President Biden thread

subee, MSN, CRNA · Mar 15

Beerman said:

It seems the worth of Hunter's paintings has declined along with dad's power. Strange coincidence.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/11/no-ones-buying-hunter-bidens-terrible-paintings-any-more-I-wonder-why

Is this a topic that even deserves the electons it took to type it? Who cares? Hunter was never a government employee and is irrelevant to everyone except the die-hard MAGA's who can't let it go. We need to pay more attention to the goofballs that are in our cabinet. I see that RFK wants more research on a topic that has been researched to death and that Lee Zeldin wants more taxpayers dollars spent on researching global warming which is now a sound science. If you INSIST that global warming is irrelevant, move to Beijing and breathe the air in the Summer. Spending money on goofy stuff seems to be OK with DOGE which just shows their hypocricy that they are working for us. They are working for themselves. If global warming is a hoax, we can ban any clean air efforts. If vaccines are dangerous, we can save a lot of money by not giving the out and endorse our more important moral imperative, personal choice.

Beerman, BSN · Mar 16

subee said:

Is this a topic that even deserves the electons it took to type it? Who cares? Hunter was never a government employee and is irrelevant to everyone except the die-hard MAGA's who can't let it go. We need to pay more attention to the goofballs that are in our cabinet. I see that RFK wants more research on a topic that has been researched to death and that Lee Zeldin wants more taxpayers dollars spent on researching global warming which is now a sound science. If you INSIST that global warming is irrelevant, move to Beijing and breathe the air in the Summer. Spending money on goofy stuff seems to be OK with DOGE which just shows their hypocricy that they are working for us. They are working for themselves. If global warming is a hoax, we can ban any clean air efforts. If vaccines are dangerous, we can save a lot of money by not giving the out and endorse our more important moral imperative, personal choice.

You're right. The Biden family business of taking money for access to Joe isn't really news.

Where is the science that says any of the green initiatives proposed or in place will make a difference? I'm excited to hear how science has led you to believe that outlawing gas furnaces and water heaters going to save the world.

toomuchbaloney · Mar 16

Beerman said:

You're right. The Biden family business of taking money for access to Joe isn't really news.

Where is the science that says any of the green initiatives proposed or in place will make a difference? I'm excited to hear how science has led you to believe that outlawing gas furnaces and water heaters going to save the world.

Another strawman argument.

If you are looking for people charging money for access to politicians I can point you in a direction that is sure to give you what you seek.

Tweety, BSN, RN · Mar 17

Beerman said:

I'm excited to hear how science has led you to believe that outlawing gas furnaces and water heaters going to save the world.

I'm sure you're being tongue in cheek. No one is claiming these little things are going to save the world.

I think a combination of changes, multiplied around the world, with everyone doing something whether big or small is going to add up to some good.

But the world is beyond saving. We've past the point of no return. People are too selfish and stupid and the damage is too severe. Also, most of the world is worried about their next meal, whacked by war and natural disasters, or here in the states living paycheck to paycheck worrying about grocery bills and the rent. No one can care about the future.

subee, MSN, CRNA · Mar 17

Beerman said:

You're right. The Biden family business of taking money for access to Joe isn't really news.

Where is the science that says any of the green initiatives proposed or in place will make a difference? I'm excited to hear how science has led you to believe that outlawing gas furnaces and water heaters going to save the world.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that having soot in the air causes weather changes. Have I said a word about outlawing gas furnaces or water heaters? It's not really smart to take an argument to it's silly extremes in every case. But didn't you see the pictures of the mountains which weren't seen before the pandemic? I remember when you couldn't see the mountains in Pasadena. If you were on the freeway you wouldn't even know they were there. I know that the science is firm re: respiratory illnesses and air pollution.

Beerman, BSN · Mar 17

subee said:

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that having soot in the air causes weather changes. Have I said a word about outlawing gas furnaces or water heaters? It's not really smart to take an argument to it's silly extremes in every case. But didn't you see the pictures of the mountains which weren't seen before the pandemic? I remember when you couldn't see the mountains in Pasadena. If you were on the freeway you wouldn't even know they were there. I know that the science is firm re: respiratory illnesses and air pollution.

I'm glad you agree it's a silly extreme.

"California is leading the way for a clean energy future in many ways, including banning gas. Many California towns and cities have implemented natural gas bans for new construction in recent years. In 2023, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) voted to ban the sale of new gas furnaces and water heaters beginning in 2030."

https://www.cleanenergyconnection.org/article/how-prepare-gas-bans-when-planning-your-home-upgrades

allnurses Guide · Mar 18

subee said:

But didn't you see the pictures of the mountains which weren't seen before the pandemic? I remember when you couldn't see the mountains in Pasadena. If you were on the freeway you wouldn't even know they were there. I know that the science is firm re: respiratory illnesses and air pollution.

I do remember that, specifically. I moved to a different state for some years, and when I moved back, it probably took longer than it should've for me to realize blue skies were not an aberration or the first sunny day after a rainstorm, and those things that were scoffed at by many people 30+ years ago actually resulted in a visible change. It was kind of a shock, to be honest, because I was one of those skeptics.

In Colorado, air pollution cause and effect were more immediate. I guess needing a permit to burn wood is unthinkable to some people, they'd rather have the nasty brown smog and non-visible pollutants that exacerbate respiratory disorders.

subee, MSN, CRNA · Mar 18

Beerman said:

I'm glad you agree it's a silly extreme.

"California is leading the way for a clean energy future in many ways, including banning gas. Many California towns and cities have implemented natural gas bans for new construction in recent years. In 2023, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) voted to ban the sale of new gas furnaces and water heaters beginning in 2030."

https://www.cleanenergyconnection.org/article/how-prepare-gas-bans-when-planning-your-home-upgrades

So what? It's called progress. Put your solar panels up and get with the future. It's not 1965 anymore. We know better.

Beerman, BSN · Mar 18

subee said:

So what? It's called progress. Put your solar panels up and get with the future. It's not 1965 anymore. We know better.

LOL....it was a silly extreme example and now it's progress....rofl

So, it looks like we are back to please show me the science that says outlawing gas furnaces and stoves in the next five years will save us. Or, if you prefer, show me how that is progress.

toomuchbaloney · Mar 18

Beerman said:

LOL....it was a silly extreme example and now it's progress....rofl

So, it looks like we are back to please show me the science that says outlawing gas furnaces and stoves in the next five years will save us. Or, if you prefer, show me how that is progress.

Is the standard that any action must "save us"? Are you interested in any other science which shows that reductions in natural gas will be beneficial to our environment, or only that which shows that it "saves us"? The question seems disingenuous.

heron, ASN, RN · Mar 18

toomuchbaloney said:

Is the standard that any action must "save us"? Are you interested in any other science which shows that reductions in natural gas will be beneficial to our environment, or only that which shows that it "saves us"? The question seems disingenuous.

It is. Climate change deniers have been slinging that particular bit of drek for decades. Remember the same discussion here over lightbulbs, oh, 20 years ago or so? The argument is that if a single change isn't going to solve the problem once and for all, then it's not worth doing. Kinda stupid, I know. Like arguing that if insulin doesn't cure diabetes with one shot, then it's not an appropriate treatment for hyperglycemia.

Classic oil company schtick.

Beerman, BSN · Mar 18

toomuchbaloney said:

Is the standard that any action must "save us"? Are you interested in any other science which shows that reductions in natural gas will be beneficial to our environment, or only that which shows that it "saves us"? The question seems disingenuous.

Let me rephrase. Show me the science that says replacing gas furnaces and water heaters with electric furnaces and water heaters will make a difference in climate change.