Can americans actually explain what is it about this man that makes him unfit to be the president?

>a lot of respectable scientists also deny global warming as human fault.
Name one.

>He says incorrect stuff hourly
Examples, please
>and speaks like a retard to make it
Refer to OP post
>clear that he isn't a politician.
It's a good thing..?
He makes a big deal out of not much with the whole illegal immigrant spiel.
Seems like it's a big deal enough since it upsets so many people
>I disagree with Trump's isolationist ideas.
Valid
>He is a populist
So he IS a good politician?

kek, fucking bait poster. Are you a proxy or did you decide to shill for the American alt right on your own?

>illegal immigration is not a big deal

Spotted the chicano

anything he does is all part of his master plan in 4d chess

>a lot of respectable scientists also deny global warming as human fault
LOL no. There are still scientists that denies that smoking is unhealthy too. It's on the same level of denial.

Its been years since I had read these articles, sorry but I can't be bothered to look it up just for you. Agree to disagree?

All will be revealed at tomorrow's debate

His job was to poison the dialogue in the republican primary and make all the other candidates pull too far to the right. Then he actually won so now his job is to make himself look so bad that Hillary seems like the sensible choice. Unfortunately the average republican is so susceptible to propaganda that they actually like him.

>he isn't a politician
That is the n°1 reason I would vote for him if I was American.

He denies global warming, is an anti-vaxxer, is anti-abortion and just about every economist is predicting total economic ruin if he wins.

There are literally no reasons to vote for him unless you are so dense that you believe an impoverished minority of the American population is the cause of most American problems.

>He denies global warming, is an anti-vaxxer
denied*, was*
>just about every economist is predicting total economic ruin if he wins
you mean like brexit?
>an impoverished minority of the American population is the cause of most American problems
they are the cause of many of poor whites' problems believe it or not

He wont back any of those up. Thats the standard list the media gives people like him to convince them they have an opinion

thats largely why hes so popular. Hes not another politician. His main issue, like sanders, was the special interest groups. The media is making a huge assault on him dragging up all these secondary and tertiary issues and demonizing him over it because the same people who own the special interest groups also own the media.

Because his political campaign came straight from Cred Forums and those people are retarded. I prefer boring conservatives like John Kasich.

He is a buisnessman and not a politican.

Also, he has a way to simplistic idea about how international politics work.

>came straight from Cred Forums
try again, Cred Forums likes islam

Spotted the Hillary shill.

The only propaganda americans are getting is around the clock trump bashing by the entirety of the media, and its not working.
Im genuinely surprised

As a senator, he voted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. He then destroyed Libya and Syria as secretary of state

I'm genuinely surprised you people somehow manage to live in a bubble

his policies aren't too bad (though the wall seems unlikely), but he's too easily angered to lead a military as large as ours

>implying I want her to win

1 he attacks
2 his changes his core plans
3 he "hates" the same ethics he has
4 he pretends to misinterpret us' corporate role in american employment crises
5 he has no definitive answer for anything
6 he likes to make people feel bad
7 he makes a mockery of the "promises" traditional politicians gives to the people
8 he also betrays his supporters

besides 7 which is best selling point he is doing exceptionally well to undermine his own possible support

lets just say any serious candidate would do not much worse than he has

>poll results
a week ago everyone came out with different polls and none of them agreed. You can find polls with trump in the lead.

The media is freaking out and basically reporting what they hope will happen because they dont know what else to do. The reported polls can even be matched up to the sources bias, with extreme trump haters showing clinton winning a huge amount, less biased networks having it be closer. The few somewhat pro trump sources showing him slightly winning.

Ignore polls

Latest polls have clinton leading by two points

It's the juice, but they are special and enlightened so they can see through the joos lies (unlike 99.9999% of the sheep, normie, beta, cucks).

>(though the wall seems unlikely)
Its just another 300 miles on hillarys 700 mile wall.

Though i doubt any wall gets built. A walls as good as a fence if you have nobody watching it

strawpoll.me/11304611
strawpoll.me/11304611
strawpoll.me/11304611

A lot of people aren't going to admit to supporting the candidate that the entire spectrum of the media from the left to the right are calling a racist, sexist, homophobic monster. The stigma against Trump supporters is so bad that it can cost someone their job or life to even hint at supporting him

what i mean is that mexico aint payin for shit
#letgarydebate

Source is Yahoo take it up with them

yahoo.com/news/elections

Yes, many polls are purposefully made and used as propaganda, this isn't a reason to dismiss them as useful tools however, I'm pretty sure there's people making 6 figures right now sifting through polls so that they can come up with results that can be used by investors. You can use the poor man's method and go for betting odds, Clinton is even (you make nothing) while Trump will pay, For someone absolutely convinced Trump will win now's the time to make the bet.

Trumps plan to make mexico pay would easily work. Do people honestly think he was just going to ask mexico for the money? Its outlined on his site if anyone wants to read it. Basically fees and tarifs on mexican interactions with the US. A few cents here and there and before long you have a wall.

>what is it about this man that makes him unfit to be the president?
He's not empathetic.
He has a poor temperament.
He doesn't appear to have principles beyond his own enrichment.
He flip-flops. Every politician does. He's turned it into an art form.
He has or had some pretty sketchy connections, among them the mob, the Russian govt.
His "plans" that he doesn't change monthly are ill-defined or outright unworkable.

And, you know. Because he's not terribly bright. "XD"

Hillary has her own problems, of course. Says quite alot about her that she's not killing it even harder.

Smart bookies make money no matter what, thats why they are bookies. The odds are more to encourage people to bet in the first place.

>it's literally the holocaust to support a bumbling inexperienced retard
No different than the Jews you Trumptards

Not a bigot, not a fascist, none of that bullshit.

Although he's obviously bright, he's a demagogue and he speaks to the lowest common denominator, his constituency.

My biggest problem with him is he is a constant, pathological liar, unlike anything we've seen in a president. He used to be a New York-style democrat, but now he's completely changed his stripes; he simply doesn't believe in what he says.

Basically, he's a salesman, pure and simple.

This

CANT STUMP THE TRUMP

>He's not empathetic.
All politicians are amoral cocained out meat robot sociopaths. He comes across worse but might actually have a few shreds of humanity left.
>He has a poor temperament.
This is a good point, he doesnt act in measured ways. The only valid problem here is that it can influince foreign politics by maybe offending someone because it doesnt actually signify hes any worse than any other politician internally.
>He doesn't appear to have principles beyond his own enrichment.
Every politician
>the mob
every politician

The reason trump needs to be elected is to show that trump can be elected. The president really does not have that much power. Obamas executive orders have been ignored before, and nobody is going to start a nuclear war just because the president tells them to. Having the codes is not the same as having the keys or the button. In fact its specifically designed that way, so no one person can just launch a nuke, including the president.

The only thing the president does is not veto his parties bills, make public speeches, and generaly act as a signaling device. Trumps signal would be "status quo doesnt keep your position safe, other politicians, you need to think about change". The exact same message that sanders would have sent. If you were going to vote for sanders (i was) you should now be voting for trump. They are identical in the main primary point of their campaign, that the current system needs to change. Once the current system starts getting broken down, it will take decades before its actually malleable enough to really start changing things. Its not this president who will have any role, or the next even. Maybe the one after, their ideas might influence things.

Nice shilling, you were going to vote for Sanders but are content to let the SCOTUS go full retard conservative?

Sanders actually cared about other people. Trump is fucking sociopath with no clear patterns.

He wants to genocide us. I hope the Mexican military invades to protect us.

...

>among them the mob
If Manhattan real estate businessmen were 100% forbidden from talking to the mob, there would be no Manhattan real estate.

Come one you really have to be retarded to not see that he has come this far thanks to American stupidity, the guy is a joke, people call him dumb because he truly sounds dumb.

When talking about his education policies trump said:

“We're No. 1 in terms of cost per pupil by a factor of, worldwide, by a factor of many. No. 2 is so far behind, forget it,"

Also no presidential candidate has ever told more lies than Trump.

latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-false-statements-20160925-snap-story.html

Also of of his stage staff quite after not getting paid, what future president allow things like that to happen??

If he gets elected its just one more proof of American decadence, a first world nation should not have someone like him as president and two of the most violent cities in the world. It's just amazing to me how fucked up USA is as a nation.

When asked about "What will your policies on NASA be?"

He answered "NASA is great. -DJ Trump"

It won't Mexico extends as a sovereign power to the border and not an inch further, come home Mexican

This. If you can't see that Trump was planted by Hillary to ensure victory for her then you're eating right into their hands.

Sorry for typos

nasa spending is in the powers of the congress

I trust conservative justices to uphold the letter of the constitution more than liberal ones. The left in general is full of the most deplorable people. I happen to be a socialist so i liked sanders, but the body of the american left is putrid.

Totaly doesnt matter, as i said, all that this election will do is signal where or not the status quo stands (hillary), or not (trump).

Its a vote between "keep things the same" or "things need to change".

You can ignore everything else either candidate says about anything because they really dont control shit.

The first priority of every politician is relection. You should never assume they are saying anything they actually believe.

The main reason i liked sanders was because calling himself a socialist was such a bad idea when it comes to gaining popular support that i can only conclude he was an honest individual. I also knew he was never going to win. I called it being trump vs clinton ages ago when the media was still covering all those other useless candidates. Did anyone ever think it was going to be anything but trump vs clinton? I dont understand how.

>implying that reddit answer isn't a good one
The Clinton Foundation probably has ties to half of congress.

Not even Alex Jones believes that bullshit anymore.

The polls are only correct when Trump is leading, if he isn't they are false.

>Also no presidential candidate has ever told more lies than Trump.

Hillary lies every time she talks.

Personally I disagree with many of his policies.
The forefront of his political message is forcing another country to pay for a border wall. Which isn't as crazy as people make it out to be, but is still much less likely to have the desired result as other less costly, and more proven options such as 1. Cracking down on all businesses that illegally employ cheap labor, and 2. Enacting more draconic rehabilitation programs on anybody confirmed to have drug addictions.

Personally I only agree with his economic policies. He also has yet (to my knowledge) to take a hard stance against corrupt political practices such as gerrymandering.

Hell, if it weren't for Clinton I might have been able to get behind the democrats again this year, but they just had to go and pick the worst option.

...

Yeah, but you ignored the fact that he lies a lot more than her.

I don't think the man is dumb, but I do think that many of his supporters are.
Listening in on one of his speeches gave temporary autism.

>He denies global warming
It's a meme or a religion. And it wants that everyone believes in it strongly. The "scientists" are like Saudi Arabian preachers, they really want that you believe.

It's more like if he is able to lead with incredibly biased polls, that just shows how well he's doing.

Early ballot requests by Republicans in Florida outpace Democrat requests for the first time in history.

>*denied *was
He took both those positions during his current campaign
Unless you have proof he changed his mind those are both fairly recent.

t. sub 90 IQ retard

:^)

sometimes he tells the truth, such as when he recently pointed out that clinton started the birther movement. She of course denied it, and the media backed her on it... even media personalities who just last year interviewed people that confirmed her campaign started it.

I guess anything trump says is a lie, even if its true

Jokes on you, a doctor of psychology found out that I have an IQ of 130. The test had a standard deviation of 15.

Obviously he is not dumb, he is a smart man, but he acts like a dumb politician because God knows why

And yeah the majority of his supporters are indeed dumb, and he appeals mainly to racists, so it makes sense, just watch how they behave online, in real life this people must be a nightmare.

the medikit is right. Whether its based in fact or not is irrelevant to the point that it is now a religion.

Its another doomsday cult. Its sensationalist predictions for catastrophy keep not happening, and getting pushed back. People who question it are shouted down as 'deniers' (heretics). Thats not science. The number one thing you do in science is be skeptical of everything and take nothing as true, only probable.

You truly not sound intelligent at all kek

>The number one thing you do in science is be skeptical of everything and take nothing as true, only probable.
Then go and jump off a cliff and see if gravity is true or not you fucking mongloid.

He's smart and knows how to manipulate. A lot of his ideas are seriously flawed (fuck man I'm always open for free trade to keep prices here low) but people like him because he's a political outsider and not Hillary.

>sometimes he tells the truth

Oh god...

No less corrupt than the other candidate, but since he hasn't worked in government before he gets a free pass.

Also, not diplomatic at all, which is a serious problem. He thinks he can strong-arm everything because that worked so well for...any president. He thinks being at the helm of a nuclear state, or maybe just a very economically powerful one, somehow means people will listen to your every whim even if it doesn't actually benefit them.

I have other gripes, but those are my main ones.

What does user think about this m.youtube.com/watch?v=od-eFEX06KY

That's a 0/10 troll attempt

You are talking about people who don't understand how the carbon cycle works. When billions of tons of carbon that were trapped for millions of years underground got released in just a couple of decades.

>He took both those positions during his current campaign
no he didn't, both those criticisms are based on tweets he made back in 2013

yeah well when you have shit like "I fucking love science" on normiebook you get people that take EVERYTHING science says as fact

Nevermind that scientific understanding of the universe has been relatively fluid since the start of history, but it's easy to look qualified and smart if you shit on creationists

Allowing SCOTUS to go full retard left is arguably worse than letting SCOTUS go full retard right.

With a right-leaning SCOTUS, all you can really guarantee is that nothing will change for the better (or for the worse).

With a left-leaning SCOTUS, all sorts of fucking things can change, and nobody will be able to do anything about it for the next 50 something years.

He has almost no real policy plans. He has little diplomatic experience, and he is unrestrained. Sadly, the only other choice we have is an evil, if not competent career politician, bitch. Please send help...

>believing in the cult of gravity

Aren't the current estimates giving us like 50 years until the permafrost starts melting and all the methane gets released into the atmosphere? Are you hyped to see the death of humanity in our lifetimes?

>Comparing apples with pears so obviously

fuck drumpf

If you believe in gravity because smart people say it's a thing why don't you believe in global warming?

If your an American worker and value labor or employment rights in the slightest you should never want a republican president. Not that Dems are much better or Americans really have any labor/employment rights left to take.

Yeah. The retards are now all pro science. Normie retards always copy smart people eventually, as best they can anyway (see how being a nerd is now 'cool' but real nerds never wore those stupid black rimmed glasses) but ruin everything in the process.

So you have all the peasants going to college and thinking they are intellectuals when the only reason they even have that degree is so the academia complex can scam a bunch of money off of them.

Harmless enough at first, but it makes it difficult to tell whether the person you are talking to actually knows what they are talking about or not. And when these fake credentials get you into jobs that kind of need smart people, you get the scientific equivalence of the modern media. You just parrot the press releases and think you are a journalist. Repeat the special interest funded studies and think you are a scientist. A doctor? Dont worry my cognitively challenged friend, the drug companies will tell you what pill to use :^)
Now just pay those student loans.

If Trump wins, he's not going to fulfill any of his promises and will no doubt be a disaster, and Cred Forums will turn on him the second it becomes apparent he's cheated his followers and is just another establishment shill.

If Trump loses, I get to see Cred Forums go nuclear and will enjoy raiding it along with the rest of the site, and it's very likely they will never recover from this election.

Either way, Cred Forums loses. And that's all that matters to me.

No, I'm not a misanthrope. Too bad that both the ultra right and the recessive left are a burden to solve the problem. The former because they prefer to deny scientific facts in order to suck the coal industry dick, and thus fill their pockets with money, and the latter because they're hippies who oppose nuclear energy.

>Either way, Cred Forums loses. And that's all that matters to me.
this

Although it'll still be more enjoyable if Hillary wins. Jesus, just think of all the shitposting and raiding that will happen.

If 'current estimates' were ever true then it wouldn't have snowed in the UK for the last 10 years. Though if the current estimates of the 70s were correct we would all be frozen to death after global cooling spiraled out of control.

One of these days a current estimate will turn out to be right, and we will all die, and it will be your fault for predicting doomsday a thousand times before and it never happening and people getting tired of listening to your sensational shit.

Yeah I'm sure you know way more than people with actual degrees and knowledge when all you do is watch anime and shitpost all day, you're so smart user.

I'm not really anti science, I think it's given us a somewhat accurate understanding of what's around us. It's just that so many people have ruined what science actually is
>calls actual nature science

Until she coughs to death and there will be another election

The green party being against nuclear power triggers me to no end, why would they be against the safest energy source with almost limitless potential? They're more interested in the """green""" ways of getting power that actually cost more carbon than they save because of the parts being shipped everywhere.

t. special and enlightened gentleman that can see through the joos lies (unlike 99.9999% of the sheep, normie, beta, degenerate, cucks).

Those scientists sure can fool everyone, but not you, no, no, because you are different, lets say, red pilled.

It's not untrue just because people said the world was ending without having all the info, it's a ridiculously complicated subject with a lot of variables, if you're abandoning it as a concept because of a few people being wrong then you should just off yourself now desu.

I think they are pro fusion just not fission. Still stupid but not totally against all forms of nuclear.

You mean like that antivax tweet he said near-verbatim in a debate just earlier this year?

Not to mention he's made plenty of insinuations on the falsehood of global warming in his campaign speeches. And his platform seems to skirt the issue entirely. Even if he doesn't think it's a Chinese conspiracy like he once tweeted (and I'd question the judgment of anyone who would believe that at any point), he's certainly encouraging people who do think so.

>With a left-leaning SCOTUS, all sorts of fucking things can change, and nobody will be able to do anything about it for the next 50 something years.

Hillary Clinton is making overturning Citizens United her litmus test for justices, which is what I want.

Thats how it is. Im not happy about it, but evidence can be seen in this very thread where im typing justifications and examples of things and you are just blowing them off with "things are actually exactly how i believe them to be, obviously, and anyone who questions that i will just insult, because i dont need a good argument, or even a bad argument, im right and justifications are too inconvenient :^)"

Its very clear when you see the tendency of millennials to make a bad argument, get that argument corrected, and then accuse the corrector of racism or something. Millennials dont think they actually need justification for their beliefs. They will pick up arguments that agree with their beliefs and use them with out even thinking about them, and if someone points out the argument is bullshit, they will just go "oh well, im still right"

If you were paying attention you will see that the medikit never actually flat out rejected climate change. He called it a religion. I elaborated on that by showing exactly how it was acting like a religion. Your response was to jump off a cliff. How academic of you :^)

The labor movement got killed long ago, before WWII, even. They've had some resurgences, but organized crime made sure it never really got too big, as well. I don't think a labor movement will ever be strong in America.

twitter.com/drjillstein/status/715230945679380481

twitter.com/drjillstein/status/764925841377746948

Jill sounds totally against it to me, I don't know why anyone would vote for her.

>implying
Nuclear energy is the most idiotic idea mankind has ever come up when talking energy sources. The costs never factor in waste storage which is a big problem (on Laguna Verde alone we've got thousands of tons of highly hazardous waste sitting around) our species will be burdened for the rest of it's existence with taking care of this issue.

This is obviating that nuclear plants can be operated with perfect safety (really the only acceptable standard) which the track record (Three Nile island, Chernobyl, Fukushima) disproves. Other than experimental reactors and the production of medically important radioisotopes we really should can this bs.

In Mexico we have one of the highest potentials in the world for use of solar, and it is on existental level urgency we start discussing pasive solar desalination plants in the north, we have no excuse to even consider nuclear.

Isn't there an arrest warrant out for Stein? Vandalism last I heard.

Not how America works, buddy. We have a line of succession within a term.

No, im calling the cult that has sprung up around it as dangerous. If anything if you really cared about the topic you would be just as much against the blind followers of it as i am. What ever the truth is its certainly not going to penetrate the clouds of belief they have accumulated over it.

She fucking won't. And she'll pass tpp shortly after. Total corperate shill.

The Green Party is for pseudo-environmentalists. That's why their platform (at least in America, and in many other countries, I think) mentions things about alternative medicine, opposes GMOs, and opposes nuclear power. A ton of individuals in the Greens also feed fuel to the antivax crowd, especially in the US.

Also, Jill Stein literally thinks wi-fi is dangerous for your health. And seems to think Europe bans it.

I agree. Labor is toast here. Shit will have to get really fucking bad for it to resurge.
Yikes. I'm all for building new ones and decommissioning old ones but nuclear power is very important and I would prefer 1000 nuclear plants to a single fucking coal fired plant.

>because i dont need a good argument, or even a bad argument, im right and justifications are too inconvenient :^)"
Isn't this exactly what you're doing when you go against the entire scientific community for no reason other than to be a contrarian?

>Its very clear when you see the tendency of millennials to make a bad argument, get that argument corrected, and then accuse the corrector of racism or something. Millennials dont think they actually need justification for their beliefs. They will pick up arguments that agree with their beliefs and use them with out even thinking about them, and if someone points out the argument is bullshit, they will just go "oh well, im still right"

>Implying you're not a millennial
loser

>If you were paying attention you will see that the medikit never actually flat out rejected climate change. He called it a religion.
He called it a meme too.

>I elaborated on that by showing exactly how it was acting like a religion.
People vehemently defending something that could very well lead to the death of humanity is a religion? Okay kid.

You mean she won't nominate a judge that'll overturn the very case she lost?

No. It's a trespassing charge from ND for the lady from democracy now.

Is there a lot of talk about how climate change is affecting/going to affect mexico?

Name a scientist that claims global warming is caused exclusively by humans and that the American president is the only one who can prevent it. Bill nye the science skype is not a scientist, he's just an old celebrity sack of shit.

The funny thing is, America was probably at the forefront of the labor movement, or alongside some other countries in starting it. An event in Chicago is what started the May 1st Labor Day. The establishment, the aristocracy was quick to quell it here, though.

I know. Form what I've heard the US government was particularly brutal when it came to strike breaking.

>Nuclear energy is the most idiotic idea mankind has ever come up when talking energy sources.
????

>The costs never factor in waste storage which is a big problem
It's barely a problem at all, do you have any sources that state it's a problem? In 4 decades of the nuclear industry the amount of waste only takes up the size of a football field.

>our species will be burdened for the rest of it's existence with taking care of this issue.
For the rest of our existence? There's a bunch of ways we could dispose of it, there's even the possibility of reusing almost all of it in special reactors.

>This is obviating that nuclear plants can be operated with perfect safety (really the only acceptable standard) which the track record (Three Nile island, Chernobyl, Fukushima) disproves.
Even with these catastrophes I'm pretty sure it's still the safest power source there is, it even beats solar.
And Fukushima happened because the safety features were only rated for level 6? magnitude earthquakes, it was an extremely rare event.

>the entire scientific community
Im going to focus on this right here. This is false. You need to understand why this is false, but more importantly, you need to understand why even though this is false, everyone thinks its true.

This whole meme started with the '97% agree' meme. This was first spoken by obama in some speech. Everyone grabbed on to this number and ran with it neglecting to really bother to know where it came from or whether it was actually true or not.

Where it came from was from a study of studies. Essentially someone looking at a bunch of studies and then reporting on it.

There is a fundamental misrepresentation going on here however. What this number comes from, is that 97% of studies whos purpose was to determine the degree of man-made contribution to global climate change, found a degree of change caused by man.

So there is something you need to look at here. Firstly, all the studies started with the assumption that there was man man climate change. Their purpose was to try and measure it. Of those 3% actually concluded there wasnt any.
Secondly, that 97% does not factor in all the studies that assert there is no problem at all to start with, or which concluded that there was not enough information to make an accurate judgement at the time (this alone was a percent somewhere in the 30s)

So in reality, what that 97% of scientists agree REALLY meant, was that 97% of studies done by scientists convinced there was man made climate change showed that there was man made climate change.

There are two problems here. The first should be obvious; In science you try to disprove things, not prove things. The second is that its making what turns out to be a slight majority sound like almost everyone.

In later years this number was increased to 98, and then 99, and even something like "99.5'. There was no basis for this. It was just self serving inflation that sounded reasonable to fit the narative of 'people coming around'.

Why would I be against blind followers of something that's a force for good? Even if global warming is just a huge meme it's causing people to become more self sufficient and use less electricity and fuel.

Might start WW3 despite the fact that the democrats and hillary switched places with republican neocons this election cycle when it comes to warmongering sabre rattling against russia.

I dont understand it.

There is a second problem ill briefly point out, which is that a lot of published scientific research is flat out wrong. This is an aknowledged problem within the scientific community and if you havnt heard about it you can just google it. here was some articles that cover it. But the tl;dr is that in order to be published you need interesting results, and boring old things like corrections or reproduction studies just dont make it into journals anymore, because money.

journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/08/27/trouble-in-science-massive-effort-to-reproduce-100-experimental-results-succeeds-only-36-times/

In 2013, a study conducted by NASA found that nuclear energy has prevented around 1.8 million deaths. Even if you include the death tolls from Chernobyl and Fukushima, nuclear energy ranks last in death per energy unit produced. And while nuclear waste is really toxic, it’s usually stored somewhere, while the toxic byproducts of fossil fuels are pumped into the air we breathe every day. Just by reducing the amount of fossil fuels burned, countless cases of cancer or lung disease and accidents in coal mines have been avoided. Even in the best-case scenario, it would take at least forty years to switch to 100%-renewable energy, I repeat, best-case scenario. For as long as we continue using fossil fuels, nuclear energy will save way more lives than it destroys.
Since 1976, about 64 gigatons of greenhouse gas emissions have not been pumped out thanks to nuclear energy. And by the mid-21st century, that could amount to an additional 80–240 gigatons.
Humanity’s energy consumption is rising steadily. According to US government projections, China alone will add the equivalent of a new 600-MW coal plant every 10 days for the next 10 years. China already burns 4 billion tons of coal each year. Coal is cheap, relatively abundant, and easy to get to so it’s not likely that we will stop using it soon.
Nuclear energy pretty much is the only way of dampening the effects of climate change
Even if it is a good idea to quit nuclear energy long-term, it IS the best solution for the next hundred years or so, compared to the alternatives.

CONT

>colorado solid blue
>georgia light blue
I've got bad news for you, shill-pai

Plus, there are new technologies. The nuclear reactors we’ve used so far are mostly outdated technology, because nuclear innovation stopped in the 1970s.
There are models, like the thorium reactor, that could solve the problem altogether.
Thorium is abundant, really hard to turn into nuclear weapons, and up to two orders of magnitude less wasteful than current nuclear reactors. The waste material might also be only dangerous for a few hundred years, in contrast to a couple of thousand years, (and thousands of years in Earth years is nothing). 1 ton of thorium is estimated to provide the same amount of energy as 200 tons of uranium or 3.5 million tons of coal.

Solar and wind energy harvesting methods are simply inefficient as of today, and they don’t seem to be improving that much despite all the funding they get.

Did you come from /x/?

>bern victims on Cred Forums
how have you not killed yourself yet?
No he doesn't.

I'd rather believe NASA than a bunch of losers tbqh.

climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

...

I would like to see that scientific evidence.

Honestly the worst thing about Trump is that he is willing to completely destroy the environment for short term economic benefits. He wants to bring back the Keystone pipeline and increase coal production out of Kentucky as some examples.

It baffles me how people want to make a dollar off of ruining America's nature. The natural beauty of this country is the only aspect that we can confidently claim to be number 1 in.

>my nazi book is scientific proof!

kay...

If you actually wanted to see it you'd go ask Cred Forums.

I'm sure you could get a thread with several hundred replies if you told people to redpill you on science and race IQ stats.

There's also studies that link racism and low IQ, doesn't mean there's an ounce of truth.

WE LOVE WHITE SKIN & GOOD TRADE DEALS

Im an environmentalist. I was all on board the 'no polution, smogs bad' bandwagon. Im all for alternative energy just because we should be saving our fossile fules for plastics or for when we really need the compact high energy fuel source it provides. Parts of the world where we cant have an electric grid for example.

I also fully accept that mans actions can and have effected the environment and by extension the climate. Im not convinced we have sparked off a doomsday scenario, in that regard anyway. We are far more likly to ultimate fuck ourselves over through overfishing and polluting the oceans. Im legitimately concerned about that. Next would be deforestation. I dont really think co2 emissions are that big a deal in the big picture compared to other things. I think the only reason it took off was carbon credits. Its always money with the politicians, and when many of the global warming supporters are board members and own stocks in 'green companies', many of which are just scams to make money off government subsidies and dont even really accomplish much, what reasonable person trusts the entire lot of them?

Im against a bad argument because bad arguments and misrepresentations ultimately hurt whatever their cause is.

Im a huge fan of pop sci but i realize its purpose is for casual dinner table conversation and stimulating the imagination, and global warming is basically pop sci. I mean you have mr pop sci himself, bill nye, acting as an authority on the subject.

It is annoying when people who dont know about things act like they have authority on them. Its fine to muse and discuss as long as you realize your limitations and dont just bullheadedly say "im right because i dont know why im right but so and so said so so its true!"

Skepticism of everything.
One of the problems ive identified amongst people is that a majority dont seem to be able to hold things as degrees of probability. They just want to say things are either true or false.

AHAHAHAHAHA

Are you being serious?

Now please, link me to those peer reviewed studies.

>if I dont believe in it, it isn't true
It's pretty hilarious how you act exactly like climate change deniers when it comes to science you personally don't agree with.

Choke on a dick, niggers.

NAFTA FUCKED US

:DDDD

He apparently doesn't understand what the president can and cannot do, meaning that he doesn't understand the basics of the position he's running for. To be fair, Clinton has the same issue.

>handfeed me
Why bother when it's apparent you won't change your mind no matter what? If you actually wanted to know if you were right or wrong, you'd google it yourself instead of asking strangers to handfeed you on a mongolian fishing forum.

The truth is that you don't want to know the truth.

NO MOTE TRADE DEALS

UNION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Billy Clinton killed that.

Given how the last president has made it clear that the president can abuse executive actions in order to ignore congress and the senate, they're both actually more right than you'd think.

Which is pretty scary. I'm sure that the only reason the republicans didn't stop the chimp in chief from doing whatever he wanted with executive actions is because they know that the second 'they' get into office, they can do the same damn thing.

I'm asking you right here and right now to show me the peer reviewed studies. I haven't said anything else. If you can't stand behind your "facts supported by science", then your opinion is worthless.

Thorium is not an argument without a working prototype dude. And like I said we've got solar potential to meet our energy requirements altogether on just that if we invested in it. Your NASA study is disngenous as it does not account for the hazards of storing nuclear waste for THOUSANDS of years, this isn't the 1960's for the "just find a hole deep enough" solution to be plausible, we now know not only do we need to store in conditions that can be safely monitored but where the stockpiles remain accesible, eg how are you going to deal with corroding containers? It takes a lot of expense to build mostly automated facilities in which the hardware (including complex machinery like forklifts or robotic arms) is getting contaminated in such a way it needs to be stored itself.

Like most nuclear advocates you've bought on to a rosy lie and are not looking at the real long term costs and potential dangers. Storage means concentrating residue aka there's a good chance it could get liberated on some accident, as simple as containment pools cracking on "hot" waste. You need to recirculate air and water and fucking take care of even dust. It's a nightmare and fucking making it convenent for present generatyions to leave such a huge fucking problem for the future is beyond idiotic.

Esentially is an overnegineered solution to a non existing problem, at least for us, when we have plenty of fucking solar available.

There's a pretty big difference between something that's pretty much completely accepted as truth both by the majority of people and the vast majority of government and government agencies and meme studies that you won't even link so we can't fucking see their methods or anything.

T\\rump will stab in it's throat an elect two Scalia's to the Supreme court, but he won't sign the TPP

>muh mustard race!
It's about society, not genetics you dumb retard.
If you raise a monkey among humans he'll behave more civilized than savage monkesy, and even see other ot it's own kind as different.

If you raise a black kid in a white neighborhood and give him good education he'll most likely behave well.

I like how you ignore europe has a lot of people that is white and poor as shit.

>but slavs are not white!! Well they have white skin and blue eyes, but they ARE NOT WHITE because... reasons!!!

This is how retard you look

All Hillary has to do, is make this a Supreme court election not sign TPP deal.

>can abuse executive actions
In his first term obama signed an executive order to close guantanimo bay

its executive order 13492

guantanimo bay is still open

The president does nothing with out support

I do stand behind them, I'm simply not going to waste my time. I could copy paste it from a notepad file I have that contains lots of links I've gathered from various searches I myself did, but I won't. Do you know why? It's because I already know exactly what your likely response will be. In order of most likely to least likely.

1) You'll flip through the first few of them before finding a single line in one of my links, ignore the context, and then copy paste it in an attempt to show that I am "wrong" despite that not being the case.
2) Find a link with a source you don't like, claim that invalidates the work, and then act like a retard.
3) Stop replying entirely, and not read any of them anyways because you were never interested in the truth, only in acting like an obnoxious faggot.

google.com
^ There, go wild. I'm sure you can think of the appropriate search terms yourself.

Whenever people talk about the constitutionality of executive actions and "checks and balances" on the office of president regarded TRUMP it really grinds my gears because it's totally disingenuous horseshit. Maybe 15 years ago. But it's been 8 years of Bush and 8 years of Obama.

>Im not convinced we have sparked off a doomsday scenario, in that regard anyway.
We haven't yet, apparently if the temperature rises another 2-3 degrees the permafrost will start thawing though, then we're truly fucked.

>We are far more likly to ultimate fuck ourselves over through overfishing and polluting the oceans.
Climate change is tied to the declining health of the oceans, rising temperatures and acidity due to the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is fucking up ecosystems.

>Next would be deforestation.
Apart from rainforests this isn't an issue at all, we're planting way way way more trees than we're cutting down thanks to the logging industry caring about long term profits and sustainability.

> I think the only reason it took off was carbon credits. Its always money with the politicians, and when many of the global warming supporters are board members and own stocks in 'green companies'
You really think green companies have enough money to bribe politicans over oil and coal companies which are a fuckton richer? If it were truly about corruption there'd be way more global warming deniers.

Seems simple. She signing that TPP deal, so will Trump.

Goodbye evrey little last little non retail job we had.

>everything I don't like is a meme
Again, you sound exactly like the people you're making fun of.
>I DONT BELIEVE IN IT SO IT ISNT REAL
Wew.
No, it's about genetics, which determines society - you retard.
>If you raise a black kid in a white neighborhood and give him good education he'll most likely behave well.
What are you basing that on? Because the few studies on trans racial adoptions show the exact opposite.
>I like how you ignore europe has a lot of people that is white and poor as shit.
Where did I ignore it? I'd rather live in Romania than any nigger shithole any day of the week. Poor > Poor, dumb and violent.

>n-no u

Are you really talking about us not having the technology now when you're also saying it'll be around for thousands of years?

read this post you nerd

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, not that the study is a huge meme that you won't even link because you know we'll find out instantly that it's massively flawed.

>No, it's about genetics, which determines society - you retard
Society actually gets determined by way more factors. Hell even genetics get determined by environment.

Climate change is real but humanity deserves it desu.
>inb4 edgy
I know.

Good news is.. with a bit of child labor, Vietnam produces some quality 80" HDTV on the dollar?

Why do you think Trump will sign TPP? Clinton will sing it for sure, like absolutely 110% sure will sign it and it's a blatant, shameless vote-grabbing lie that she claims that she won't that the media is going along with full well knowing that it is a lie, but why do you think Trump will?

What study are you talking about?
>we'll find out instantly that it's massively flawed
This is why you will remain ignorant. You automatically assume that anything you disagree with is flawed, biased, or isn't true.

Ironically exactly like people against the notion of climate change do when you confront them with your studies. Yet you can't see that you're just looking in the mirror.

Funny how that works.
I wouldn't say it's entirely genetic.

Just mostly.

Genetics make significant variations, but when it comes of intelligence is more complicated. It is proven the DNA is not as static as you think, and the enviroment plays a huge roll of brain development.

Yeah, having dark skin and a big nose may make you run faster, but the brain is way more complicated and it's development it's not determined 100% about genetics.

THIS ELECTION BOILS DOWN TO THIS

You down wit TPP?

They both are & they both will.

>This is why you will remain ignorant.
We'll remain ignorant forever unless you link us the study you dreg.

>You automatically assume that anything you disagree with is flawed, biased, or isn't true.
I automatically assume that if you're so reluctant to link the study it must be so bad you don't want to get laughed at.

>Ironically exactly like people against the notion of climate change do when you confront them with your studies. Yet you can't see that you're just looking in the mirror.
Except climate change people actually link the studies and the studies are reputable, peer reviewed, and government backed.

LINK THE STUDY YOU DOLT

Trump isn't though. He's really against it it. He hates those foreign trade deals and he actually wants to put up a bunch of tariffs.

Doesn't matter who is elected Goldman Sachs always wins.

Who gives a shit that he denies global warming? Whether or not it's a real thing doesn't matter, what matters is the agenda that is always pushed with it which Trump is absolutely correct about. Look at any "climate deal" that gets brought up and it's always the same thing, the United States must make cuts to industry and oil consumption but Europe and Asia a can increase theirs. You can't argue that that part isn't a plot by the EU and China to harm the United States and give themselves an advantage.

So you give are jobs away & build machines that can take our jobs?

I don't want to have to pick fruit like a Mexican.

Why did the unions die in America?

>You can't argue that that part isn't a plot by the EU and China to harm the United States and give themselves an advantage.
What? Europe is going wild over climate change and China is so fucked up with pollution you need to wear an air filter mask in the bigger cities.

>100% genetics
No, it's probably around ~75-80%, the amount of heritability for the IQ of adults.
>Evolution stops at the neck.
Again, you need to read more. Liberal creationists are worse than religious creationists.
>the study
There are lots. Feel free to look them up. I already explained why I won't post them, and you're just proving me right by sperging out. If you were interested in whether or not you were right or wrong, you would look the information up yourself.

You are a fucking retard. USA has to make cuts because your per capita emission is huge. You are probably whining about Chinks still having less per capita emission than you and being harder to negotiate with getting some imaginary handicap.

And fuck off from Europe. Germany and France are light years ahead of USA with their nuclear and renewable energy sources.

Nigger, we about to WWIII this shit!

We all lose.

>You really think green companies have enough money to bribe politicans
No, as i said, the politicians have stock and are on the boards of those companies. I think it was their attempt to make those companies they were involved in get more profitable.

Another example is that paris climate agreement which had absolutely nothing to do with the climate and was about sending money to africa. And whos NGOs and foundations do you think profit from that? The same politicians who are involved in it.

But slap 'climate' on it, and there you go, its hereby sacrosanct, has the seal of approval of his high holiness gore himself. If you oppose it, or even question it.. you are a climate denier! DEEENIIIERRR!

...

Governments don't care about global warming. It's all about energy and economy. Most countries in Europe don't have their own oil and natural gas resources.

>Why did the unions die in America?
They we're under constant attack from the moment they formed. Red scare and eventually Reagan and Clinton drove a steak though organized labors heart.

Maybe Argentina.

They may win.

Still NOT white.

*enough of their own

Life has been existing in this planet for 4.1 billion years. Even if we went to nuclear war and we destroyed as much as we could, including ourselves, life WILL continue no matter what. Thousands of years is absolutelly nothing even in the worst case scenario, (and earth has already seen worse than our worse case scenario. Several times). In less than a million years everything would be back to normal. And no, I am not advocating for the destroying of species and ecosystems, but no, thousands is not an impressive number.

Now, you are also ignoring the fact that Solar energy is not sustainable, not because the sun does not produce enough energy, but because, as of today, we can't pick up enough of it. In the best-case scenario, it could only produce 27% of the energy by 2050. We don't have that much time if you want to stop coal pollution. Solar power plants require large amounts of land, and it actually varies a lot depending on the day.

>Your NASA study is disngenous as it does not account for the hazards of storing nuclear waste for THOUSANDS of years

It does. And that's why Nuclear energy is only being considered as a bridge between coal/oil and 100% renewable energies.

I'm sorry, but nuclear is the best option we have right now. You can't shift from coal to solar in just a couple of decades, you just can't. And while you don't, coal keeps destroying the enviorment several times more than Nuclear has ever done.

>into_the_trash.jpg

Why can't workers work together?

It's the answer to ourselves.

I love Sam Walton, but they took his name for ransom.

Weren't there a lot of protest around the convention?

>You really think green companies have enough money to bribe politicans over oil and coal companies which are a fuckton richer? If it were truly about corruption there'd be way more global warming deniers.

Yes I think the "green economy" is massive and growing incredibly quickly. I think they emphasize greenhouse gas emissions and downplay other forms of pollution and environmental degradation that green technology produces. It's something they can do because they've only established themselves a small amount.

You can look at the criticism China receives for it's major alt-energy projects to see the fact that there is not such thing as a zero-impact energy source.

Why do you even discuss this seriously. Not to mention violating WTO agreements (and I assume NAFTA) it's bad politics. If elected Trump won't fuck up US trade for dumb meme policy. Why do people seriously believe him?

>I am right but I won't show any valid proof of it, just google it or whatever

>has to
Don't kid yourself you stupid faggot, we don't have to do anything.

If we can without harming our economy, we might. If we thought it would overly harm us we'd just act like china and tell you to eat a dick and you literally couldn't do a thing about it.

Oh no not WTO agreements and NAFTA

Build the wall and make Mexico pay for it.

It's like looking into a mirror isn't it?

Here's your gold star for effort.

I dont think trump will build a wall.

I do think he could make mexico pay for it if he did, however.

The day I pay 300$ for a Vertua goggles form Laos...

>No, as i said, the politicians have stock and are on the boards of those companies.
Sorry, it's 4AM.

>I think it was their attempt to make those companies they were involved in get more profitable.
I think that if they were looking to be corrupt like this they would've been able to make a lot more money by just getting in contact with standard industries and working to prevent climate change awareness.

>Another example is that paris climate agreement which had absolutely nothing to do with the climate and was about sending money to africa.
What? The part about Africa wasn't part of the Paris agreement and it isn't legally binding, and as far as I remember it was about helping African countries minimise their carbon footprint as they develop.

>it's bad politics
If he gets elected it's actually great politics.
>wont fuck up US trade
The point is to unfuck it, by getting rid of NAFTA and telling the WTO to get fucked if they're hurting us more than they're helping.

>helping African countries minimise their carbon footprint as they develop.

Sounds expensive. Especially given the corruption in africa. Actually sounds more like a bottomless pit.

Wed do better to just give africa to china then take it over during the next global apocalypse.

>Oh no not WTO agreements and NAFTA

>What is realpolitik

Are all Americans retarded, or just the ones on Cred Forums? Do you actually think congress will ever debate withdrawing from WTO and NAFTA just so you can tariff Mexico for the meme wall? How are people this gullible?

>antivaxxer

Not really true. His hobby before running for president was saying stupid shit on twitter for attention. He would hint that he believed crazy stuff he didn't really believe. That's also one of the reasons he has so many famous people in the media who genuinely hate him. He would just call people names.

So, you think what he says on his website is going to work?

White people have officially lost their minds

People here, especially Cred Forumsshits, just like being contrarian.

According to Wikipedia the Green Climate Fund uses "Thematic funding windows" which I assume are little goals that they place that need to be reached before they give funding.

Coal is still plentiful in Europe and even if you don't have your own natural resources (oh wait Norway, UK, and probably a couple other countries) it's still profitable to commit yourself to various emission methods. Polish electricity is mostly still just coal for example.

You are just making excuses and putting bold claims of conspiracies wherever you can without any proof, and in addition you would probably want mountains of evidence that those things don't happen.

It's the job of politicians to lie; do you fault him for being shameless about it?

he literally said vaccines cause autism

I don't know how obviously retarded he has to be to get you faggots to vote against him

Do you even understand how populism works?
>haha do you actually think parliament will ever debate withdrawing from the EU
>haha do you ever think the Philippines will actually allow a president to make police carry out extra-judicial murder in a war against drug barons
>haha do you ever think that the iran parliament will allow Mosaddegh to nationalize British oil wells

You try to make me look like a fool, when it's you that wants your country to keep economically and socially isolated for a globalized world and think It will work. kek

The only mind to give.

We transcended you once we decided winter was cold, let's adapt.

White man the one that took it there...

How is nuclear waste safer than solar (which kills... nearby birds)?

Hillary Clinton also literally said this.

>talking to white people
>WE HAVE TO STOP THE, UH, MEXICAN? FROM COMING OVER THE BORDER. THE SYRIA MUST ALSO BE STOPPED. LETTUCE GIVE ISRAEL MORE MONEY M'KAY?
>okay
>BUT RUSSIA IS BAD BUT GOOD TOO BECAUSE THEY EXPOSE HITLERY KLANTON. I AM WONDERING WHAT THE BLACK PEOPLE ARE UP TO. MAKE COAL GREAT AGAIN.
>p-please back away from me
>COAL GOOD? NO, COAL GREAT. WE WILL SAVE APPALACHIA. BUILD THE WALL AND DEFEAT JAPAN. JAPAN AND RUSSIA WILL BE DEFEATED. AND POLAND TOO.
>please let go of me, PLEASEEEEEEE
>MAKE COAL GREAT. MAKE COAL GREAT. MAKE COAL GREAT! MAKE COAL GREAT!
>okay OKAY PLEASE JUST STOP. GET OFF ME

Ill give you that, since its white people who started this entire politically correct fiasco to start with.

Trump can fix it.

Its basically office space. As long as he gets the decimal palcement right mexico will slowly pay for it and nobody will notice it.

Also I don't "vote against" anybody because I'm not a cuck. I vote for whoever I think should be president.

What I'm saying is, big dick black man is home base,

Be proud of cousin white/asian man for adventure.

I got vaccinated
I became autistic
Im now voting for trump

its the circle of life :^)

I said nuclear was safer, not nuclear waste.
Nuclear waste probably is safer though.

Well he'd have to do something like blame white people for nigger crime (hillary). Or maybe even something like "Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs." when talking about the economy.

Or perhaps one of my favorites from Hillary - "No. We just can't trust the American people to make those types of choices ... Government has to make those choices for people."

sounds like democracy

>democracy is bad
i agree, which is why its a good thing we are a representative republic and the constitution will protect us from straight mob rule

Couldn't be bothered to quote all the post but jesus christ you fuckers are fucking retarded hahahah

Even the fucking 3rd world Mexican is smarter than you, what a joke
USA is an embarrassment to the western world

>blame white people for nigger crime
Not scientifically disproved as much as the other thing was.
>Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs
100% normal if it's another episode of failed trickle-down economic ideas. Jobs aren't entirely about corporations and big businesses.
>No. We just can't trust the American people to make those types of choices ... Government has to make those choices for people.
Do you literally referendum every single thing and not leave important shit to experts in given fields?

>You try to make me look like a fool
You're doing that just fine on your own
>GLOBALIZATION IS INEVITABLE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Stay on your containment website, spic.

>h-heretics!

Many white Americans are insanely stupid. The US has more in common with Brazil than it does Canada or Australia.

Why does that user need to read a post that contains no value?

We keep burying exhausted isotopes in patches of the ground with Keep Out signs yet assume they will remain contaminated through the next ice age and beyond

If we could catapult it into the sun, then fine, but we can't. Dumping waste into the earth doesn't mean we've solved the problem.

I wish nuclear was a safe energy solution but it's not.

>and the constitution will save us
Lel. The constitution has been shit on by every supreme court since the justices figured out they could 'interpret' it to say what they wanted it to say when making a decision.
>a republic will protect us from straight mob role!
Only until the mob gets big enough :^)
Look at who he was replying to, shill. If you're comparing retarded as fuck statements and lying then there's little difference between trump, hillary, and most politicians.

Literally any other flag could have made that point, but coming from sweden of all places is fucking rich. You already lost your place in the western world

Are you okay? You should call medical services if you're not feeling okay

>Globalization isn't inevitable
Technology is one way street and in today's world you need to erect barriers if you want to stop flow of information and products while 500 years earlier just a bit of ocean did fine.

Look at all those successful isolationist countries like Best Korea
>Look at who he was replying to, shill. If you're comparing retarded as fuck statements and lying then there's little difference between trump, hillary, and most politicians.
I think your problem is that you put a couple of statements by Hillary that disagree with your viewpoint against a couple of statements from Trump that disagree with facts.
>It's another episode of I have opinion on science fuck actual facts

>being a mad as fuck swedecuck.

Why because they are like 5% non white? Where 40%+

What exactly is so bad about putting something in a box for eternity? The amount of space nuclear waste takes up is absolutely minuscule. We can't go back in technology and go with less efficient options because people are scared of the what ifs that'll only happen if governments suddenly decide the 20 tons per plant annually is too much hassle even though it's absolutely nothing?

Pretty much all countries you want to apply that statement to are better places to live in and more white than USA.

Unless USA becomes North Korea I wanna see that shit.

Just look at history and tell me one single civilization that succeded on their own until know and it's not shit

Literally asked in a briefing "Why can't we just use nuclear weapons?" (in reference to countering ISIS).

*now

Why isn't there a "nobody" option?

Nuclear waste, a necessary bi product of extracting energy from nuclear fission, cannot be removed from the environment.

How is Nuclear power (with its necessary bi product of radioactive waste) safer than Solar power?

That's not even close to true. The ONLY thing he was successfully at was real estate development. And even then, he has massively underperformed the market in terms of rate of generating wealth.

Being a birther even after being proven wrong on multiple occasions.

let me ask you a fucking question

when Al-Assad detonated the nuke in CoD 4, did OpFor continue to exist? No, I didn't THINK so

You have a lot of places you can dump it x metres underground and it doesn't just magically give cancer to everyone in 20km proximity even if someone suddenly decides to dig it up.

Nuclear waste can be fed back into a reactor of a modern and proper design and is in no way required to be stored long term.

Exploring every possibility is the sign of a good leader

leld

>He comes across worse but might actually have a few shreds of humanity left.

>a rich fuck who got millions of dollars from daddy?
>has absolutely no knowledge of the shitty quality of life millions of Americans endure everyday
>somehow people think hes sympathetic to the "lower classes" who have done all but wipe his ass his entire life.

But he is fucking orange. Seriousy? He is dumb and orange. Really dumb.

No it's not. He also literally didn't know what "no first use" menat.

>you have to meet my specific criteria to be considered isolationist
That's not how it works.

Also both of them lie about actual facts constantly. I'm sorry, you just can't make a comparison between the two and say that one is better than the other in that regard.

>Nuclear waste, a necessary bi product of extracting energy from nuclear fission, cannot be removed from the environment.
Why does that matter? The amount is so tiny it's not an issue at all, it's really the most petty thing possible to bring up when it's so ridiculously minor.

>How is Nuclear power (with its necessary bi product of radioactive waste) safer than Solar power?

The deaths per trillion kWh for rooftop solar is 440

The deaths per trillion kWh for global nuclear energy is fucking 90

The deaths per trillion kWh for glorious American nuclear power is a ridiculous 0.01.

Ok, dude, that life could survive in some isoalted biome like thermal vents something like nuclear armagedon doesn't mean it's back to business in a million years, and even then, who the fuck cares when we are talking existential threats to OUR biome and species? I'm talking specifically Mexico which also has geothermal and eolic sources investing on which can probably be handled in more manageable projects than the lump sums required to get nuclear started. We are not going to shift away from coal with current levels of consumption anyway. And yes thousands of years is an impressive number when it comes to human scale, it is an enormous burden imposed by myopic dumb fucks married to a pipedream magic bullet solution and who argue for social inertia as a pretense on which to peddle their own agendas. No, NASA is not accounting for the costs of thousands f years worth of storage of nuclear waste, it would be imposible to present nuclear as anything close to cost effective on such a scenario.

"Let's burden humanity for hundreds of generations so that we can close the gap on a few decades worth of switching over at minimal inconvenience" Americans don't give a fuck, get it through your thick skull, it's 5% of the global population consuming a quarter of all resources and claiming they're losing on trade because they won't give up their fucked up lifestyles no matter what. That's what they have guns to protect, their fucking selfish "interests"

Stop drinking the fucking kool aid, it's millions of hectares of rainforests disapearing so palm oil can be produced in enough quantities to produce everything from "all natural" mositurizers to fucking nacho cheese for them, it's thousands fucking enslaved in South East Asia so they can have cheap shrimp at the added cost of a near unavoidable large scale extinction event on the world's oceans, it's children in South Asia fucking losing their lives as indentured servants sop they can have cheap clothes for CONT

Nuclear power is not unsafe but is it safer than solar power? No

That being said nuclear power is a must in aany developed nation because the only energy sources that comes even close to producing the same amount of energy is bad for the environment

The current storage methods are to dump it in a hole and cover it with cement
Which is fine if earthquakes weren't a thing
To be fair, I am sure there are nuclear dump sites that will go untouched for many (hundreds? thousands?) of years

The waste itself will remain active and harmful longer than our current civilization, and if it gets into a water table, that could cause a lot of problems. But who knows, maybe that will trigger interesting changes in the environment and accelerate some other kinds of life.

For now, it's also a question of the operators of nuclear plants not fucking up (Chernobyl, 3 mile) or being struck by a catastrophe (Fukushima), and human error is probably not going away any time soon

Hopefully there will be gains in this area, because it is quite efficient. But I think solar will outpace it until we develop stable fusion reactors.

the released birth certificate has the modern name of the hospital on it, not the name the hospital had when he was allegedly born there.

That he did not release it right away when asked to quickly dismiss the whole thing before it even became a big deal is evidence there is something fishy about it.

Lots of suspect things about obama, such as the fact he was sworn into office twice, once publically, once privately. Many people think there are two obamas.

Maybe the real birth certificate confirms there are twins? hmm, i just thought of that!

>being isolationist means being north korea
>you cant JUST pull out of CERTAIN trade agreements, you have to go FULL ISOLATIONIST OR NOT AT ALL
Life must be hard for you, given how stupid you are.

Everyone lies, it's just about quantity and quality of lies and what those lies cause.

a politician has to be a sociopath to get beyond the local government level.

Geneticist, Alan R. Templeton argues that the question about the possible genetic effects on the test score gap is muddled by the general focus on "race" rather than on populations defined by gene frequency or by geographical proximity, and by the general insistence on phrasing the question in terms of heritability. Templeton points out that racial groups neither represent sub-species nor distinct evolutionary lineages, and that therefore there is no basis for making claims about the general intelligence of races. From this point of view the search for possible genetic influences on the black-white test score gap is a priori flawed, because there is no genetic material shared by all Africans or by all Europeans.

Intelligence is a polygenic trait. This means that intelligence is under the influence of several genes, possibly several thousand. The effect of most individual genetic variants on intelligence is thought to be very small, well below 1% of the variance in g. Current studies using quantitative trait loci have yielded little success in the search for genes influencing intelligence.

A review of candidate genes for intelligence published in Deary, Johnson & Houlihan (2009) failed to find evidence of an association between these genes and general intelligence, stating "there is still almost no replicated evidence concerning the individual genes, which have variants that contribute to intelligence differences".

The 2012 review by the Nisbett et al. (2012) concluded that "Almost no genetic polymorphisms have been discovered that are consistently associated with variation in IQ in the normal range".

CONT

>If Trump wins, he's not going to fulfill any of his promises and will no doubt be a disaster
lets not forget he's driven potential congressional supporters away with all the dumb shit he's done and the media as a whole hates him.

If trump wins i can't wait to see how the presidency slowly sucks the life from him.

>getting mad at trump for something hillary started
Thanks for Correcting the Record. $0.34 has been deposited into your account.

All it does is confirm that you're the product of multi-generational incest.

.. From falling off roofs installing solar power? Lol

CONT

Nisbett and colleagues (2012) consider the entire IQ gap to be explained by the environmental factors that have thus far been demonstrated to influence it, and Mackintosh does not find this view to be unreasonable.

However, since high heritability is simply a correlation between traits and genes, it does not describe the causes of heritability which in humans can be either genetic or environmental. Therefore, a high heritability measure does not imply that a trait is genetic or unchangeable, however, as environmental factors that affect all group members equally will not be measured by heritability and the heritability of a trait may also change over time in response to changes in the distribution of genes and environmental factors. High heritability also doesn't imply that all of the heritability is genetically determined, but can also be due to environmental differences that affect only a certain genetically defined group (indirect heritability).

Jensen argued that given the high heritability of IQ one way that the IQ gap could be explained as caused by the environment would be if it could be shown that all blacks were subject to a single "x-factor" which affected no white populations while affecting all black populations equally. Flynn's discovery of the Flynn effect showed that in spite of high heritability environmental factors could cause considerable disparities in IQ between generations of the same population, showing that the existence of such an x-factor was not only possible but real.

CONT

Too bad it has been proven dozens of times that Clinton didn't personally start it and that nobody on her campaign staff ran with it.

Just kill yourself.

CONT every one of four fucking seasons. And you want to buy the tripe on nuclear? Fuck off, what you want is their lifestyle and then blame the "hippies" for the world going to shit because sustainable living aka sacrifice and hard work is the one thing you won't do. There's no working safe standard for nuclear storage today, no real beyond decades solution but you wanna keep on this path without solid arguments because you read some pundit somewhere tell you it's the easy way out. Pinche malinchista edgy de mierda, tenemos un problema muy grave en las manos y tu solución es mamarsela a los gringos?

>The current storage methods are to dump it in a hole and cover it with cement
Proofs?

Do you really think 20 tons per plant is so much that they can't store it properly? I'm not sure what the most popular method is now but back when I read about it it was to melt the nuclear waste with glass, shove it into a steel tube, and bury it underground.

it wont really. yeah the resorts will get flooded but the majority of the country is protected by the who mountain ranges their are on both coasts

Today researchers such as Hunt (2010), Nisbett et al. (2012) and Mackintosh (2011) consider that rather than a single factor accounting for the entire gap, probably many different environmental factors differ systematically between the environments of White and Black people converge to create part of the gap and perhaps all of it. They argue that it does not make sense to talk about a single universal heritability figure for IQ, rather, they state, heritability of IQ varies between and within groups. They point specifically to studies showing a higher heritability of test scores in White and medium-high SES families, but considerably lower heritability for Black and low-SES families. This they interpret to mean that children who grow up with limited resources do not get to develop their full genetic potential.

Eyferth (1961) studied the out-of-wedlock children of black and white soldiers stationed in Germany after World War 2 and then raised by white German mothers and found no significant differences.
Tizard et al. (1972) studied black (African and West Indian), white, and mixed-race children raised in British long-stay residential nurseries. Three out of four tests found no significant differences. One test found higher scores for non-whites.
Moore (1986) compared black and mixed-race children adopted by either black or white middle-class families in the United States. Moore observed that 23 black and interracial children raised by white parents had a significantly higher mean score than 23 age-matched children raised by black parents (117 vs 104), and argued that differences in early socialization explained these differences.

CONT

>she didnt personally start it
>her campaign staff forwarded it on to news people and said they should look into it
>but she had nothing to do with it
Hillary shills are literally fucking retarded.

>insults

>increase coal production out of Kentucky
lots of folks gonna get the black lung.

>It baffles me how people want to make a dollar off of ruining America's nature.
welcome to America

Most people have an ancestry from different geographic regions, particularly African Americans typically have ancestors from both Africa and Europe, with, on average, 20% of their genome inherited from European ancestors. If racial IQ gaps have a partially genetic basis, one might expect blacks with a higher degree of European ancestry to score higher on IQ tests than blacks with less European ancestry, because the genes inherited from European ancestors would likely include some genes with a positive effect on IQ. Geneticist Alan Templeton has argued that an experiment based on the Mendelian "common garden" design where specimens with different hybrid compositions are subjected to the same environmental influences, would be the only way to definitively show a causal relation between genes and IQ. Summarizing the findings of admixture studies, he concludes that it has shown no significant correlation between any cognitive and the degree of African or European ancestry. He finds that studies by Eyferth (1961), Willerman, Naylor & Myrianthopoulos (1970) did not find a correlation between degree of African/European ancestry and IQ.
WEW

:^)

actually NAFTA fucked the Mexican people.

Also something like 97% of nuclear waste only takes like 40 years to die anyway so it's fine.

This. It literally caused millions of capasinos to go out of business and move to the US.

Here's my perspective as a conservative leaning man:

I've thought he was a joke since the primaries and that hasn't changed. He's really not the best qualified guy for President. But that's not the reality of the situation as it stands. We have 2 options, and we have to pick one or the other.

Trump:
>has said mean and bombastic things
>hasn't been consistent
>no political background

These are poor marks imo, but they aren't all wholly disqualifying, when compared to Clinton:

>already has a long list of political scandal/inefficacy
>wouldn't have ever even been this high in politics were it not for her husband

So the jury is still out on Trump, but Clinton already has a piss poor resume. Coupled with my conservative ideals, which are "more" represented by Trump, that's all I'm left with. People who think Trump is way worse than Clinton because he's been uncouth are children who are fine with letting big, corrupt government continue on towards eventual peril. Didn't even care that they rigged the DNC and buried Sanders.

That's funny coming from someone who think only whiteys are smart and everyone else is dumb.

Now that's unreallistic. No country can just take what they want and pretend they have "agreements".

Yes, I think an addition 2000 tons of radioactive waste per year[1] in the US is an environmental concern especially if you live nearby.

Even though the sum of all the waste fits "inside a football field", it is distributed across sites all over the country, each of which is a point of failure.

I'm sure we are doing "our best" to encapsulate it but I am skeptical about it staying out of a water table in the long term.

I am optimistic about improving re-use and monitoring the existing sites, but I am more optimistic about improvements in solar and proliferation of energy storage (not waste storage) technology.

Nuclear is pretty wonderful as an advancement, and I hope we don't mishandle it and fuck over part of the country in a similar way to the Flint water debacle.

[1] gao.gov/new.items/d11731t.pdf

>Moore observed that 23 black and interracial children raised by white parents had a significantly higher mean score than 23 age-matched children raised by black parents (117 vs 104)

This is the most significant thing here.

So the solution is lots of black babies raised by white parents.

It should be noted that interracial couples wont solve this since half the influence will still be negative.

>the United States must make cuts to industry and oil consumption

We never ratified the Kyoto Protocol, any and all emissions laws we have now aren't dictated by the United Nations but are national policies. Nobody's telling us to do anything; stop listening to infowars.

If you really don't trust the greatest country in the history of our entire species to handle an absolutely tiny amount of waste I don't know what kind of person you must be, I'd worry more about the staggering amount of pollution in the atmosphere over a tiny amount underground that's probably being transitioned into better storage as we speak.

>copying and pasting stuff from fucking NISBETT
Also known as, how to prove you know fucking nothing about race and iq, 101.

However, since you could at least be bothered to do that much, I will pretend for a moment that you have actually read Nisbett's Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count, in which he included a critique of Jensen and Rushton's earlier work.

Here is a point by point reply from Rushton and Jensen, published in response to Nisbett's book.
psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/2010 Review of Nisbett.pdf

At least you didn't try to post Gould. I would have fucking died of laughter. I guess Nisbett is one step up, though a better choice would have been Flynn.

As far as Alan R. Templeton goes, I honestly don't have much on him. I will have to look into his work further, but a quick cursory glance at what he's said doesn't appear promising.

Your post on his views is hopefully inaccurate, as it means that Templeton is a biologist who doesn't understand how sub-species are defined, which would make him rather hard to take seriously.

Interesting that you would quote the three studies that unlike the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study, didn't re-test the children later in life. Or the one on korean children in belgium. Though it is amazing that you bothered to look them up in the first place.

Regardless, if nothing else, you have left out contradicting evidence with all the skill of a stalinist commissar, and for that I salute you.

>That's funny coming from someone who think only whiteys are smart and everyone else is dumb.
Actually I think jews and east asians are smarter than whites, because that's what the data shows.

You however, are dumb as fuck.
>No country can just take what they want and pretend they have "agreements".
Yes they can. But that's not what international agreements are about.

It's about compromise. If the compromise stops being worth it, you can expect the deal to be thrown out in short order.

You also don't get to define what isolationism is.

It is very possible for a country to have freedom of trade without freedom of movement, or freedom of movement without freedom of trade.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_and_incidents#Nuclear_power_plant_accidents

Taking into account all of them, there are 4070 deaths. Be it directly, or because of cancer.

Now, lets take hydro energy for example.

They have several problems. The first is ecological: to build them you have to charge entire ecosystems (all that remains under water). The second is their risk: when they break, the disaster is enormous. Search the history of the Banqiao Dam in China, which killed nearly 200,000 people at once (but you never see perfumed environmentalists Greenpeace hippes complaining about that). In that sense they are more dangerous than nuclear and worse for the environment. Yes, Chernobyl was a disaster that caused an ecological problem in one area. But it is not expected with each nuclear power plant, and it is inevitable that each time build a dam you destroy everything you flood.

Nuclear energy remains our best bet as a bridge energy on what best sources, cleaner and safer renewable energy develop, I think. But better organized panic drives others like it or coal-burning power, much more harmful pollutants and worse options.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam#Casualties

>almost 200, 000

Hippies are a fucking problem, and you are being scared from fear mongering idiots that onece thought that a nuclear test was going to trigger earthquakes causing a tsunami. Of course it didn't happen. Those same idiots later evolved into the terrorist organization Green Peace who commit crimes agains humanity such as this.

washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/06/29/more-than-100-nobel-laureates-take-on-greenpeace-over-gmo-stance/

China has always been susceptible to floods and always will be. For fucks sake look up the Yellow River flooding all the time.

Hydro and Solar are the safest sources of energy that we have right now that have little to no waste. Because the way they work isn't by creating or causing some reaction, it's by harvesting the by-products of already occurring reactions and actions.

And with all of this in mind, nuclear power that we currently have isn't even the most ideal nuclear power since everyone and their mother knows that fission is the next big thing to happen. And it's no longer some scifi pipe dream.

We will have fission cracked by 2100. Fuck, we could have it cracked by 2075. And that's going to open a whole other can of worms and arguments and ultimately, that is the key to our planet moving beyond fossil fuels.

But until then, solar and hydro are our best bets.

>You also don't get to define what isolationism is.

hooo boy

Yes, let's just abandon nuclear until fission magically becomes a thing, it's not like you need funding or anything for that.

Also I just looked it up and apparently nowadays they keep spent fuel in these big pools filled with water until they're inert enough to be put into above ground storage. Also the little pools are so well designed even the one at Fukushima didn't get hecked up.

One more thing, hydro and solar are location dependent, nuclear is fine anywhere.

Trump is a borderline sociopath. He will do whatever it takes to win. This means changing his political stance if he thinks it's what a crowd wants to hear. He can also be very manic and volatile when somebody goes against his interests. I don't believe he is necessarily a "Hitler", but he has plenty of people worried. Hillary isn't much better with her compulsive lying and her belief that she is above the law. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein wont be included in the debates, so it looks like the next POTUS will be Hillary or Donald. This will be a very interesting 4 years for the US. The best possible outcome would be Hillary winning then dying immediately afterward and Kaine becoming president.

Continuing on, you'll probably most interested (again, I'm pretending you didn't just copy paste that and actually bothered to read things that you both agree and disagree with in an attempt to get at the data) in section 3, 3. CULTURE-LOADED VERSUS HERITABLE g-LOADED TESTS.

Lol, if you think statistics and your nazi books are unquestionable facts that give you the right to make prejudices about others, then you either are a retard or have real autism.

It seems you don't seem to understand many things I've said, or just ignore them. An agreement is made when two get benefits from it, not when one takes the best for himself.

You can't say you believe in democracy if you don't consider others equal in terms of human rights. Wether you like it or not, USA needs resources and work force from other countries, heck, you don't know how genetics, society or economics work in the real world. Why I am wasting time trying to explain it to you?

You'll probably die and believing in MUH MUSTARD RACE bullshit as the world becomes more and more multicultural and globalized.

Because his opinions don't fall in line with the mainstream media and political establishment that have been owned by the increasingly sensitive and whiny left for decades.

>Trump vs. Hilary thread with some IQ/race debate thrown in

this is mini-Cred Forums

Odds are he is just saying that stuff to eat into the crowds vote that believes in it.

He also rode the "Obama should produce his birth certificate" train back when he went up for election. He's pandering like all politicians, just to the severely jaded crowd vs. the fuck me in the ass please group.

I'd rather have Pence than Kaine.

Kaine is a TPP supporting fuck who will never change his mind on it. Pence might not sign it.

So still Trump either way, even looking at VPs.
>Trump is a borderline sociopath. He will do whatever it takes to win. This means changing his political stance if he thinks it's what a crowd wants to hear.
Hillary is literally the exact same.
She's also been that way for way fucking longer.
youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI
>IF YOU DONT ACCEPT ONE HUNDRED PERCENT FREE TRADE AND MOVEMENT YOU ARE LITERALLY NORTH KOREA
The thread.

Globalists are retarded cultists and you should be gassed.

I'm not advocating abandoning nuclear at all. Take what you can get, but the thing that really baffles me is why these saharan countries aren't exporting solar power to other countries in the same vein that other countries export natural gas and oil.

>WAAAH WAAAH NAZI
Wew, thanks for proving my point m8.