Have you read the Constitution of the United States? The left news tells you that e*****rs certified by state legislatures are f**e and those certified by executive branch officials are legitimate. But even a cursory read of our constitution will show you that it is the state legislatures who have the sole authority over their State's e******ns. It is the executive branch officials who have unconstitutionally certified e*****rs.

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/

There were no f**e e*****rs. Even the ones illegally and unconstitutionally certified by the State's executive branch are not f**e e*****rs. The e*****rs were chosen by their parties well before the e******n as is proper. They are real e*****rs. They simply were not legally certified.

If the front runner is a RINO, is beholden to corporate America or China, or simply weak; they won't go after him/her. Threaten their apple cart, corruption, China, or Iran; and they'll attack full force.

Educated in what? If you mean educated in history, physics, science, engineering, technical or trades, or any other subject which engages logic; then I agree. But if you mean getting a BA in G****r Studies means you are educated, then I disagree.

My response was to the assertion that red state governments were forcing women to bear children. There is only one way a woman can be forced to get pregnant. That is through rape. So for the women to be forced to bear children she would have to be taken off of and prevented from using contraceptives while simultaneously be raped. And since most rapes don't result in pregnancy, the women would have to be raped repeatedly until they became pregnant.

Taking contraceptives is not a preventative for rape. I have not, nor ever implied, that women should take contraceptives in case they are raped. Such an attitude implies rape is no big deal so long as you don't get pregnant. Or, as it seems to be viewed by pro-a******nists, rape is seen as a lesser evil than not allowing anyone to end a pregnancy for any reason up until, or even after, labor begins.

A fetus is an offspring not yet born. A baby is an offspring. They are both offspring. Just one is specific as to age. Your statement is like saying, " preschooler, NOT child." As if because the child is in preschool it is not a child.

So which red state governors are you accusing of raping and impregnating women, or forcing women to be raped and impregnated, without allowing them access to contraceptives?

And don't forget the AZ audit where boxes of mail in b****ts which had been recorded as received in the mail, had never been folded. Mail in b****ts need to be placed in 2 envelopes, one inside the other. But there were also far more "received " than mailed out.

Yes records are broken. The hottest July since 2022. Sometimes the record goes back less than a month. I routinely hear the news say this is a record heat when the temperatures are in the 90s. Yet in the 1990s 115 to 120 degrees for a week or three were common. This doesn't mean they are lying. But the record they are speaking of may only go back days or weeks.

There are about 15 glaciers outside of Greenland which are shrinking. There are thousands which are increasing including those in the Sierras in California and all but one of Antarctica's ice sheets which have been expanding both in area and thickness.

Greenland sits over a geothermal plume where the magma has recently risen close to the surface. This is the same plume which formed Iceland. If the climate models were correct and the geothermal plume had nothing to do with the loss of Greenland glaciers but were instead due to global carbon emissions; why are so many glaciers expanding? Why has Antarctica's glaciers increased more than 40% in both area and thickness since 1979? Hmm. It couldn't possibly be that computer models might be inaccurate.

Nowadays whenever the actual data differs from that projected by computer models, those supporting a climate agenda take the projected data over the real data.

The newest green project Biden wants to do is put up sun shields to block the sun's rays from entering our atmosphere. What a team. Harris wants to build a monorail to HW to reduce emissions and Biden to put up sun shields outside of earth's atmosphere.

https://scitechdaily.com/newly-discovered-greenland-hot-rock-mantle-plume-drives-thermal-activities-in-the-arctic/

Attached file:
(Download)

They've been saying the seas are rising since they first changed the crisis from-- we are going to be in an ice age due to human generated pollution, to we are heating up the world with greenhouse gases.

Why are the only places seas are rising is where population has had a major increase and water reservoirs are be drained and there are lots more buildings? The seas aren't rising. The land is sinking in those areas.

Would the same elites who push the c*****e c****e narrative of the world getting hotter and the seas rising be buying and moving into low lying coastal areas if they thought they'd be under water?

I agree!

The article said they found a way to make them more efficient while using less lithium or chemicals. Yes they are still a far more "dirty" than using f****l f**ls and a very great deal more so than nuclear.

I was making the comparison with these and what is currently being used in electric cars; not with these and using f****l f**ls.

I should have qualified that I was relating how the El Nino/La Nina effects the southwestern States. I don't know what the effects of El Nino and La Nina are so far from their source or far from where they hit the USA, which is in the southwest States. But the effects must in some places be the opposite as hot dry air flow into the wind currents of an El Nino.

Have you enough science knowledge to know the difference between the el nino and la nina? For a few years in a row we were in la nina. This resulted in wetter cooler weather, especially as it was accompanied by a grand solar minimum. This year we have an el nino. Dry hot weather and droughts are common during el nino.

Back in the 90s, during el nino there were weeks at a time of triple digit heat in the southeast corner of AZ where I live. We'd have the temperature hit triple digit by May at the latest. And in late June and July the temps often reached over 110 for weeks with some days 115 to 120. Occasionally it hit 130 in mid July. This el nino we have had only three days of triple heat so far. Two days at 100 and one day at 101.

If you actually look at the temperatures in past years you will find it is not getting hotter but actually getting cooler.

At today's level of technology, absolutely. Maybe someday someone will discover how to make various devices now only talked about in science fiction. But for today it is nuclear.

Yup. Science alarmists don't look at climate data going back before the industrial revolution. Or any data which doesn't support the narrative.

I recently was trying to explain grand solar minimums to a college graduate. She smuggly said it was due to all the CO2 emissions. When I reminded her it was the sun and nothing we do on earth will effect the sun, she disagreed and continued to blame the solar minimum on CO2 emissions. She also didn't know that due to less solar radiation reaching the earth, it cools and doesn't warm. She even had the gall to tell me to follow the science.