Big Tech Authoritarianism

[Longbow]

As I said, the chap has been impeached for the charge. You then counter that with saying it was political. I said the academic, professional and political world has the same consensus. You said we believe the media.

You are not willing to accept any proof other than a direct quote from Trump declaring insurrection.

Therefore the discussion is pointless as you are ignoring the consensus and implying you are the "woke" one.

He's been impeached, not convicted, similar to being charged pre-trial.

As for proof, yes I was asking for actual proof, not about him talking about rigged elections etc, that's not incitement to insurrection.

Also consensus does not equate to truth, again this constantly dodging the question of evidence. There's a reason why trials exist, to show the actual evidence, and why "trials by media" are bad because they don't rely on it. So your "lots of people say it" argument doesn't hold up.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Quick, find some random stats.

Lets use your own website, SEIA have been pretty good over the years to get an overall view of whats happening. I have skin in the game with renewables so i do have to keep my ear close to the ground.

https://www.seia.org/solar-industry-research-data

Sorry but continuing with this stance that Trump has been awful for renewables is so far removed from the reality, it hurts my brain.

I do get the feeling you'd argue with yourself in a mirror sometimes. Clearly adding 30% to the cost of solar panels isn't going to help solar.

Ok lets hear what Trump did to benefit renewables? What policies did the executive branch roll out that helped them?

 

[dlockers]

He's been impeached, not convicted, similar to being charged pre-trial.

As for proof, yes I was asking for actual proof, not about him talking about rigged elections etc, that's not incitement to insurrection.

Also consensus does not equate to truth, again this constantly dodging the question of evidence. There's a reason why trials exist, to show the actual evidence, and why "trials by media" are bad because they don't rely on it. So your "lots of people say it" argument doesn't hold up.

Okay well stop arguing on the internet and wait for the trial.

 

[Longbow]

Okay well stop arguing on the internet and wait for the trial.

Got it, asking for someone to backup their claim on a discussion forum is forbidden.

 

[dowie]

Okay well stop arguing on the internet and wait for the trial.

The "trial" isn't going to answer that point tbh... it comes down to a partisan vote in the Senate essentially. I'm not sure they will get the 2/3rds required, they might have a shot at disqualifying from holding office in future via a majority vote.

It's not like he's actually being charged with a criminal offence here and facing trial in a federal court.

 

[dlockers]

The "trial" isn't going to answer that point tbh... it comes down to a partisan vote in the Senate essentially. I'm not sure they will get the 2/3rds required, they might have a shot at disqualifying from holding office in future via a majority vote.

It's not like he's actually being charged with a criminal offence here and facing trial in a federal court.

I guess Longbow will never be satisfied then.

 

[Fubsy]

I do get the feeling you'd argue with yourself in a mirror sometimes. Clearly adding 30% to the cost of solar panels isn't going to help solar.

Way off topic, but..

From what I understood from what was posted, is that the 30% increase of non-domestic panel cost had a net benefit of making domestic production viable for manufacturers in the US, and cutting down the environmental transportation costs importing causes.

Who knows if the above was the intention though.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Way off topic, but..

From what I understood from what was posted, is that the 30% increase of non-domestic panel cost had a net benefit of making domestic production viable for manufacturers in the US, and cutting down the environmental transportation costs importing causes.


Who knows if the above was the intention though.

Is the evidence for that? The US still imports solar panels because they can't match the pricing of quality of the far east.

 

[Fubsy]

Is the evidence for that? The US still imports solar panels because they can't match the pricing of quality of the far east.

Nah, I'm not interested in looking into it Had a read up above and I'd misread the original back and forth. There's so many "what abouts?" in this thread it's hard to follow.

I can confidently say that Trump doesn't like China or renewables though.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Twitter blocks Chinese US Embassy account

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/21/tech/twitter-china-embassy-us-uyghur-intl-hnk/index.html.

 

[mmj_uk]

Corporate media and social media who have spent the last 4 years relentlessly attacking the democratically elected president of the United States, were donors to the Democrat Party and who actively interfered in the 2020 election by not reporting on scandals involving the Biden family now have their candidate of choice in the Whitehouse. It's all smooth sailing from here. Well done to those who were in the 'resistance' by joining a bunch of billionaires, corporations, rich celebrities etc... I mean it was about as difficult as the Nazi's in WW2 resisting France but you must all be so proud. There's nothing at all left to resist now, the corporations and mega wealthy are of course your friends so you can all go back to sleep..

https://observer.com/2020/11/big-tech-2020-presidential-election-donation-breakdown-ranking/

 

[Werewolf]

I suspect those very same companies also donated to the Republicans, and the only reason they didn't report more on the biden stuff was simple, it was obviously nonsense spouted mainly by Rudy and idiots.

 

[dlockers]

Corporate media and social media who have spent the last 4 years relentlessly attacking the democratically elected president of the United States, were donors to the Democrat Party and who actively interfered in the 2020 election by not reporting on scandals involving the Biden family now have their candidate of choice in the Whitehouse. It's all smooth sailing from here. Well done to those who were in the 'resistance' by joining a bunch of billionaires, corporations, rich celebrities etc... I mean it was about as difficult as the Nazi's in WW2 resisting France but you must all be so proud. There's nothing at all left to resist now, the corporations and mega wealthy are of course your friends so you can all go back to sleep..

https://observer.com/2020/11/big-tech-2020-presidential-election-donation-breakdown-ranking/

You are literally supporting a reality TV star, billionaire.

And by the way, I am sure you know this, the total contributions highlighted by your link equal 12% of total funding. Or, in other words, 88% of funding came not from Big Tech.

Your superhero on the other hand received top funding from:
1.Timothy Mellon, Pan Am Systems - $10 million
An heir to the Mellon banking fortune and the grandson of former U.S. Treasury Secretary, Andrew Mellon

2.Kelcy Warren, Energy Transfers - $10 million
Warren is the co-founder, chairman and CEO of Energy Transfers. The Texas-based company owns and operates the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline,
(remember this pipeline?)

3.Geoffrey Palmer, G.H. Palmer Associates - $6 million
Palmer is a real estate magnate whose buildings in Los Angeles are known for their characteristic "fauxtalian"


Blah blah blah.

 

[Trusty]

I do get the feeling you'd argue with yourself in a mirror sometimes. Clearly adding 30% to the cost of solar panels isn't going to help solar.

Ok lets hear what Trump did to benefit renewables? What policies did the executive branch roll out that helped them?

lol...you're unbelievable. I'm arguing with myself in the mirror now.

You don't have a clue whats going on, its just the standard Trump did it, so it must be bad attitude.

I really can't be bothered going round and round in circles with you. Goodbye

 

[Theophany]

Renewables overtook coal last year or the year before for the first time in like a century, i can't remember when it was exactly. Why didn't Obama achieve that if he so good? see, i can say pointless stuff as well.

The point you originally made, trying to insinuate that the slight relaxing of regulation had this huge dramatic effect on the environment and renewables industry is not correct.

The macro trend hasn't changed. Renewables are here to stay and fossil fuel is on its way out, and it'll continue to do that.

Watch how Biden doesn't remove certain tariffs regarding China. Because for all the bluster in the MSM from the democrats about the China tariffs being bad, a lot of them were needed to change the mindset. Obama was told time and time again to start doing something about it, he didn't.

Yes, you are saying pointless things. I didn't say anything about Obama, so I'm not even sure why you'd bring him up? Renewables did not overtake coal, they were on parity with coal, which isn't in the least bit impressive when you consider how many different forms of renewable energy there are compared to burning dead fossils. Long term change doesn't happen within a presidential cycle. Perhaps Trump's legacy will be kinder in retrospect, who knows?

Just for context, the UK developed over 40% of its energy from renewables in the first quarter of 2020. Renewables being here to stay and a macro trend really doesn't speak to America's credit at this point, if anything they are a global laggard.

But please, tell me more about the US' green revolution over the last four years. Preferably whilst condescendingly telling me to read corporate marketing literature from companies looking to raise funding whilst telling me about how ~the mainstream media~ has an agenda with a straight face.

 

[mmj_uk]

 

[stockhausen]

Corporate media and social media who have spent the last 4 years relentlessly attacking the democratically elected president of the United States, were donors to the Democrat Party . . .

I was interested in your Observer link, wrongly thinking that it was the "Sunday Guardian". Having looked at it I was surprised that it ONLY mentioned donations to the Democratic Party. It seemed that the mega rich Trump must have had to fend for himself - Odd, dashed odd

As a result, I researched what turns out to be the online version of the New York Observer - owner one Jared Kushner, Donald Trump's son-in-law

I do hope that you are receiving some sort of reward for being one of Trump's disinformation peddlers?


According to the New York Times, Trump's once loyal Praetorian Guard, the Proud Boys, have turned on him; shame

 

[Trusty]

Yes, you are saying pointless things. I didn't say anything about Obama, so I'm not even sure why you'd bring him up? Renewables did not overtake coal, they were on parity with coal, which isn't in the least bit impressive when you consider how many different forms of renewable energy there are compared to burning dead fossils. Long term change doesn't happen within a presidential cycle. Perhaps Trump's legacy will be kinder in retrospect, who knows?

Just for context, the UK developed over 40% of its energy from renewables in the first quarter of 2020. Renewables being here to stay and a macro trend really doesn't speak to America's credit at this point, if anything they are a global laggard.

But please, tell me more about the US' green revolution over the last four years. Preferably whilst condescendingly telling me to read corporate marketing literature from companies looking to raise funding whilst telling me about how ~the mainstream media~ has an agenda with a straight face.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=43895

I was just pulling you up on the idea that Trump and relaxing of some regulation was apocalyptic for renewable energy in America. Which is what you insinuated. Its not correct.

 

[Theophany]

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=43895

I was just pulling you up on the idea that Trump and relaxing of some regulation was apocalyptic for renewable energy in America. Which is what you insinuated. Its not correct.

I didn't suggest anything "apocalyptic." I stated that they have a growing number of damaging weather events that are directly attributable to climate change, which is factual. You have inferred something that I have not insinuated.

 

[Trusty]

I didn't suggest anything "apocalyptic." I stated that they have a growing number of damaging weather events that are directly attributable to climate change, which is factual. You have inferred something that I have not insinuated.

I'm sure that having less reliance on imported energy has been good for them in some ways, but it hasn't pushed them to develop greener means of energy production meaning that the environment suffers as a consequence..

But you're right, I probably am misinformed. Mainly by the guy that said he loves coal and was bringing back all the coal jobs who just buggered off to Mar-a-Lago.

Well when you say stuff like that, yes i did conclude you thought that Trump was all in on fossil fuel and putting the sword to the renewables sector.