the future. They can only project the present onto the future, leaving no room for human innovation or any other "outside the box" solutions we may stumble on as a people. I don't think being honest about that (not that I'm saying you're not being honest about it, not at all what I mean) does a disservice to the cause itself. In fact, I think ignoring this fact, when it's clear to most empirical minds, hurts the cause far more than it helps. My favorite example of how silly it can be to rely on models as predictors of the future is the horse ***** debate in NYC at the end of the 19th century. At that time, everyone was using horses, and people were actually concerned about the rising population numbers and what that would do in terms of horse ***** piling up in the streets of NYC. Had the world modeled the problem back then, and reorganized their society based on it, it would have looked insurmountable without eliminating horses entirely... ... But they didn't see, couldn't see, that the world was about to change forever due to the advent of the automobile and the combustion engine. Not in decades, but in a few short years. My personal take is that there's a middle ground that must be found between being slavishly devoted to models as if they were bibles, and being hopelessly optimistic/naive about the long term costs of a runaway climate disaster. And I think the vast majority of individuals, if you get them talking honestly and not from a partisan standpoint, would agree that it's a problem we have to be aware of, a problem we have to work to get ahead of, but that we shouldn't over-react without a full understanding of the data or the cost of the solutions being pushed. Again, it's kind of amazing how much this current pandemic parallels the debates around climate. We're very much on the same page with this issue. My personal issue with this is detailed in my other post, but revolves around the fact that the government (more than likely) has been suppressing advanced technologies (especially with regards to energy and propulsion) from the private sector and the people for 70+ years -- so how can we trust them to be the arbiters of truth now? This suppression was done for reasons of national security originally (in the late 40s through the 60s), but then slowly became about protecting the global economy which runs on oil. This, obviously, is a FAR OUT there claim to make, but there's thousands of pages of FOIA documentation which suggest it's legit. That's why I personally roll my eyes when I hear government employees/officials/candidates push more government as the answer to this issue. If these government types truly cared about the climate, they wouldn't be looking to garner more power and control over us through their solutions, they'd be digging into their archives and Special Access Programs looking for the tech the people of this country paid to develop without even knowing it. (imo of course)

Freedom is hard, Justice. It's risky. Sometimes it's deadly. Big boy rules. Then the country is gone anyway, and the election won't matter.

Tracking just will not happen. That's the goal of many -- for years before this pandemic. Now they want to backdoor it into reality. If you value your civil liberties, your innate rights, and your freedom, you'd understand why this is an all they way bad idea. There's no upside to exchanging our basic civil liberties for a security which is just a mirage to begin with.

And now the CCP (and every other bad actor watching) knows just how easily they can shut down their rivals' economies and way of life. This is just the start of these kinds of shenanigans if we don't start stepping up our courage a bit as people.

Hard pass. Fraud is rampant with mail-in voting, there aren't any secure online voting mechanisms or infrastructure in place either. Again, see above. Think of the precedent this would set and why certain voices are pushing so hard for it. It's not because they're afraid of the gun you mention, it's because the temptation to garner MORE power through nefarious means is tough for many to pass up in partisan circles.

Surely you can acknowledge that the reason most downplayed it early (hindsight quibbles aside), is because the global community put its faith in the WHO and the UN, only to discover that they both were helping China cover up the extent of the spread/crisis. This was a failure of globalism on a massive scale, with the lion's share of the blame falling at the feet of the CCP and the globalists of the past 30+ years. Voting is sacred. Letting fear rob us of not only our personal freedoms (as we live under house arrest despite committing no crime), but also our right to vote would be a terrible precedent to set for the future. Imagine the "fun" bad actors could cause within our electoral process if we set that standard.

Lots of California Bernie Bro types agree with the above. They're piping mad.

It is shut down, as much as you’re going to get without something extreme. And if you go extreme in how you’re enforcing the lockdown this deep into it, with the numbers showing what we now all can see, you won’t get people to comply for long if at all. A large chunk of Americans have willingly given up their freedom for a month just to help the cause — they did it because their country asked them too. But that won’t last. The better the weather gets, the more people will realize that voluntary house arrest without having committed a crime is anathema to all we stand for.

https://mobile.twitter.com/newley/status/1247770701429215235

Correct. ABC News (and all its media content) is peanuts compared to Disney's film and TV slate. Same goes for Universal and NBC news (and all its media content).

https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/iger-floats-temp-checks-at-disney-parks-but-wall-street-sees-two-years-before-normalcy-returns-1234573760/?

That's great! Love to hear that. Hear's to hoping it only gets better from here.

It's amazing that they think people can't see through it in today's environment.

Asking for a hold on WHO's money. Love that. (Congress likely won't let him)

Yup.

Briefing starting now...

Gotcha -- meaning you didn't write this, CCP Bill? But you did write it. And stood by it. And still are... Because you're a parrot for the CCP, and a mentally deficient one at that.

Run away (again) -- you got pummeled, deservedly so. And with all that bullshite you spewed you still failed to address your own post: You've had days to disavow it, take it back (you still can in fact) -- but you won't. Why? Because you're a tool of the CCP, CCP Bill. Wear that badge with honor. You've earned it.