2022 SCOTUS rulings

Political discussions
HI54UNI
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 12387
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:39 pm
I am a fan of: Firing Mark Farley
A.K.A.: Bikinis for JSO
Location: The Panther State

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by HI54UNI »

I love how the Senate Majority Leader and other Dems are complaining because the Supreme Court said the Legislative Branch is supposed to pass laws.
If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism. Ronald Reagan, 1975.

Progressivism is cancer

All my posts are satire
HI54UNI
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 12387
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:39 pm
I am a fan of: Firing Mark Farley
A.K.A.: Bikinis for JSO
Location: The Panther State

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by HI54UNI »

Winterborn wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 6:18 pm
bobbythekidd wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 1:18 pm
So the Environmental Protection Agency doesn't have the authority to protect the environment???

I guess we can just shut down that whole agency and pocket the money. I'm looking forward to my tax refund.
They have the authority to act under Congressional guidance (regulations that Congress passes) not a blank check to do whatever they want.

Congress did not give them unilateral authority, which is how the EPA has been acting since the 90's.

And I am all for working on keeping the environment clean and healthy. Just it needs to be evidence based.
This. :nod:
If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism. Ronald Reagan, 1975.

Progressivism is cancer

All my posts are satire
User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19443
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by SDHornet »

houndawg wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:13 pm
SDHornet wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 9:20 pm

Cry more, shitlib. :lol:
Is that a "none"? About what I figured. :coffee:

Nobody is crying today except traitor cunts, like yourself. :coffee:
I've got my own kids thank you very much.

And yes there should (and probably will) be charities and agencies that step up and address the adoption/fostering issue...or maybe big gubmint will solve this problem.
User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19443
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by SDHornet »

kalm wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 7:43 am
AZGrizFan wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:23 pm

And the other major political party believes that a series of lies written in 1848 just “hasn’t been done right” and are willing to throw away the greatest nation on earth to give Marx another shot. They’re the American Stalin.
Image
:lol: :clap:
User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19443
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by SDHornet »

Interesting thread...

User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19443
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by SDHornet »

:clap:

User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by JohnStOnge »

I am being forced to conclude, at this point, that this court is political. Not that liberal courts haven't been political in the past. But this court is political. The thing with saying it is OK for the Louisiana legislature to have just one Black majority district is an example. Louisiana is one third Black. That's math. To me, what the Louisiana legislature did in creating a situation in which only 1 of 6 Congressional districts is majority
Black is clearly a violation of the Voting Rights Act. It's really blatant and obvious. But this Supreme Court is going to allow that situation to prevail during the next Congressional election.

Another one is the EPA thing. I have never dealt with environmental regulation but I have dealt with public health regulation a lot. Congress gives VERY broad authority to regulatory agencies to do things like what EPA was doing. We live in a very complex world with 330,000 million people in our country and 7.8 billion people int he world. Saying Congress has to explicitly say EPA can do something specific like that instead of just giving it broad authority to do what it needs to do to control emissions is ridiculous. This is not good. And, to me, it is clearly based on political philosophy.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by JohnStOnge »

SDHornet wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:16 pm Interesting thread...

I think it is simpler than that. We have a flawed system that allows the minority to rule. A President who lost the overall vote among the People got to nominate Supreme Court Justices. His Party controlled the Senate at the time of each appointment because we have a system in which low population States have just as many Senators ad high population States do. So when he nominated the first two the Republicans had the majority in the Senate even though more people had voted for Democrats during the elections involved by a margin of about 8 percentage points. And when he nominated the third one the Republicans had the majority even though more people had voted for Democrats during the elections involved by about 10 percentage points.

It happened because we have a system that allows for minority rule.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by JohnStOnge »

AZGrizFan wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:23 pm
JohnStOnge wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:35 pm

Look, we've got a serious problem right now. We have a major political Party that is beholding to a core base of people who are completely separated from reality. They depend on overwhelming support among a group that is around 30% of the population and believes that a series of myths written between something like 4,000 and 1,800 years ago is the inerrant truth. it's the American Taliban.
And the other major political party believes that a series of lies written in 1848 just “hasn’t been done right” and are willing to throw away the greatest nation on earth to give Marx another shot. They’re the American Stalin.
No it doesn't. The Democrats aren't Marxists and they don't subscribe to the Communist Manifesto. That's just one more over the top lie Republicans tell all the time.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 23236
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by houndawg »

SDHornet wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:03 pm
houndawg wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:13 pm

Is that a "none"? About what I figured. :coffee:

Nobody is crying today except traitor cunts, like yourself. :coffee:
I've got my own kids thank you very much.

And yes there should (and probably will) be charities and agencies that step up and address the adoption/fostering issue...or maybe big gubmint will solve this problem.
400,000 is a lot of unwanted kids
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »


JohnStOnge wrote:
AZGrizFan wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:23 pm And the other major political party believes that a series of lies written in 1848 just “hasn’t been done right” and are willing to throw away the greatest nation on earth to give Marx another shot. They’re the American Stalin.
No it doesn't. The Republicans aren't Fascists and they don't subscribe to Mein Kampf . That's just one more over the top lie Democrats tell all the time.
Perspective and putting aside your bias is important.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by JohnStOnge »

UNI88 wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 3:10 pm
JohnStOnge wrote:
No it doesn't. The Republicans aren't Fascists and they don't subscribe to Mein Kampf . That's just one more over the top lie Democrats tell all the time.
Perspective and putting aside your bias is important.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
While we might see a some of it, I really don't think we see nearly as much of that kind of over the top stuff from the Democrats as we see from the Republicans. But since you brought it up: I do think there is more risk of Republicans being in power leading us to fascism than there is of Democrats leading us to communism.

The "they're both bad" thing is something I know people like to do. But at this time in history we are in an asymmetrical situation. The Republicans are a lot worse. A lot.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
HI54UNI
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 12387
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:39 pm
I am a fan of: Firing Mark Farley
A.K.A.: Bikinis for JSO
Location: The Panther State

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by HI54UNI »

JohnStOnge wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 2:10 pm
SDHornet wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:16 pm Interesting thread...

I think it is simpler than that. We have a flawed system that allows the minority to rule. A President who lost the overall vote among the People got to nominate Supreme Court Justices. His Party controlled the Senate at the time of each appointment because we have a system in which low population States have just as many Senators ad high population States do. So when he nominated the first two the Republicans had the majority in the Senate even though more people had voted for Democrats during the elections involved by a margin of about 8 percentage points. And when he nominated the third one the Republicans had the majority even though more people had voted for Democrats during the elections involved by about 10 percentage points.

It happened because we have a system that allows for minority rule.

Cry more.
If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism. Ronald Reagan, 1975.

Progressivism is cancer

All my posts are satire
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

JohnStOnge wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 2:02 pm The thing with saying it is OK for the Louisiana legislature to have just one Black majority district is an example. Louisiana is one third Black. That's math. To me, what the Louisiana legislature did in creating a situation in which only 1 of 6 Congressional districts is majority
Black is clearly a violation of the Voting Rights Act. It's really blatant and obvious. But this Supreme Court is going to allow that situation to prevail during the next Congressional election.
No its not. If 2/3 of the population of a state was non black, and 1/3 was black, and they were spread throughout the state, and the districts were drawn randomly without regard to race, you could easily have only one district that was majority black, or even zero.

And what you are proposing is packing more blacks into fewer districts, which actually gets more blacks elected to Congress, but fewer democrats, and more republicans.
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
Baldy
Level4
Level4
Posts: 9609
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:38 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by Baldy »

JohnStOnge wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 2:10 pm
SDHornet wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 8:16 pm Interesting thread...

I think it is simpler than that. We have a flawed system that allows the minority to rule. A President who lost the overall vote among the People got to nominate Supreme Court Justices. His Party controlled the Senate at the time of each appointment because we have a system in which low population States have just as many Senators ad high population States do. So when he nominated the first two the Republicans had the majority in the Senate even though more people had voted for Democrats during the elections involved by a margin of about 8 percentage points. And when he nominated the third one the Republicans had the majority even though more people had voted for Democrats during the elections involved by about 10 percentage points.

It happened because we have a system that allows for minority rule.
That's how the system was designed. You should probably sign up for an elementary level civics class. It would do you a world of good.
I just don't know why so many people are so dumb about this. The United States is a union of individual states. Congress was intentionally designed for states to be represented equally in the Senate and proportionally in the House of Representatives.

BTW, its long pass time to repeal the 17th amendment. :nod:
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by AZGrizFan »

Baldy wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 6:53 pm
JohnStOnge wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 2:10 pm

I think it is simpler than that. We have a flawed system that allows the minority to rule. A President who lost the overall vote among the People got to nominate Supreme Court Justices. His Party controlled the Senate at the time of each appointment because we have a system in which low population States have just as many Senators ad high population States do. So when he nominated the first two the Republicans had the majority in the Senate even though more people had voted for Democrats during the elections involved by a margin of about 8 percentage points. And when he nominated the third one the Republicans had the majority even though more people had voted for Democrats during the elections involved by about 10 percentage points.

It happened because we have a system that allows for minority rule.
That's how the system was designed. You should probably sign up for an elementary level civics class. It would do you a world of good.
I just don't know why so many people are so dumb about this. The United States is a union of individual states. Congress was intentionally designed for states to be represented equally in the Senate and proportionally in the House of Representatives.

BTW, its long pass time to repeal the 17th amendment. :nod:
He needs much more than an elementary level civics class. His ignorance goes much deeper.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

JoltinJoe wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:17 am
Hey, Joe. Any thoughts on this one?
WASHINGTON, June 30 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a Republican-backed appeal that could give state legislatures far more power over federal elections by limiting the ability of state courts to review their actions, taking up a North Carolina case that could have broad implications for the 2024 elections and beyond.

The justices took up the appeal by Republican state lawmakers of a February decision by North Carolina's top court to throw out a map delineating the state's 14 U.S. House of Representatives districts approved last year by the Republican-controlled state legislature.……………………

In March, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a Republican request to put on hold the lower court rulings that adopted the court-drawn map, a decision seen as boosting Democratic hopes of retaining their slim House majority in the November midterm elections. Conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented from that decision.

The Republican lawmakers said the state court impermissibly imposed its own policy determination for how much partisanship can go into crafting congressional lines. They acknowledged that the case would have an impact beyond redistricting, extending to "the whole waterfront of voting issues, from absentee voting deadlines to witness requirements, voter ID to curbside voting."


The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case in its next term, which begins in October, with a decision due by June 2023. The ruling is not expected to come before this November's elections but could apply to 2024 elections including the presidential race.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

JohnStOnge wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 2:02 pm Another one is the EPA thing. I have never dealt with environmental regulation but I have dealt with public health regulation a lot. Congress gives VERY broad authority to regulatory agencies to do things like what EPA was doing. We live in a very complex world with 330,000 million people in our country and 7.8 billion people int he world. Saying Congress has to explicitly say EPA can do something specific like that instead of just giving it broad authority to do what it needs to do to control emissions is ridiculous. This is not good. And, to me, it is clearly based on political philosophy.
And that is the problem right there. You want unelected, unaccountable DC bureaucrats being given carte blanche to make rules and policies, in some cases based on unproven theories like here, that can harm the economy, and greatly affect, and in some cases, ruin peoples lives.

And CO2 isn’t a pollutant.
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
bobbythekidd
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 4713
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:58 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern
A.K.A.: Bob dammit!!
Location: Savannah GA

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by bobbythekidd »

BDKJMU wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 8:39 amAnd CO2 isn’t a pollutant.
Weird. The Supreme Court said it was.
In one of the most important decisions in environmental law, the US Supreme Court has ruled that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a pollutant and that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the right to regulate CO2 emissions from new cars.
https://dieselnet.com/news/2007/04epa.php
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

bobbythekidd wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 10:12 am
BDKJMU wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 8:39 amAnd CO2 isn’t a pollutant.
Weird. The Supreme Court said it was.
In one of the most important decisions in environmental law, the US Supreme Court has ruled that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a pollutant and that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the right to regulate CO2 emissions from new cars.
https://dieselnet.com/news/2007/04epa.php
In a prior case 15 years ago. And SCOTUS has also been wrong before and overtunred before, as we have recently seemingl.
Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.
Pollutant, according to Mirriam-Webster’s, denotes “something that pollutes,” and to pollute is “to make physically impure or unclean” or “to contaminate (an environment) especially with man-made waste.” The Google online dictionary defines pollutant as “a substance that pollutes something, especially water or the atmosphere,” and pollute as to “contaminate (water, air, or a place) with harmful or poisonous substances.”

Carbon dioxide isn’t harmful or poisonous except at concentrations over a hundred times higher than its concentration in Earth’s atmosphere—levels that we’ll never approach by burning fossil fuels.
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/e-ca ... -pollutant

CO2 is essential to photosynthesis and hence to all life.
We don’t breath out pollutants.
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
bobbythekidd
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 4713
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:58 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern
A.K.A.: Bob dammit!!
Location: Savannah GA

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by bobbythekidd »

BDKJMU wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 10:40 am
bobbythekidd wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 10:12 am
Weird. The Supreme Court said it was.


https://dieselnet.com/news/2007/04epa.php
In a prior case 15 years ago. And SCOTUS has also been wrong before and overtunred before, as we have recently seemingl.
Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.
Pollutant, according to Mirriam-Webster’s, denotes “something that pollutes,” and to pollute is “to make physically impure or unclean” or “to contaminate (an environment) especially with man-made waste.” The Google online dictionary defines pollutant as “a substance that pollutes something, especially water or the atmosphere,” and pollute as to “contaminate (water, air, or a place) with harmful or poisonous substances.”

Carbon dioxide isn’t harmful or poisonous except at concentrations over a hundred times higher than its concentration in Earth’s atmosphere—levels that we’ll never approach by burning fossil fuels.
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/e-ca ... -pollutant

CO2 is essential to photosynthesis and hence to all life.
We don’t breath out pollutants.
Were you hoping to use an unbiased source or the one you linked that describes their mission as:
Cornwall Alliance is on a mission. It’s a big mission—way too big for any one person. Here it is:

to save the lost by means of the gospel of Jesus Christ (John 3:16; Acts 4:12);
to save churches from false teaching about God, creation, humanity, sin, and salvation by teaching people to “test all things, hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21);
to save the poor from counterproductive environment and energy policies (Galatians 2:10);
to save kids (and others!) from false propaganda in news, entertainment, politics, and education (2 Timothy 4:1–5);
to save free people from government overreach (Psalm 94:20–21), even while working to ensure just governments that save people from oppression (Psalm 72);
to “save the planet from the people who are saving the planet” (Romans 1:20–25).
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by SeattleGriz »

bobbythekidd wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 10:12 am
BDKJMU wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 8:39 amAnd CO2 isn’t a pollutant.
Weird. The Supreme Court said it was.
In one of the most important decisions in environmental law, the US Supreme Court has ruled that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a pollutant and that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the right to regulate CO2 emissions from new cars.
https://dieselnet.com/news/2007/04epa.php
I know this is about SCOTUS rulings, but I sure hope that pollutant, CO2, doesn't kill all the plants. Stupid photosynthesis.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

SeattleGriz wrote:
bobbythekidd wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 10:12 am Weird. The Supreme Court said it was. https://dieselnet.com/news/2007/04epa.php
I know this is about SCOTUS rulings, but I sure hope that pollutant, CO2, doesn't kill all the plants. Stupid photosynthesis.
Is too much CO2 a good or bad thing?

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by SeattleGriz »

UNI88 wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:04 pm
SeattleGriz wrote:
I know this is about SCOTUS rulings, but I sure hope that pollutant, CO2, doesn't kill all the plants. Stupid photosynthesis.
Is too much CO2 a good or bad thing?

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
I would have to say too much is a bad thing, but that's the rub, as the datasets we use for public consumption are junk.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

SeattleGriz wrote:
UNI88 wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:04 pm Is too much CO2 a good or bad thing?

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
I would have to say too much is a bad thing, but that's the rub, as the datasets we use for public consumption are junk.
So if too much CO2 is produced, more than plants can use, the excess CO2 could be considered a pollutant? We shouldn't be talking in absolutes.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
Post Reply