Comments by "Michael Lenczewski" (@kayakMike1000) on "CNBC" channel.

  1. Democrats are incompetent. People leave because they hate the rules.
    14
  2. Sigh... ARM is hardly RISC. There are hundreds of instructions. Its ALOT fewer than x86, but if you want RISC, go with RISC-V or MIPS.
    8
  3. Politicians can't fix the grid. The government should focus on GOVERNING. The power companies need to fix the grid.
    7
  4.  @deezeed2817  capitalism concentrates wealth? No, that is not true. Production of goods and services that other people want cause people who are skilled at making those goods and providing those services. It's a bit more fundamental than capitalism. Maybe... Private ownership concentrates wealth. If some dude is really good at making something valuable, he could retain that something. You could say that dude becomes more and more wealthy the more somethings if value he created. He needs not take it to a free market, nor engage in any trade. No capital trades hands, but wealth is concentrated in the skilled workers that produce for themselves. If you wanna get rid of private ownership to avoid concentration of wealth, good luck. Someone will likely disagree with you with a shotgun.
    5
  5.  @CreatorCade  you bought that computer or phone with something, didn't you?
    3
  6.  @Curtis69213  we prefer the words "warm factory" as opposed to swear shop. The former polls better with the latter, according to leading market research
    3
  7. Why would they want to? CO2 is in short supply in the atmosphere, we need at least another 500 ppm for optimal plant growth. I hope there is enough coal and oil to reach 1000 ppm by 2150. All that CO2 would make the plants grow GREAT!
    3
  8.  @abcz98  well, democrats don't seem to be logically or morally consistent.
    3
  9. I buy from the company that makes the most CO2.
    2
  10. And you never will, child. You'll own nothing and be happy.
    2
  11.  @yt_nh9347  what if I told you that there are sea creatures that convert CO2 into calcium carbonate as part of their natural life cycle? What is the ideal concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere? Could it be you that doesn't understand the science?
    2
  12. So... If climate change is melting Earth's glaciers and raising sea levels, why did the current climate Czar recently buy a house by the house ocean?
    2
  13. He was right. Our atmosphere is better with more CO2
    2
  14.  @generictester  and that prediction, like many other predictions did not come true. In science we call these predictions hypothesis that are used to test to see if our ideas are correct. If the hypothesis disagrees with reality, ideas are updated with new ones... I don't understand why they hold on to these ideas when the evidence suggests they are wrong.
    2
  15. Period full stop? Are these people completely stupid? It's a complete waste of time and energy. Life itself is made of Carbon. The extra CO2 in the atmosphere is actually very good for plants. Plants are autotrophs, which are the base of the food chain. Increase plant life, make it grow better, the rest of the web of life becomes stronger. Historical and fossil evidence shows Life on earth thrives when it's WARM and rich in CO2..
    1
  16. There is no evidence that weather events are becoming more extreme and even less evidence that climate change are responsible for tsunamis.
    1
  17. @M W We prefer to say "support for allied energy interests" rather than "buy russian gas" and "exporting recycling resources to at need people" rather than "paying china to manage our waste". Furthermore, we believe that what you are calling slavery in 3rd world countries is slanderous and may hurt people's feelings. Who are we to say what enslavement looks like on other countries?
    1
  18. @M W I agree with you, my latest comment is intended to be satirical. Seems that the forces that work towards the goal you indicated use rhetoric to make what they want to do sound like a great idea.
    1
  19. Conflating synthetic rubber with natural rubber to make the problem seem worse is disingenuous.
    1
  20. Sounds like propaganda for Amazon.
    1
  21. Seaweed is not algea
    1
  22. Yaaaar! High pirates!
    1
  23.  @kunalkashyap863  myth: the climate models do not become more accurate over time unless they reduce CO2 sensitivity significantly. Even then, the models indicate a warming bias, especially in the tropical troposphere. There is no warming observed there, but the models predict there should be lots. Models are wrong.
    1
  24.  @Tony29103  I have a brain and I don't deny climate change, I just don't think anthropogenic CO2 is the cause. I also know that there has been no significant change of sever weather events consistent with a warmer climate. Droughts, floods, hurricanes, heat waves, blizzards, etc. have been within expectations for the last century, with a mild peak in heat during the early 1930's. Read the data before you appeal to authority, they are, infact lying dooshbag s.
    1
  25. Because it's not actually happening. Funny how they say that the oil and gas companies are conspiring to hide the truth. Doesn't that make it a conspiracy theory?
    1
  26.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  alleged leaked Exxon memos. Even if this is true, I still assert that the conclusion of environmental damage is premature. I am skeptical of the tie between anthropogenic CO2 and an alleged increase in global atmospheric temperature. There are enough counters to the hypothesis that humans are causing a tremendous change to climate through CO2. it's a really small change, so small we need special scientists to determine that it exists. Many of these scientists do not agree, but the lie that there is a huge consensus continues. We would not notice unless someone TOLD us the temperature was increasing. Next, many other hypothesis by climate scientists fail. They have hypothesized permanent flooding of NYC, submerged maldive islands, great lakes dry out, and no polar ice at all... None of these hypotheses were correct. Furthermore, their experimental models show evidence that is not observed in nature, yet there are claims that these are predicting calamity... Climate science in general, the credibility is suspect.
    1
  27.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  they are all failed predictions. Sorry bro. Humans don't understand climate well enough to determine what caused it to change. Sorry my facts are inconvenient, but yeah, I did fact check. You are experiencing confirmation bias. I recommend "The Scout Mindset" by Julia Galef to understand how to change your mind. Here is another new fact for you. Carbon Dioxide is increasing in our atmosphere, but all scientists don't agree on where it's coming from. I have heard that anthropogenic CO2 accounts for 3% of the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. I don't know if that is true, I have no idea how to verify it. It would just be one scientist versus another scientist.
    1
  28.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  fact check yourself, man... The IPCC says the rate of change of sealevel is variable and right now it's about 3.2 mm per year. That is up from the average of the 20th century, but humans have been burning stuff for many hundreds of years. CO2 IS UNRELATED to ocean depth, weirdo.
    1
  29.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  oh yeah I believe everything I read online....
    1
  30.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  with millimeter changes in sea level .... Takes hundreds of years to really get much above my ankles. Ha 😃😁
    1
  31.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  also, if the ocean water is warming and expanding, it does not have the same ability to dissolve CO2. That means your claims of ocean acidification are questionable, and the SOURCE if the CO2 is not coming from humans anyway, making your whole arguments moot. CO2 is coming from the ocean outgassing and it's Not anthropogenic. See how lovely thinking for yourself can be?
    1
  32.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  here I googled this for you. https://www.thegwpf.com/ten-climate-predictions-for-2020-that-went-horribly-wrong/
    1
  33.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  no... You're just finding crap on the evidence that supports your ideas. If you actually looked at the damn data, you would see that there IS NO EVIDENCE that hurricanes are stronger or more frequent. There have been 84 hurricanes and tropical storms that have hit New York, Hurricane Sandy wasn't the worst one. That one hit in 1925, well before the ocean got 4 or 5 centimeters deeper.
    1
  34.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  also... Weather is not Climate. Hurricanes are foul weather and are not caused by deeper oceans. It basically doesn't matter if the ocean rises a meter it two in the next three hundred years.
    1
  35.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  blah blah blah.. me smart. U dum dum, okay? Now go to school like a good Non player Character..
    1
  36.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  no, they have not. Just because you read something on the internet doesn't make it true. Read the IPCC. I read that source and they make no such claims. Besides, you failed to link CO2 to global warming anyway. We're going to have to agree to disagree. I don't know what the climate is changing to, nor do I know what the cause is, nor can I be sure that China India and Africa are going to play ball with whatever treaties we make. Mostly I just don't care anymore. I don't think we know enough to say what's going on at all. We need to do more research. That's all I can say. I don't think it's a critical issue. I do know that CO2 is good healthy gas and has been much higher in the past. I think humans make this planet better. I think you're probably wrong. Let's just leave it there. Also, you're a sheep person.
    1
  37.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  I am aware, and I disagree with the conclusion as it makes no sense. CO2 is a well mixed gas and exists in the stratosphere. H2O behaves differently and can't mix well at these higher elevations. If there is more CO2 at higher elevations and responsible for alleged warming, the stratosphere would ALSO WARM. CO2 absorbs infrared photons, they DON'T reflect them like a pane of glass. This is what smart people call abuse of analogy. The infrared photons are largely absorbed by H2O molecules in the lowered atmosphere. Besides that, the models show the stratosphere warming too, contrary to observation. The climate scientists are taking evidence against CO2 induced warming and twisting it to fit a narrative that confirms their expectations. The stratosphere does not warm because H2O in the lower atmosphere has overwhelmingly absorbed all the infrared photons, there are none left to absorb at higher elevations. The stratosphere does not act like a reflecting shield that holds the heat back, that's stupid. You're like a flat earther denying science...
    1
  38.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  wow, you really are bad at science. First, using big smart sounding words like "spectroscopic analysis" and "empirical evidence" does not make you right. Secondly, you did not site any source for your claim that 47% of atmospheric CO2 is man made. You're little sister could have decided that, who knows. Anyway we can verify that? Secondly, empirical evidence implies an experiment occurred. There is no control group, there is no experiment. Your claim of empirical evidence is debunked. Besides that carbon dioxide has been higher in the past, even during ice ages. Also, again, I said that CO2 is a well mixed gas. If CO2 were a major greenhouse gas, the troposphere AND the stratosphere would both warm over time. The junky stupid models show this when greenhouse gas forcing is applied, but we do not observe this in REALITY. Even if you consider the models to be a reasonable experiment, your conclusion is invalid. All the models show is we don't know what's causing whatever change that is occuring. Besides that, climate scientists are untrustworthy at best. Data from the past is routinely changed that often makes the past colder and the present warmer to show a sharp increase in temperature. I will find some reference for that claim. All I really believe is we don't know enough to definitively say what is causing the climate to change. I doubt it's CO2. That's all I am saying.
    1
  39.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/there-is-no-climate-emergency-say-500-experts-in-letter-to-the-united-nations/
    1
  40.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  nope I read them. It's a conspiracy theory. You're pretty gullible.
    1
  41.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  I fact checked this. It's true. It was Hansen.
    1
  42.  @swiftlytiltingplanet8481  it's a failed prediction because it was much hotter in the 1930's. The temperature record had been "adjusted". Best way to make a terrible warming trend is to cool the past because, well science, and blamo .. you've got a hockey stick of doooooom!
    1
  43.  @kindface  no new wars from Trump.
    1
  44.  @doomguy2.0  it's the CCP, man... But I here you brother
    1
  45. @Layla Goodon-Witter I am awake. You are asleep, having a nightmare. Humans are good, we make the world better, except for the ones that don't believe this. It's a fact
    1
  46.  @jerrygereden  all those people who took too much fentanyl?
    1
  47.  @jerrygereden  nah. Soldiers with muskets shot them to death. Then we matched them to reservations in the trail of tears. What's your problem? I think that was wrong and poor form. But it happened. I didn't effing do that nor would I. George Floyd broke the law and was arrested by a reasonable officer who could have tased him but chose to use less force.
    1
  48.  @jerrygereden  um that was a massacre not a genocide. And yeah, the people were deputized and many were given weapons by the city government. That was a really bad thing that happened. I don't see where I am making excuses or what this has to do with Floyd. I am speaking truth. George Floyd died because he overdosed on Fentanyl. Derek Chauvin used a less violent way of subduing a man who was resisting arrest while he was with his rights if tasing him. Here is another truth. One of my ancestors fought in the civil war for the Union. He got shot, but survived. Another on my mom's side helped on the underground railroad. They didn't hide anyone on thier journey north, but never refused food or water to those who needed it because they were devout Catholics who "fed the hungry" and "clothed the naked". They were caught doing this and got ostracized by their community. There was a symbol near their farm that indicated they were friendly. So... My ancestors helped END egregious slavery in the USA, one even took a bullet for it. I wasn't there, but I like to think I would have helped also. I won't take credit for what they did, but I am proud of my heritage, though I am white. I stand for truth and Justice. You just want vengeance. That's bad news, my friend. That's what is TRUE
    1
  49. Some people read more than headlines
    1
  50. Some people believe Epstein killed himself.
    1