Warning: file_get_contents(/home/www/settings/mirror_forum_db_enable_sql): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /var/www/html/content/Forum/functions.php on line 8
Because he's quite elderly and won't be around to suffer but he can do some insider trading and manipulate the hell out of markets and get orders of magnitude wealthier all while coincidentally fluffing the white rural voters whose heritage is drilling and mining. He doesn't care about them but they love that he's made domestic production profitable so they can go back to the man camps in Williston.
Trump is against wind power and has led the charge to cut consumer subsidies for the purchase of solar panels. I don't know if his admin has any position on deep geothermal drilling or even if Trump has heard of it. He has also cut funding for energy R&D.
Trump is all in on oil and coal. But Trump is wedded to the past. The markets—NOT government regulations—have decreased the use of coal in the US drastically, and in a short period of time:
My point to you, Kurt, is that new forms of energy production are, at first, always going to seem like permanently niche options. But if you put money into R&D, you can increase the amount of solar energy captured by solar panels, and decrease the cost of those panels. The same is true of wind power. According to Wikipedia, one unit of the 26 megawatt wind turbine mentioned below provides enough energy to power 55,000 homes.
The worldâs largest wind turbineâcurrently being tested off the coast of Chinaâhas blades that are more than twice as long as a Boeing 777âs wingspan. It can generate 26 megawatts (MW) of energy, more than double the global average for individual turbines. But its record is about to be smashed to smithereens: another offshore wind turbine that is twice as powerful has been announced by Ming Yang Smart Energy, a company based in southern China.
With a capacity of 50 MW, this supersized structure is designed to float on the oceanâs surface and can withstand typhoons, according to the company, which plans to start making the turbine later this year and to deploy it next year.
Kurtsey must be in a mobile home where his world view is a small window of other hamster boxes, stunted ugly trees, and an expressways lined with Applebees and Cracker Barrels, hey man there are actual students discovering ways to generate electric power from sea water, along with drinkable fresh water, building materials from remade cardboard and metal waste as well as respectfully using soil for crops without covering it all with poisonous insecticides, fertile growing spaces on the tops of and inside abandoned buildings, it is happening in places where people have IDEAS and COMMITMENT to SOCIETY! Fuck the money/power driven old school creeps and there's way more advanced ways to go forward, get the tribe of greedy maggots out of the driver's seat and pay respect to some intelligent people, you will see improvement when Putin and Rump and sick old men currently calling the shots are dead. The sooner the better.
Global onshore and offshore wind generation potential at 90m turbine hub heights could provide 872,000 TWh of electricity annually,9 over 30 times the 27,081 TWh used globally in 2023.10Continental U.S. wind potential of 43,000 TWh/yr9 exceeds 2024 U.S. electricity use of 4,100 TWh.6
By September 2019, 19 states had over 1,000 MW of installed capacity with five states, Texas, Iowa, Oklahoma, Kansas, and California, generating over half of all wind energy in the nation.<8> Texas, with 39,450 MW of capacity generating about 25% of the state's total electricity in 2024, has had the most installed wind power capacity of any U.S. state for more than a decade.<9><10> The state generating the highest percentage of energy from wind power is Iowa, at over 57% of total energy production.<8>North Dakota currently has the most per capita wind generation.
The Bully Buffoon will long be remembered as one of America's most terrifying moments of its existence. The rest of the world will be suspicious of us for decades. The GOP is finally seeing the laht.... That Bunker Ballroom Ain't for THEM.
It was never a two-way street of loyalty to Henry VIII either.
No, I did not demand that anyone quote me. The only thing I said is that if you are going to quote me, quote me. Be honest and accurate.
A quote is a very specific and well defined thing.
Is that asking very much ?
Evidently it is asking for too much around these parts.
Your words....
Those of you who still bring up these convictions to this very day are basically summarily dismissed as someone who doesn't care about the actual truth and accept the outright framing of a man as acceptable.
My quoting (/paraphrasing) of you....
"Anyone who disagrees with me doesn't care about the truth"
Arguing "I was misquoted", and expressing procedural outrage, is a lot easier than defending your statements.
No, I did not demand that anyone quote me. The only thing I said is that if you are going to quote me, quote me. Be honest and accurate.
A quote is a very specific and well defined thing.
Is that asking very much ?
Do you not understand that he was paraphrasing you? Restating your post into a distilled version that represents what he got from it? That the quotation marks don't literally mean you said it, only that if some undefined person were to say something like that, then the rest of his statement about that would apply? Or did I overestimate your intellectual wherewithal?
Mostly I was just havin' a laugh, paraphrasing your demand that we only quote you. BUT you do the same thing as everyone here because it's important to having a conversation: restate what you're responding to so that if we do misunderstand, we can spot that error. You seem to think you make no post that isn't 100% accurate to what you mean to say AND that it's perfectly clear what it is that you're saying. I, on the other hand, fully acknowledge my propensity to get into logical roundabouts with no obvious exits and then I hit post and then edit and then edit and then edit and then say oh fuggit that makes no damn sense even though I am actually correct.
No, I did not demand that anyone quote me. The only thing I said is that if you are going to quote me, quote me. Be honest and accurate.
A quote is a very specific and well defined thing.
Is that asking very much ?
Evidently it is asking for too much around these parts.
You of all people should know the difference and purpose between paraphrasing and quoting.
Or did I overestimate your intellectual wherewithal ?
Mostly I was just havin' a laugh, paraphrasing your demand that we only quote you. BUT you do the same thing as everyone here because it's important to having a conversation: restate what you're responding to so that if we do misunderstand, we can spot that error. You seem to think you make no post that isn't 100% accurate to what you mean to say AND that it's perfectly clear what it is that you're saying. I, on the other hand, fully acknowledge my propensity to get into logical roundabouts with no obvious exits and then I hit post and then edit and then edit and then edit and then say oh fuggit that makes no damn sense even though I am actually correct.
So what you're saying is "don't try to parse the circuitous writing in my post; the only way your response will be valid is if you accept my words as sensical in the first place."
You of all people should know the difference and purpose between paraphrasing and quoting.
Or did I overestimate your intellectual wherewithal ?
The above quote is an outright lie. I did not say that.
This what I actually said.
And the context is reflecting on those with the POV I was putting forth and how having a conversation with those who hold this POV is basically pointless and will only result in an exercise of futility.
.
If you're going to quote someone, quote the actual words. To do otherwise is lying to justify the point the liar is trying to make.
So what you're saying is "don't try to parse the circuitous writing in my post; the only way your response will be valid is if you accept my words as sensical in the first place."
"Anyone who disagrees with me doesn't care about the truth" isn't a rebuttal, it's an admission that you'd rather question motives than confront opposing facts.
The above quote is an outright lie. I did not say that.
This what I actually said.
Those of you who still bring up these convictions to this very day are basically summarily dismissed as someone who doesn't care about the actual truth and accept the outright framing of a man as acceptable. Impossible to have any kind of meaningful discussion in any matter regarding Trump.
And the context is reflecting on those with the POV I was putting forth and how having a conversation with those who hold this POV is basically pointless and will only result in an exercise of futility. . If you're going to quote someone, quote the actual words. To do otherwise is lying to justify the point the liar is trying to make.
So trying to put an end to the regime in Iran is not making the world better ?
So sad to see that you think Iran should be left alone and left to their own devices.
Right there reflects a huuuge problem with you Magas. Consistently WRONG and DANGEROUS answers to the right types of questions.
Should we do something to make the world and individual countries safer from dangerous leaders?
Should we protect sensitive US industry- eg, steel, pharma, rare minerals- and not be reliant on foreign adversaries?
Should we strive to keep taxes low?
And then of course looking at things like the environment/fossil fuels as black and white, the culture wars...
No matter how many times you say "this problem" you never have the right answer or a clue how to fix it.
To Summarize:
- Iran regime change: partial and worse, not better.
- Left alone... what's changed?
- China... stronger
- Russia... stronger
- Iran... stronger
- Israel... better off
- US... exposed as weak and lacking commitment
"But we had to do something" is bullshit, and doing it without a plan or appreciation of the potential consequences is reckless.
Location: At the dude ranch / above the sea Gender:
Posted:
May 27, 2026 - 9:02am
I posted a little bit of blather from the ChatGPT where it postulated that something very negative would have to happen before midterms for there to be any possibility of a trump impeachment and conviction.
This Cornyn thing is making a lot of not-brain-dead GOP angry. He turned on someone who had more or less supported him. Then there's Cassidy, and the numbskulls he's been putting into positions of power that have screwed up big time, and the rising prices everywhere and his obvious corruption and nepotism, and the Iran blockade of the previously open Hormuz and even more. And now GOP Texas, pissed off and fiercely independent, sees trump as thinking he can boss them around.
It's gotta be making the normal (not ass-kissing) GOP wonder in an existential way if they're doing it right.
Moving towards a "revolt" before midterms, things are getting more, not less, likely. I'm not placing bets yet, but I am making popcorn.
So trying to put an end to the regime in Iran is not making the world better ?
So sad to see that you think Iran should be left alone and left to their own devices.
Right there reflects a huuuge problem with you Magas.
Consistently WRONG and DANGEROUS answers to the right types of questions.
Should we do something to make the world and individual countries safer from dangerous leaders?
Should we protect sensitive US industry- eg, steel, pharma, rare minerals- and not be reliant on foreign adversaries?
Should we strive to keep taxes low?
And then of course looking at things like the environment/fossil fuels as black and white, the culture wars...
No matter how many times you say "this problem" you never have the right answer or a clue how to fix it.
Yeah, well unfortunately we cannot get away from the oil and gas dinosaurs for some time to come. More than likely not before we attain the Holy Grail of Sci - Fi, Zero Point Energy. We have exponentially increased the demand for electricity by magnitudes in just the past 5 or 10 years. First with the push to rid home use of fuel oil heating and natural gas, second, the demand created by Electric Cars. As of now the demand still exceeds supply. To those two add the demands of Block Chain mining and in just the past year or so two more, A I and Data Centers. Where are we going to get the energy in the form of electricity from without Petrochemicals ? Nuclear, but that is about a 10 year from initiation to going online per unit.
I don't think that there have been very many people who have been thinking out this supply crunch for very long since the focus has been on wind and solar, which in the scheme of this kind of demand, are simply toys that are a tremendous waste of time, money and resources, given their extremely limited potential with the scope of this kind of demand. And then, new power transmission grids have to be built. Hell, even the demand for water is going to exceed the supply for drinking based on the additional need for cooling all of these computers.
Solve these problems and then we can begin to get away from petroleum based energy. Until then we are stuck. imho.
At the southern outpost, my power bill is under a dollar a month. Mostly a charge to support the guys who read the meter and send the bill. I'm working on getting a two way meter so we can produce energy for the grid. Many people are doing the same. The ROI with a new build is a no brainer. Also working on an electric car for getting around most of the time there. It's all doable, if you have the will.
