Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Oil Giants Spend $115 Million Per Year To Oppose Climate Policy" video.

  1. +MaxCPP Nice comment. I agree with what you said. The climate change issue is purely politicizing science to create an excuse to generate another tax and regulation.
    1
  2. +네타냐후베냐민 Very few people deny climate change. The issue is that democrats are lying about it to make an excuse to generate another tax and more regulations.
    1
  3. +Kyrie Irving Climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years.
    1
  4. +Kyrie Irving I can say that democrats are incredibly ignorant as well just like you said animals are smarter than Republicans. The issue of climate change is exaggerated and is just an excuse to politicize science to create another tax and more regulations giving government more power. I find it sad that those on the political left as so quick to trust a group of politicians so easily.
    1
  5. +Kyrie Irving I trust them a lot as well. So what do you trust about them? Because there are still questions about climate change that prevents us from making radical decisions.
    1
  6. +Ylze Tyr "the only people who DON'T accept the truth about it are the politicians on the right." But yet under Bush funding in science research went up. Also there are a lot of questions regarding climate change. They are 1. Is it even bad 2. How much is man playing a role 3. Can we even do anything, and if we can then should we do anything We can't make radical decisions that will destroy jobs and hurt our economy with such large doubt. If there wasn't such a large doubt then we would be pushing for radical changes. We aren't. The only people that are pushing for such large changes is the political left. They are doing so for political reasons. They have a politician that goes are far as saying that climate change is directly related to terrorism. That is fear mongering to the nth degree. It is pure fear mongering to make an excuse for more taxes and regulations.
    1
  7. +Ylze Tyr Science funding is general, so yes a part of it was towards climate change. Considering how you don't even know how funding in science works I can see you still haven't learned anything.
    1
  8. +Ylze Tyr It is still clear that you lack understanding of science and how it works.
    1
  9. +Ylze Tyr I have a legit argument. It is that just you refuse to listed to facts. Here is a fun fact, look up the comparison of Al Gore's house to George Bush's house. How about you tell the political left to practice what they preach.
    1
  10. +Ylze Tyr Nope, it proves that Bush is willing to take actions including increase funding in science research.
    1
  11. +Kyrie Irving "almost the entire international scientific community knows climate change is real" When did I ever say it wasn't real? "and dangerous," How? It has been happening for over 4 billion years. In fact a driving force of evolution is climate change. Funny how the political left supports science until it goes against them.
    1
  12. +Ylze Tyr This again? How about you tell me what Subjective Value Theory is? Or what the word subjective even means? Or who Christina Romer is, or what labor to labor substitution is, or skilled biased technological change. You are a sad individual.
    1
  13. +Ylze Tyr What is Subjective Value Theory? And what does "subjective" mean?
    1
  14. +Ylze Tyr I am not changing the subject. I am a busy person. If you are not worth my time I am not going to argue with you. You have proven to me that you are not willing to learn anything new and take pride in being ignorant.
    1
  15. +Ylze Tyr Nope, I just have 3 weeks left this semester and a lot to do. I have no problem getting into a discussion with someone who is wiling to learn. The pure fact that you don't know what subjective means despite 1. me giving you a dictionary definition 2. me showing you the Subjective Value Theory shows your refusal to admit when you are wrong and your willingness to learn. At times it it good to have ignorant people, it makes my chances for a job easier.
    1
  16. +Ylze Tyr Nope, you have no clue what subjective means. It all began with the arbitrary term "living wage". To me a "living wage" is having a one bedroom apartment with a reliable car even though I walk to work because living to me is having such luxuries. I am willing to pay that much. I value those things at the price I pay. That is subjective. If you want to talk about "circumstantial" then you need to change the phrase to a "wage to survive off of". I can live in a tiny studio with 4 other people, eat Raman, hardly use the heat, have few clothes no luxury items. That amount would depend on someone's situation. You are no longer living you are surviving. But I think we are getting into too big of words for you.
    1
  17. +Ylze Tyr Nope, that is subjective. Sorry that definitions are not your friend. Why the fuck am I giving an English lesson to a moron??
    1
  18. +Ylze Tyr It is subjective. What you perceive to be living I perceive to be different. That is the way it is. You make up this arbitrary phrase of "living wage" which you claim to be X with no standards. I can make it be less because I subjectively feel that someone can live off of less if needed. Are there different circumstances involved? Yes. But it doesn't change the fact that I have different standards making the phrase "living wage" subjective. Also it is related to the subjective value theory. Someone is not worth something just because they exist as a worker. They are worth that much if someone perceives them to be worth that much. It is crystal clear. And great, you get high, drunk and play video games. I wouldn't expect anything less from an unemployed individual in their mom's basement. I have actual work to do, and if I get high and drunk I have actual friends to hang out with.
    1
  19. +Ylze Tyr I am not changing the subject, I am pointing out how ignorant you are. The earth has been going through climate change for over 4 billion years. Species have evolved during that time. That is why the issue of how bad climate change is, if at all exists. It has been happening for over 4 billion years. Can anything be done if at all? The sun is eventually going to die, why are you not running scared about that?
    1
  20. +Kyrie Irving "Academies of science from over 80 different countries like Zimbabwe, South Africa, Japan, Iceland, Australia, all knows it real." Again, point to me where I ever said climate change was not happening.
    1
  21. +Kyrie Irving No they don't.
    1
  22. +Ylze Tyr How is something that has been happening for over 4 billion years now all of a sudden bad? Evolution has been happening for millennia and we don't consider that bad? Species have died off and climate change has been a driving force in evolution and extinction in nature. So now my assumption has to be that you don't support the theory or evolution. Why are you so anti-science?
    1
  23. +Ylze Tyr Where did you get that quote? Plus it still doesn't change the questions. 1. how can something that has been occurring naturally for millennia be bad 2. why are you anti-science
    1
  24. +Kyrie Irving I have looked at the science. How can something that has been happening for millennia be bad? The sun is shinning in my apartment window right now, I guess that is bad according to you.
    1
  25. +Ylze Tyr I get it, you don't support the theory of evolution. You feel that things in nature can't evolve. I also get it, you feel that somehow we can stop nature from doing what it has been doing for millennia. I get it, you are anti-science.
    1
  26. +Ylze Tyr I don't see what is so bad about natural occurring events? I see it as we need to adjust and prepare which we are. But to say it is bad is like saying the sun is bad. I many ways it is? Do you want to push for policy to try to block the sun?
    1
  27. +Ylze Tyr I don't believe in evolution because I don't believe in anything. That is why I never asked if you believe in evolution or not but instead asked why you don't support it. I support the theory of evolution very strongly. So you can try to put words in my mouth all you want but the fact is that I strongly support the theory of evolution and it is involved in my research in some ways.
    1
  28. +Ylze Tyr I doubt everything, so did Richard Feynman. What's your point? I guess you feel Feynman is not a scientist either.
    1
  29. +Ylze Tyr "I can live with doubt, and uncertainty, and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. I have approximate answers, and possible beliefs, and different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything, and in many things I don't know anything about, such as whether it means anything to ask why we're here, and what the question might mean. I might think about a little, but if I can't figure it out, then I go to something else. But I don't have to know an answer. I don't feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without having any purpose, which is the way it really is, as far as I can tell, possibly. It doesn't frighten me." Richard Feynman
    1
  30. +Ylze Tyr So now my next question, why do you not consider Richard Feynman to be a scientist?
    1
  31. +Ylze Tyr There is a lot of doubt of how much man is playing a role. Climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years, we see it happening on other planets. How much of a role does man play? We don't know. With that we can't make radical decisions that will hurt our economy with so much doubt exists. We should continue doing research and progressing in technology. But destroying our economy when we don't know the results is not a solution. Say we take the radical approach and nothing changes? Temperature keep rising but now we also have a poor economy? Then what? What is your backup plan?
    1
  32. +Ylze Tyr Ah, drinking again. Must be great to be unemployed.
    1
  33. +Ylze Tyr So you spend your free time getting high and drunk? Real productive of you. No wonder you are ignorant.
    1
  34. +Ylze Tyr There is a lot of doubt. Tell me how climate change was happening for over 4 billion years before man was no earth? Unless you are on that thinks the earth is like 7000 years old. Why are you so anti-science?
    1
  35. +Ylze Tyr So making our major source of energy more expensive and forcing a switch to an energy source that is less efficient would not hurt the economy? Compare it to forcing people to switch to a car that is more expensive to not only buy but run off of the energy it uses. That means less money for something else. Also nobody forced anyone to switch to cars. People did it because it was more efficient. According to you we should go back to horses because doing so will mean less greenhouse gasses in the air since horses release less than cars.
    1
  36. +Ylze Tyr I am not ignoring anything, I am pointing out reality. You making the conclusion that climate change is bad is like saying a sunny day is bad. Do you want to block the sun as well?
    1
  37. +Kyrie Irving I never got any video, try again.
    1
  38. +Ylze Tyr I am working tonight on research. I share my lab equipment with my other lab mates and it is my time to use it. I am not going to give that up. Tomorrow night I am going to have fun doing something productive with friends while making money. So you can enjoy getting high and drunk and being poor. And when you are poor and are bitching about income inequality or pushing for a higher min. wage since that is the only way you can get a raise, I will be well off.
    1
  39. +Ylze Tyr Solar power is inefficient compared to fossil fuels, especially in industry. You are talking about how tiny plants use solar and feel that we can run high power instruments, like my half a million dollar laser set up, or the Z pinch machine in Sandia. You can't, it is that simple. Solar panels are not efficient and neither is storage. The technology is not there. We are working on it but it isn't there.
    1
  40. +Ylze Tyr So now I see you supporting halting science research to go to solar energy. So I ask again, why are you so anti-science?
    1
  41. +Ylze Tyr Unemployed people have a lot of time off. People who live with their parents have a lot of time off. Having time off means nothing.
    1
  42. +Ylze Tyr You don't have to believe I am in college, it still doesn't change the fact that I am.
    1
  43. +Kyrie Irving I wasn't given one.
    1
  44. +Ylze Tyr Actually my parents live 2000 miles away, I live in my own apartment. Nice try though. And no, I did not get a video. Youtube does not allow people to post links sometimes.
    1
  45. +Ylze Tyr Citation? Look up "Why Are Solar Panels so Inefficient" from Forbes. A Postdoc in physics from Harvard explains why. Solar energy and trying to improve efficiency is a large area of research. If you type in "solar energy efficiency" in Web of Science you get around 1700 hits. One thing that is slowing us down is the fact that China has cornered the market in Lanthanides due to them having so low regulations they can open a mind no problem where in the US it takes around 10 years to open one. Thus they jack up the price of lanthanides which are used for up and down conversion research for solar energy. That is an example of government regulation trying to help the environment preventing progress.
    1
  46. +Ylze Tyr I took a course in lanthanides chemistry during my graduate studies so I do know a thing or two about it.
    1
  47. +Gnomesmusher You clearly don't understand the issue.
    1
  48. +Gnomesmusher Climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years. The issue of climate change has become fear mongering with democrats because they are politicizing science. Your last sentence is alluding to that a certain set of people don't trust science. Nothing can be farther from the truth. Under Bush spending in science funding went up because, as Neil deGrasse Tyson said no republican wants to die poor. Thus they support science, they just don't politicize it like democrats do.
    1
  49. +Gnomesmusher I climate change real? Yes, it has been happening for over 4 billion years. Is man playing a role? Yes, but the questions are 1. How much 2. Is it even bad 3. If we even can do anything....should we? We should continue doing research on the issue and keep progressing like we are in technology, but we can't make radical decisions that will hurt our economy when there is so much doubt. Say we do radical changes that the political left wants, it hurts our economy and the climate change issue still exists......then what?
    1
  50. +Gnomesmusher "You do realize that climate change has a negative impact on the economy, right?" How much? And I can argue it doesn't in that jobs are created in research. " Not to mention every other aspect of life on the planet. " Which has dealt with climate change for over 4 billion years "The economy is not more important than climate change." Without a strong economy we are screwed. "And you do realize that the scientific community is saying that the scenario is really bad, right? " It isn't.
    1
  51. +Gnomesmusher What harm does climate change do? Let us start with that.
    1
  52. The problem with the issue of climate change is that it is politicized. Democrats are lying about it to make an excuse to create new taxes and enforce more regulations. You have this video that talks about what businesses are doing but politicians on the left are just as corrupt on the issue.
    1