Reply With Quote
Wondering if in 25 minutes you’re getting pegged by dr boss, tbh. Market was down a little today. She gonna break out the black mamba on you?
LOL trolling with Steve Bannon posts and youtube videos that will get us a bunch of conspiracy theory videos in our recommendations if we click them. The Aggie board well going dry for you lately?
Wondering if in 25 minutes you’re getting pegged by dr boss, tbh. Market was down a little today. She gonna break out the black mamba on you?
Saying it a few more times almost guarantees a like, based purely on the odds of someone clicking on the wrong area.
Yes, I sat here for 23 hours wondering what to say. Totally plausible. Are you serious?it took you 23 hours to think up this response.
Sure. You had a bunch of posts itt in between. You really put some thought into this gem.
What do you know about dr boss pegging her little aggie when he loses her money in the wall street casino? You’ve been known to keep a Rolodex.
Never said the bar wasn't pretty low, but that doesn't invalidate the fact that saying something stupid here will elicit a long line of dunking.
Some people found it pretty funny. It might not be your cup of tea, that's fine with me.
Plus it's something that's measurable. Agreeing or not with projections is a different matter, but lowballing what's right in your face seems pretty stupid. Not like Trump s wouldn't know.
You actually think someone sat in one place for 23 hours trying to summon a response? That's re ed even for you.
That depends on who says it, obviously. It's crickets from one side, dunking on the next. Of course if you're on the left, you have to get in line to dunk. If you're on the right, the court is usually open.
It's fine. So were the remarks asking for all the other daily weather bullet points that didn't come with a dozen likes from the fam.Some people found it pretty funny. It might not be your cup of tea, that's fine with me.
You know damn well that if anyone on the right started a similar thread they'd be ridiculed daily. WH23 has a half dozen threads talking about weather or population or climate change. It's basically him talking to himself. Not for nothing but you guys do love to jerk each other off.
^^^nonstop personal grudgeposting and weepy right wing grievance mongering
good luck finding the topic, gramps.
Clearly not as you were posting other stuff itt. You were just looking for a coy response to SR21 logically dismantling your argument. I just thought it was funny that was all you could muster after 23 hours.
lol laziest bait ever. Never change.
Related:
London too
https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/...cident_report/Google has revealed the root cause of the outage that disrupted services at its europe-west2-a zone, based in London, during a recent heatwave.
"One of the datacenters that hosts zone europe-west2-a could not maintain a safe operating temperature due to a simultaneous failure of multiple, redundant cooling systems combined with the extraordinarily high outside temperatures," states Google's incident report.
This week is gonna suck, 104 tomorrow and Thursday.
No doubt you were walking around too, doing any number of things while focused squarely on the perfect response.
Lol that still fell flat
https://www.marke ch.com/story/un...te-11653329417Inaction on climate change will cost the global economy $178 trillion over the next 50 years, enough loss for a 7.6% cut to global GDP in 2070 alone, a new report from the Deloitte Center for Sustainable Progress said Monday.
the report: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/da...int-report.pdf
Its karma on teh fats.
If, on the other had, the world acts rapidly to achieve net zero emissions by midcentury, the transformation of the economy could set the world up for stronger growth by 2070...Such a transformation could increase the size of the world economy by $43t in net present value terms from 2021-2070.
We could continue to use fossil fuels, capture all CO2 emissions, and begin to reverse the increase for bout 20 trillion
but we won't
You like to suck
conversion to 100% renewable power technologically doable by 2050, says Stanford study. cost recouped in 6 years, net jobs added.
https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-e...osts-doing-it/
The study concludes that we do not need miracle technologies to solve these problems. By electrifying all energy sectors; producing electricity from clean, renewable sources; creating heat, cold, and hydrogen from such electricity; storing electricity, heat, cold and the hydrogen; expanding transmission; and shifting the time of some electricity use, we can create safe, cheap and reliable energy everywhere.
https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/arti.../EE/D2EE00722C
We found that the overall upfront cost to replace all energy in the 145 countries, which emit 99.7 percent of world carbon dioxide, is about $62 trillion. However, due to the $11 trillion annual energy cost savings, the payback time for the new system is less than six years.
The new system may also create over 28 million more long-term, full-time jobs than lost worldwide and require only about 0.53 percent of the world’s land for new energy, with most of this area being empty space between wind turbines on land that can be used for multiple purposes. Thus, we found that the new system may require less energy, cost less and creates more jobs than the current system.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
