16 hours ago, SayAgain said:

This is why I have a hard time taking you seriously … you don’t answer questions, you just divert to something else as a “justification”.

Which questions did I not answer?  I can't find where you or Martin asked me a question.

16 hours ago, SayAgain said:

China is righting their wrongs, they have huge solar farms, they’re moving away from coal and I’ve linked you to existing solar farms in China 160 sq/mi here

OK, so China is building solar farms with their excess manufacturing capacity.  The fact remains that they built 289 coal power plants in 2024.  Yet, you criticize the U.S. for spending a relatively small amount of money to improve and revitalize some coal plants.  Some of that money is for carbon sequestration equipment for those plants, which should be considered a safe and wise investment.  Does China do this in their plants?  Just say what you really mean, that you hate coal power plants and want *all* of them shut down, *everywhere*.  State what you want plainly instead of targeting your criticism only at the USA. 

16 hours ago, SayAgain said:

removing drink water standards is good how?

I read the EPA press release that you linked to.  Nowhere does it say that drinking water standards are being diminished or eliminated.  Moreover, every regulatory policy and program in that list is being "reconsidered", not eliminated.  The fact is that EPA regulations have gone too far and become onerous and egregious to the point where they actually do more harm than good in some cases.  It is time for reform and implementation of reasonable environmental regulations, not elimination.  No one wants to go back to the 1930s-1980s with chemicals being dumped into rivers and smokestacks pouring out toxic fumes.

 

16 hours ago, SayAgain said:

This administration has caught onto the exodus and is now trying to stop ex-pats by trying to figure out a way on how to tax them

There has been an exit tax for decades now, implemented by both parties.  Luckily for you, unless you're quite wealthy, it only applies to individuals with a net worth over 2 million dollars.  Please specify how the current administration is targeting expats like yourself now that they've caught on to the "mass" exodus.  BTW, I've been listening to wealthy, out of touch celebrities and other rich folks threaten to leave the country for years only to watch them never follow through, or actually leave and then return within a short time. I actually lived in another country for years, learned the language and culture and really integrated fully.  I'll tell you that it ain't easy.  I admire you for having the courage to actually leave the U.S. for good.  I think you'll find that the grass is not always greener, and that most of the negative issues we have here also exist in every other country.  Sometimes things are worse than here. 

Believe it or not, I'm not all that enamored with my own country and know that we're far from perfect, and I'm not in agreement with everything the current administration is doing.  I don't go around bragging that we're the "greatest country in the world", shouting "USA, USA!" and all that jazz.  Most people here have never lived anywhere else and have never even been to another country, so they don't know squat.

Would you reveal which country you're moving to, or which part of the world?  I wish you good fortune and happiness.

Dave

On 10/13/2025 at 4:37 PM, dave2013 said:

So, it's OK for China to build, not just "maintain" as you stated, coal power plants to strengthen its energy security, but not OK for the U.S. to do that?

 

No, and not the point. The point is that you need to stop using China in your arguments because, per capita, the US its on its was to double China's Co2 output. 

 

On 10/13/2025 at 4:37 PM, dave2013 said:

BTW, you do realize that all the trees, and plants, and crops, need CO2 to survive, right?  It's not a "pollutant".  There are scientists who think more CO2 is a good thing, you just choose to ignore them.  Obviously you can have too much of a good thing, but there is evidence and research that CO2's greenhouse effect influence has its limits and we've likely reached that limit already.  I'm sure you'll ignore that as well. 

 

1. 😁 Don't worry, nobody wants to, or could, get rid of all CO2, just our stuff.  😁  Trees plants and crops require the CO2 that exists naturally without our contribution. And yes, rather than ignoring the phenomenon of "Global Greening" its something I addressed the last time you raised it, and the time before, and the time before that. And once again, global greening has positive aspects, but there's also many negative aspects to global greening. Also, the greening effect is temporary. If you want a list of the negative aspects of global greening, let me know.

2. You claiming that the greenhouse effect has its limits and and that we've reached that limit is just "something you said" without evidence provided. Take a look at Venus. 😏

 

On 10/13/2025 at 4:37 PM, dave2013 said:

Again, I could make a very long list of all the failed predictions by folks like you over the past 50 years, but you just keep on a comin as if you're never wrong.

 

If you mean accuracy of climatological predictions, rather than the media nonsense...

 

Quote

Climate prediction models have been remarkably accurate in their projections for global warming, with studies showing that many models from the 1970s were "pretty much spot-on" in predicting future temperatures. While some earlier models were slightly off, the overall trend of warming has been correctly projected, and the accuracy has improved as technology and data have advanced. Today's models incorporate more complex data, such as land cover and air circulation patterns, leading to even more reliable projections

 

 

https://www.science.org/content/article/even-50-year-old-climate-models-correctly-predicted-global-warming

 

On 10/13/2025 at 4:37 PM, dave2013 said:

Yes, the average American pollutes and consumes more than the average person in China, but China has 4 times our population, so even with the smaller per capita emissions, the overall emissions are much higher

 

🤣 Of course China's emissions, in total, are higher.  But that's not a fair way to look at it, that's utterly illogical. I could say that the entire world other than the US emits more CO2 and thus, the US is awesome and the rest of the world dastardly CO2 emitters, but again, that would be ridiculous. You can not condemn China for its emissions due to its higher population numbers, its a huge country with a huge population. Per capita is the only logical, fair metric. Same for anything, crime rates, anything. You know this, of course, so just an invalid attempt at a counter argument.

 

 

On 10/13/2025 at 4:37 PM, dave2013 said:

So why no criticism of China, or India?  It seems as if you only like to criticize the USA.  Is this perhaps because you're in competition with us and wish to bring us down a notch or two?

 

😁 Wrong! There' plenty to criticize both India and China for, but the point is that you use the fact that there TOTAL emissions are high to support your argument, which is not a valid argument due to the fact you are using the wrong metric, total emissions instead of the logical per capita figure. The average Chinese person emits very little CO2, the average American emits a prodigious amount more. Simple! As for "competition" I'm not in coemption with America, I'm a person not a country. 😃

 

 

 

On 10/13/2025 at 4:37 PM, dave2013 said:

those on your side are unwilling to compromise and listen to reason. 

 

 

Projection!

Edited October 14, 2025Oct 14 by martin-w

25 minutes ago, martin-w said:

No, and not the point. The point is that you need to stop using China in your arguments because, per capita, the US its on its was to double China's Co2 output. 

The USA has reduced its per capita carbon emissions from 22 tons to 14 tons since 1973.  Coal emissions have dropped from 2.6 billion tons in 2005 to 775 million tons in 2024 - a threefold reduction.

Please stop the nonsense that we're increasing our emissions.

As far as subsidies, the European Union provides a lot more subsidies than the United States.  You live in the EU.  This from the IMF: https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/climate-change/energy-subsidies

I'll also re-post a link to the World Climate Declaration which has 2023 signatories from around the world to refute your hysterical claims, most of whom are scientists and environmental and climate experts:  https://clintel.org/signatories-and-supporters/

Lastly, it's rich getting criticized by someone who lives Jersey, part of the notorious Channel Islands tax haven which shields the ultra rich and huge corporations from just and fair taxation.  Jersey is one of the worst according to the BBC whom you like to reference.  Headline: "Channel Islands 'among worst tax havens' worldwide" https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-jersey-48354081

I have a hard time not responding to misrepresentations and mischaracterizations of what I've stated, what my beliefs are, and what policies I support, but I will not resume a 15-page debate over these issues with you again.  This *will* be my last post no matter what you and SayAgain post.

Dave  

 

 

Edited October 14, 2025Oct 14 by Mike A

7 hours ago, dave2013 said:

...

  I think you'll find that the grass is not always greener, and that most of the negative issues we have here also exist in every other country.  Sometimes things are worse than here. 

...

Dave

Much greener over here, thanks 🙂

We're into politics again.  If you can't discuss the technology without getting into the politics, please refrain from commenting.

We are growing weary of refereeing these discussions when certain folks keep taking us there, and I'm contemplating locking offenders out of the forum should it continue.

And to be clear, if someone does cross the line, it is not a green light for others to jump into the scrum and fuel another political debate.

So stop.  This is a flight sim site.