[quote=@SleepingSilence]
I think we'll find even more efficient ways to use those fuels. We've already made it much cheaper through fracking.

The EPA admits it has no proof it does anything, and the drinking water part they now claim, has been debunked.

But I'll be an optimist, and say I'd love to see alternative energy make progress because there's nothing wrong with competition. They just need to stop being subsidized, $74 billion in federal subsidies, or 25 times how many fossil fuels are getting. (and shouldn't be getting either for the record.)

And if the product was cheap and effective, and was actually a viable source. That's made a lot of progress in you're own words, It should be able to profit without so much effort. 

And not be this much of a futile effort.
[/quote]

Science doesn't happen over night. The idea that we should cease funding improvements to our society if those improvements are not yet competitive on the market is very short sighted. That we haven't reached the point where clean energy is competitive doesn't mean that it is impossible that it will ever happen. Until then, the Market itself has no reason to favor funding for experimentation, so development in a fundamentalist Market economy would necessarily be way slower. 

[quote]I honestly wouldn't defend that, but even if you believe so. Him not going after Clinton was his own undoing. Him supporting her after the fact, certainly completely went against his own message.[/quote]

Again, he was a policy dude, so the idea he wouldn't sacrifice medicaid and the like to purge a bit of bile isn't that surprising.

[quote]Trump won because he would call terrorism, terrorism. He didn't call half of america, deplorable people. He won because he didn't demonize an entire race and gender for being evil and the cause of all the worlds problems. If we're going to talk about bitter venom losing an election, that's on the progressive left side. That you can thank for that.[/quote]

Sounds like you're in love =p

Let's not go waaay out there and pretend Trump smashed this thing. The "Leftists are all ebil monsters and everyone knows it and thats why everyone everywhere loves Trump" narrative is a surefire way to land your own philosophy in the same type of unreality as that of the small cadre of SJW type space cadets you assume to be everybody left of center. The bitterness after the election was going to happen one way or another. 

[quote]
I can't respect Bernie in the slightest, for someone who basically said "White people can't be poor and don't understand what it's like being in a ghetto" in fact, I've said it before, I'll say it again. He can go f himself. [/quote]

I disagreed with that particular statement, but since the rest of his campaign didn't bear the anti-white thing out, and because the other candidates were by far worse, Bernie is the least f-himself-able candidate in the running. It would be too bad if we as a culture sanctify Trump and demonize Sanders. 

[quote]
He's a six figure socialist, so that's a touch ironic. And a millionaire. Change only starts with yourself, why not redistribute his own wealth? Because when people want to steal money because "poor" well there's always someone worse off than you...why aren't you doing anything about it? It's because it's not for helping, it's being envious your neighbor has a bigger house.

And if Donald was poor, but got the funding from somewhere else and he was still as known as he was. It wouldn't of changed a thing...But yes, it's difficult for "anyone" to become president in that sense. But I mean, it's not hard to understand why that's the case..[/quote]

So Bernie Sanders is a socialist because he is envious that other people having three bigger houses than him? Wat? The guy doesn't make enough money to personally fund public healthcare on his own, so his income isn't really pertinent to his policy positions. You'd have to think I'm an Arch-Marxist who actually thinks everyone should make the same income for that argument to have an effect, because otherwise it's nonsensical. I mean, shit, I personally know people who make six figures. That's not mega-elite status exactly.  

Also, if Trump got the funding from elsewhere, which he would need more of to cover expenses that pre-existing wealth covered in this timeline, then he would probably land even closer to Dem spending then he already did. 


[quote]IQ and race[/quote]

goddamit. IQ tests are imperfect measures of intelligence. I mean, just look at [url=http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-iq-questions.html]the questions[/url] and imagine a person with a poor education trying to work them out. This doesn't reflect on their latent abilities, and therefore doesn't reflect on natural intelligence.

When I was in school I considered going into IO psych, which among other things focuses on IQ tests and Myers-Briggs tests and what not. The reason I considered it is because they straight up tell you in school that those tests are complete useless bullshit, but they make you shit loads of money because businesses and the government eat up any sort of test that simplifies complex ideas into something easy enough for HR to understand. So it was basically "There are a lot of jobs here and you can do well in this field if you can bullshit well."

Personally, I don't think intelligence is something that is easily measurable, and I'm not sure it will ever be something that you can measure on a number scale. There is just too much going on, too many factors in abstract and spacial thinking working at once to make a single genetic factor that is intelligence.