Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2024 21:09:11 +0000
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Cruz Destroys Gender Activist Judge During Hearing
References: <_qidnWbvU5joYdL7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> <v3llcv$3kpo$1@dont-email.me> <atropos-7B9062.19350203062024@news.giganews.com> <v3nbkm$fr5l$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=fixed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Usenapp/0.92.2/l for MacOS
Message-ID: <x_WcnRlz0JjqH8L7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2024 21:09:11 +0000
Lines: 139
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-0aRlmJTbGnsxyool5DevozBkjTwlYAeDSPQ0Gw+6DeMCJJ+voXhOyVPWQw2aGuCRq0vIUgQe/Eb82Ms!sRtAfsTUBXzG1ZPtIQlxjW50AueqI929eeIkNLRq6qNASY7/t01JC0XUsU7Mn14Oyq5Rd42/0Fqj
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 8324
X-Original-Lines: 85

On Jun 4, 2024 at 8:25:10 AM PDT, "FPP" <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 6/3/24 10:35 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>  In article <v3llcv$3kpo$1@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>  wrote:
>>  
>>>  On 6/3/24 2:22 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>  In article <v3kipd$3u0gd$5@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>>>  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>  On 6/2/24 10:05 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>  FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>  On 6/2/24 3:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>  
>>>>>>>>  So when you said you don't talk about another state's governor because
>>>>>>>>  he doesn't affect your life... that was... wait for it... a lie.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>  How does eating out affect my life?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>  Now, trying to destroy capitalism and education in the country is
>>>>>>>  another matter.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  Your own words: another state's governor doesn't affect my life.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  Weird how you're now claiming some governors have the power to do exactly
>>>>>>  that by "destroying capitalism and education" throughout the entire
>>>>>>  country by signing laws that only apply to their respective states. How
>>>>>>  does DeSantis signing an education bill that only applies to Florida
>>>>>>  affect your life, Effa?
>>  
>>  Still no answer here.
>>  
>>>>>>  But for some reason when Newsom signs laws, according to Effa the Hutt,
>>>>>>  he only has the power to affect California, despite the fact that in many
>>>>>>  cases, he actually does affect the whole country with his bullshit. Like
>>>>>>  when he banned all gas-powered vehicles by 2035. That affects the whole
>>>>>>  country because California is such a large percentage of the car market,
>>>>>>  vehicle manufacturers conform their products to California standards
>>>>>>  regardless of where they'll eventually be sold.
>>>> 
>>>>>  Newsom went out to eat.
>>>> 
>>>>  Newsom did exactly what Cruz did that gets your panties in a twist: he
>>>>  went on vacation while his state was in crisis. And he did it twice.
>>>>  Cruz only did it once.
>>>> 
>>>>>  DeSantis is destroying a state.
>>>> 
>>>>  Not your state. Doesn't affect your life. Your words.
>>  
>>>  Nope. False equivalence.
>>> 
>>>  Newsom owned up to it.
>>  
>>  Newsom never 'owned up' to fleeing the state for vacation. Once he got
>>  caught, he admitted his maskless indoor dining at the French Laundry was
>>  wrong. But he never gave a mea culpa for being on vacation in Cabo while
>>  he his state was on fire.
>>  
> You guys caused the fires, ignoring climate change.

To quote our newest Hutt: Nope.

This nonsense that the California wildfires are due to 'climate change' is
ridiculous. Even Emperor Newsom has admitted that historically bad forest
management at both the federal and state level is a major factor in the
severity and frequency of the most recent wildfires.

Anyone who thinks that if we'd all just installed more solar panels and rode
our bikes to work, that the state wouldn't be on fire every year is completely
delusional. And these idiotic media reporters and politicians who keep saying
that the amount of acreage burned in California in 2019-- the worst fire year
(2.2 million acres)-- is 'record-breaking' and 'unprecedented' are bald-faced
liars. It's fucking factually completely untrue.

Before the 1800s, California would see anywhere from 5 to 14 million acres
burn EVERY YEAR. That's 12% of the state burning every year. Before there were
any SUVs or 'climate change'. Just as there were massive droughts in
California long before the era of 'climate change'. California had a 500-year
drought between 800 and 1300 AD. These are documented scientific facts, but
that undermines the Agenda, so we get flat-out lies from politicians claiming
this is unprecedented, which goes completely unchallenged by their media
lackeys.

Excess timber comes out of a forest in only one of two ways. It's either
carried out or it burns up. We used to carry it out. It was called logging. We
had healthy forests and a thriving timber economy. Then in the 70s, we began
imposing a shit-ton of environmental laws-- both at the state and federal
level-- that have made it all but impossible and wildly unprofitable to carry
out that timber and what we've seen over those decades is increasingly severe
forest fires.

We've had an 80% decline in timber harvested out of California forests since
1980 and we've had 85% increase in acres destroyed by fire over that same
period. The mismanagement has gotten to the point where you can tell the
boundary between private forestland that is not affected by these laws and the
public lands that are. The burn scars follow the property lines almost exactly
in many cases.

Wow, the climate sure is clever to only change over the public lands and burn
them while leaving the private lands alone, isn't it?

An untended forest will grow and grow until it chokes itself off. When there
are too many trees for the land to support, they start dying off, and that
dead timber becomes thousands of square miles of fuel, just waiting to be set
ablaze. California currently has four times the timber density that the land
can support. Even the reliably leftist L.A. Times, which never misses an
opportunity to blame something bad on 'climate change', noted that there are
currently more than 150 million dead trees in the Sierra Nevada, just waiting
to be ignited. That's how nature manages a forest and if we don't want half
the state on fire, we have to do something other than nature's way.

That's why we started the Forest Service to begin with-- to scientifically
manage the forests so that they're both preserved for people's use and to keep
them healthy and reduce fires to a minimum. And we had healthy forests for
decades. But then the enviro-kooks came along and said "You're interfering
with nature! Stop it!" and got all sorts of laws passed requiring a hands-off
approach to forestry and now here we are, with the entire West Coast
frequently ablaze.

The Native American tribes understood this and would routinely both clear away
dead trees and brush from around their settlements and villages and conduct
controlled burns to reduce the possibility of large out-of-control fires. Then
came the white environmentalists, who dismissed the practices of those they
considered ignorant savages, and decided they knew better how to do things.
Well, we're seeing how well that worked out, huh?

But no, we're still having to deal with idiots like Pelosi, Newsom,
Occasional-Cortex, and Karen Bass who insist that this problem can be solved
with carbon caps and solar panels and windmills, when the truth is that if the
U.S. literally shut down all emissions COMPLETELY-- cars, gone; industry,
gone; cattle farming, gone; airplanes, gone; all of it, gone-- and we lived
that way for the next 80 years, it would only reduce the global mean
temperature by 0.3 degrees. That's from the U.N. IPCC model itself. You can go
run the numbers yourself if you don't believe it.

These wildfires are not a 'climate change' problem. They're a forest
management problem. Period.