Thats why its important to spend resources and pressure countrys to get away from fossil burning. It will take a lot of time, but isnt it better to do something to speed up the process (and slow down the global warming in the process)?

Sure, its better not to even try. Let those oil and food dollars keep ticking in...
- Cloud

The economics are difficult. Figuring out how China and India can do this, with over 1/3rd of the world's population, is next to impossible. Getting them to do this? Who knows.

And here's the rub. The emissions rate world wide has increased the last several years yet the temps are actually lower than the most recent 1998-1999 local maxima.

For an advanced country like the U.S., Methane and LNG (more for storage and int'l transportation) can work. But that is on a smaller scale compared to China and India. Then there are the anti-fracker nuts.

If this alarm-ringing were really true, we would not have seen moderation and decreases in temps. Plus, plant life thrives more with CO2, that is seen via satellites, the last several years.

Problem with the basis for the argument, was CO2 concentration increase yields temp increase. Problem is, with Gore's graph for instance, zooming in on this graph on the time axis, shows temperature rise gives rise to CO2 concentrations, the exact opposite to what was used for some inconvenient truth.

For me, this is all about a money grab by certain individuals and wealth distribution plan by some governments. The Paris accord was complete BS and would utterly rob the U.S.

We can make less pollution just like the CFC reduction effort the last few decades. That had tangible proof though: Ozone layer measurements. But if people think reducing this trace gas and we will see less Typhoons, and then more ice at the poles, they are fooling themselves.

IMO, in less than 30 years we will be back in a global cooling cycle. Whether or not some people go nuts like some did in the 70's, that remains to be seen.

Whatever is done has to be by private industry with minimal gov't intrusion. No need for more Solyndra's and clowns running around with their phone and pen. Let technologist's do their thing.

And lastly, fix the Ethanol model. Whoever thought it was good to burn food for fuel and then have it cost $1.30 for for every $1.00 of end product should have their heads examined. Oh, Ethanol-compatible engines produce about 20-25% less power than 87-Octane and get about 20-25% less MPG than 87-Octane. Ridiculous.

"The Knights have the perfect situation in which to immediately tank. The nature of Vegas is that it's 100% out-of-towners going to games"

This is so incredibly dumb it's not even funny.

https://www.nhl.com/news/...eason-tickets/c-281931152

16,000 season tickets sold. Must be a lot of out of towners planning to travel to Vegas 41 times a year.
- Zac_O

Could be a lot of biz folks who intend to take clients.

The economics are difficult. Figuring out how China and India can do this, with over 1/3rd of the world's population, is next to impossible. Getting them to do this? Who knows.

And here's the rub. The emissions rate world wide has increased the last several years yet the temps are actually lower than the most recent 1998-1999 local maxima.

For an advanced country like the U.S., Methane and LNG (more for storage and int'l transportation) can work. But that is on a smaller scale compared to China and India. Then there are the anti-fracker nuts.

If this alarm-ringing were really true, we would not have seen moderation and decreases in temps. Plus, plant life thrives more with CO2, that is seen via satellites, the last several years.

Problem with the basis for the argument, was CO2 concentration increase yields temp increase. Problem is, with Gore's graph for instance, zooming in on this graph on the time axis, shows temperature rise gives rise to CO2 concentrations, the exact opposite to what was used for some inconvenient truth.

For me, this is all about a money grab by certain individuals and wealth distribution plan by some governments. The Paris accord was complete BS and would utterly rob the U.S.

We can make less pollution just like the CFC reduction effort the last few decades. That had tangible proof though: Ozone layer measurements. But if people think reducing this trace gas and we will see less Typhoons, and then more ice at the poles, they are fooling themselves.

IMO, in less than 30 years we will be back in a global cooling cycle. Whether or not some people go nuts like some did in the 70's, that remains to be seen.

Whatever is done has to be by private industry with minimal gov't intrusion. No need for more Solyndra's and clowns running around with their phone and pen. Let technologist's do their thing.

And lastly, fix the Ethanol model. Whoever thought it was good to burn food for fuel and then have it cost $1.30 for for every $1.00 of end product should have their heads examined. Oh, Ethanol-compatible engines produce about 20-25% less power than 87-Octane and get about 20-25% less MPG than 87-Octane. Ridiculous.
- blackhawk24

You seem very logical and informed. I agree with you. America is different from the rest of the world, for the most part, free markets will dictate what will work in this country. Obama tried to "push" solar with fedrl funding and most of those companies went bust. Just because the "experts" say one way or the other is best doesn't make it so. The rest of the world tries to make talking pints and waits for the US to pay for it even Though they wont change their own behavior.

The consumer has the final say. Whether or not Tanner, or MSNBC, or whoever disagrees . people will not buy or invest in products, industries, or technology that isn't profitable!....period! Thats not bad, its simply reality. Maybe I am short sighted, but until topics like climate change, or global warming, or global cooling are talked about in an open way, and not as a certainty, which its not, or as a religion, than most common sense people will tune it out.

The Earth is alive, and like any other living thing it goes through changes and cycles. NO proof humans are the sole reason for this

Jesus, the mods need to get off their asses, either we're allowed to talk about this stuff or we're not. But to delete over 100 posts and make Tanner edit his blog and then allow people to continue to talk about it after the fact is asinine.

Jesus, the mods need to get off their asses, either we're allowed to talk about this stuff or we're not. But to delete over 100 posts and make Tanner edit his blog and then allow people to continue to talk about it after the fact is asinine.
- Wetbandit1

The "stuff" is still on the blog. Have to be real. Take ALL of the political/environmental rants off the blog. Period. THEN criticize if comments contain such topics. As long as Tanners blog has such content, then the replies can also. imo

The "stuff" is still on the blog. Have to be real. Take ALL of the political/environmental rants off the blog. Period. THEN criticize if comments contain such topics. As long as Tanners blog has such content, then the replies can also. imo
- quackup

I missed that one, he had 2 I guess, and one is gone.

I thought it was completely edited. Then why the (frank) did they go on a spree deleting 100+ comments last night? So stupid. That was my whole point yesterday. If it's up there we should be able to talk about it. If he wants to talk about it in his blog that's his prerogative, and if you don't like it, read one of the other 35 blogs on the site. It's not really a big deal. I have a passionate dislike for Ryan Wilson. I don't read him. I hate FOX and MSNBC. I don't watch them. And the only time I see CNN is when I'm at the doctor. It's really quite simple to avoid things you don't like to the point of complaining about.

But I agree, if it's in the blog we should be able to talk about it.

Jesus, the mods need to get off their asses, either we're allowed to talk about this stuff or we're not. But to delete over 100 posts and make Tanner edit his blog and then allow people to continue to talk about it after the fact is asinine.
- Wetbandit1

Over a couple months time, I tried to contact Ek and ask if the CoC changed regarding this. Crickets. Asked a mod specifically about this author. Would not answer me. I took it they condoned it, therefore I comment. I refuse to let someone so ill informed in the economies and sciences to sit in front of a computer and spew complete and utter BS. Add in asinine hockey talk like the RS is more telling than the PO and I see someone who has their own alt-universe.

Over a couple months time, I tried to contact Ek and ask if the CoC changed regarding this. Crickets. Asked a mod specifically about this author. Would not answer me. I took it they condoned it, therefore I comment. I refuse to let someone so ill informed in the economies and sciences to sit in front of a computer and spew complete and utter BS. Add in asinine hockey talk like the RS is more telling than the PO and I see someone who has their own alt-universe.
- blackhawk24

This is hilarious because lately, I have really been into studying the way that guys like you take condescending tones in order to make up for the way in which facts never seem to agree or get through to you.

The idea that a person like you, who thinks and writes the things you do, thinks that I am the one who is not informed is ironic, and sad.

Also, objectively ridiculous.

I honestly am at a loss to explain why all the sane, educated informed people are talked down to by people who are only good at being rude, condescending and avoiding facts.

Just for the record, I have been - and likely will be again - a college professor and it doesn't seem like you have graduated high school. OH, and I've also had a job that paid me to do research, something I am an expert at.

I don't want to brag, and I almost never mention my actual qualifications. I just want you to know that I'm on to you. I know how you've been brainwashed to think, and I know you despise new information, facts, and anyone who knows better than you.

I have been asked to lay off the politics, so I won't be responding to whatever garbage you post in response to this, but I just want to make it very clear how much you amuse me, and how, no matter how sarcastic or insulting you are, or how much you disparage me, or (ironically) think I'm the one who isn't informed, how I will be the one who continues to objectively and morally be in the right.

Just so we're clear and everything.

The economics are difficult. Figuring out how China and India can do this, with over 1/3rd of the world's population, is next to impossible. Getting them to do this? Who knows.

And here's the rub. The emissions rate world wide has increased the last several years yet the temps are actually lower than the most recent 1998-1999 local maxima.

For an advanced country like the U.S., Methane and LNG (more for storage and int'l transportation) can work. But that is on a smaller scale compared to China and India. Then there are the anti-fracker nuts.

If this alarm-ringing were really true, we would not have seen moderation and decreases in temps. Plus, plant life thrives more with CO2, that is seen via satellites, the last several years.

Problem with the basis for the argument, was CO2 concentration increase yields temp increase. Problem is, with Gore's graph for instance, zooming in on this graph on the time axis, shows temperature rise gives rise to CO2 concentrations, the exact opposite to what was used for some inconvenient truth.

For me, this is all about a money grab by certain individuals and wealth distribution plan by some governments. The Paris accord was complete BS and would utterly rob the U.S.

We can make less pollution just like the CFC reduction effort the last few decades. That had tangible proof though: Ozone layer measurements. But if people think reducing this trace gas and we will see less Typhoons, and then more ice at the poles, they are fooling themselves.

IMO, in less than 30 years we will be back in a global cooling cycle. Whether or not some people go nuts like some did in the 70's, that remains to be seen.

Whatever is done has to be by private industry with minimal gov't intrusion. No need for more Solyndra's and clowns running around with their phone and pen. Let technologist's do their thing.

And lastly, fix the Ethanol model. Whoever thought it was good to burn food for fuel and then have it cost $1.30 for for every $1.00 of end product should have their heads examined. Oh, Ethanol-compatible engines produce about 20-25% less power than 87-Octane and get about 20-25% less MPG than 87-Octane. Ridiculous.
- blackhawk24

Like I said...climate is global

This is hilarious because lately, I have really been into studying the way that guys like you take condescending tones in order to make up for the way in which facts never seem to agree or get through to you.

The idea that a person like you, who thinks and writes the things you do, thinks that I am the one who is not informed is , ironic and sad.

Also, objectively ridiculous.

I honestly am at a loss to explain why all the sane, educated informed people are talked down to by people who are only good at being rude, condescending and avoiding facts.

Just for the record, I have been - and likely will be again - a college professor and it doesn't seem like you have graduated high school. Just so we're all clear. OH, and I've also had a job that paid me to do research, something I am an expert at.

I don't want to brag, and I almost never mention my actual qualifications. I just want you to know that I'm on to you. I know how you've been brainwashed to think, and I know you despise new information, facts, and anyone who knows better than you.

I have been asked to lay off the politics, so I won't be responding to whatever garbage you post in response to this, but I just want to make it very clear how much you amuse me, and how, no matter how sarcastic or insulting you are, or how much you disparage me, or (ironically) think I'm the one who isn't informed, how I will be the one who continues to objectively and morally be in the right.

Just so we're clear and everything.
- james_tanner1

Well, if you're so smart, why don't you figure out how to affordably get rid of the internal combustion engine? Until then, this is all talk.

Wow Tanner. What a self centered, self absorbed, narcissistic post. Just a pompous nobody.

The nature of Vegas is that it's 100% out-of-towners going to games, and the Casinos will buy up most of the tickets anyways. Why even attempt to win a single game?

This actually couldn't be further from the truth. It's well known that Bettman wanted a real fan base for the team and not dependent on casinos buying up seats. That's why the league required the sale of 9,000 individual season tickets (17,500 seat arena) before they'd approve the new team. In reality, it only took 1 month for this city of almost 2 million people to buy 13,000 individual season tickets. By early 2017 the team reached the limit of season passes they'd even sell (16,000) so there'd still be some individual game tickets available.

Most people wrongly assume this city is full of transient, drug induced drifters, when in reality it's generally similar to any other urban setting once you get away from the Strip atmosphere....which if you live here, you do immediately.
- nikel

It's going to be fascinating to watch this unfold.

I'm wondering if some of the season ticket buyers are thinking they can unload to out of towners via StubHub or other.

I've had this discussion a few times with a friend who is in the gaming industry - he seems to think that the notion that casinos will be buying up all the tickets is wrong.

Apparently the casinos have a formula - down to the minute - as to how long shows should be. I can't recall off the top of my head what it was - but it's under 2 hours.

The idea being that they are happy to give you a break from the tables - comping you some tickets to an event or a meal - but they don't want you away for too long.

Sending someone to a hockey game is too long - people will consider that their night's entertainment.

So, at least according to my buddy, casinos will get tickets for high rollers if asked (they'll get whatever high rollers ask for), but they won't be giving away free tickets to Martha and Mike from Toronto who come down for 3 days and don't load a lot on their casino card.

It will be really interesting to see the Knights' schedule when it comes out - I'm guessing the NHL will have done some serious thinking about this, and will try to put teams from larger, more affluent cities on key dates.

This is hilarious because lately, I have really been into studying the way that guys like you take condescending tones in order to make up for the way in which facts never seem to agree or get through to you.

The idea that a person like you, who thinks and writes the things you do, thinks that I am the one who is not informed is ironic, and sad.

Also, objectively ridiculous.

I honestly am at a loss to explain why all the sane, educated informed people are talked down to by people who are only good at being rude, condescending and avoiding facts.

Just for the record, I have been - and likely will be again - a college professor and it doesn't seem like you have graduated high school. OH, and I've also had a job that paid me to do research, something I am an expert at.

I don't want to brag, and I almost never mention my actual qualifications. I just want you to know that I'm on to you. I know how you've been brainwashed to think, and I know you despise new information, facts, and anyone who knows better than you.

I have been asked to lay off the politics, so I won't be responding to whatever garbage you post in response to this, but I just want to make it very clear how much you amuse me, and how, no matter how sarcastic or insulting you are, or how much you disparage me, or (ironically) think I'm the one who isn't informed, how I will be the one who continues to objectively and morally be in the right.

Just so we're clear and everything.
- james_tanner1

have a snickers

This is hilarious because lately, I have really been into studying the way that guys like you take condescending tones in order to make up for the way in which facts never seem to agree or get through to you.

The idea that a person like you, who thinks and writes the things you do, thinks that I am the one who is not informed is ironic, and sad.

Also, objectively ridiculous.

I honestly am at a loss to explain why all the sane, educated informed people are talked down to by people who are only good at being rude, condescending and avoiding facts.


- james_tanner1[b]Just for the record, I have been - and likely will be again - a college professor and it doesn't seem like you have graduated high school. OH, and I've also had a job that paid me to do research, something I am an expert at.

I don't want to brag, and I almost never mention my actual qualifications. I just want you to know that I'm on to you. I know how you've been brainwashed to think, and I know you despise new information, facts, and anyone who knows better than you.

I have been asked to lay off the politics, so I won't be responding to whatever garbage you post in response to this, but I just want to make it very clear how much you amuse me, and how, no matter how sarcastic or insulting you are, or how much you disparage me, or (ironically) think I'm the one who isn't informed, how I will be the one who continues to objectively and morally be in the right.

Just so we're clear and everything.

Well done Tanner, way to make fun of someone's education.

What is wrong w/ you? By the way, most people in Academia aren't too smart when it comes to how REAL life works!

I'm sure you are one of the professors who is churning out those little Snowflakes who still live w/ their mommy and daddy, and are afraid to swim in the deep end!

This is hilarious because lately, I have really been into studying the way that guys like you take condescending tones in order to make up for the way in which facts never seem to agree or get through to you.

The idea that a person like you, who thinks and writes the things you do, thinks that I am the one who is not informed is ironic, and sad.

Also, objectively ridiculous.

I honestly am at a loss to explain why all the sane, educated informed people are talked down to by people who are only good at being rude, condescending and avoiding facts.

Just for the record, I have been - and likely will be again - a college professor and it doesn't seem like you have graduated high school. OH, and I've also had a job that paid me to do research, something I am an expert at.

I don't want to brag, and I almost never mention my actual qualifications. I just want you to know that I'm on to you. I know how you've been brainwashed to think, and I know you despise new information, facts, and anyone who knows better than you.

I have been asked to lay off the politics, so I won't be responding to whatever garbage you post in response to this, but I just want to make it very clear how much you amuse me, and how, no matter how sarcastic or insulting you are, or how much you disparage me, or (ironically) think I'm the one who isn't informed, how I will be the one who continues to objectively and morally be in the right.

Just so we're clear and everything.
- james_tanner1

This is hilarious because lately, I have really been into studying the way that guys like you take condescending tones in order to make up for the way in which facts never seem to agree or get through to you.

The idea that a person like you, who thinks and writes the things you do, thinks that I am the one who is not informed is ironic, and sad.

Also, objectively ridiculous.

I honestly am at a loss to explain why all the sane, educated informed people are talked down to by people who are only good at being rude, condescending and avoiding facts.

Just for the record, I have been - and likely will be again - a college professor and it doesn't seem like you have graduated high school. OH, and I've also had a job that paid me to do research, something I am an expert at.

I don't want to brag, and I almost never mention my actual qualifications. I just want you to know that I'm on to you. I know how you've been brainwashed to think, and I know you despise new information, facts, and anyone who knows better than you.

I have been asked to lay off the politics, so I won't be responding to whatever garbage you post in response to this, but I just want to make it very clear how much you amuse me, and how, no matter how sarcastic or insulting you are, or how much you disparage me, or (ironically) think I'm the one who isn't informed, how I will be the one who continues to objectively and morally be in the right.

Just so we're clear and everything.
- james_tanner1

James, I know how much you love facts. So here is something that I consider to be a fact. Smart, educated, informed and intelligent people don't have to tell others that they are those things even remotely as much as you do.

It's going to be fascinating to watch this unfold.

I'm wondering if some of the season ticket buyers are thinking they can unload to out of towners via StubHub or other.

I've had this discussion a few times with a friend who is in the gaming industry - he seems to think that the notion that casinos will be buying up all the tickets is wrong.

Apparently the casinos have a formula - down to the minute - as to how long shows should be. I can't recall off the top of my head what it was - but it's under 2 hours.

The idea being that they are happy to give you a break from the tables - comping you some tickets to an event or a meal - but they don't want you away for too long.


Sending someone to a hockey game is too long - people will consider that their night's entertainment.

So, at least according to my buddy, casinos will get tickets for high rollers if asked (they'll get whatever high rollers ask for), but they won't be giving away free tickets to Martha and Mike from Toronto who come down for 3 days and don't load a lot on their casino card.

It will be really interesting to see the Knights' schedule when it comes out - I'm guessing the NHL will have done some serious thinking about this, and will try to put teams from larger, more affluent cities on key dates.
- Atomic Wedgie

You're correct on all accounts. the show times are 1 hour 44 minutes MAX. I had a friend who played in a great cover band and they were killing it at the old Tropicana hotel. They came out to play an encore and the Trop pulled the plug on them at 1hr. 50 min and the casino boss almost didn't pay them he was so pissed!
There are a LOT of people from out of the area who live in North Las Vegas and Henderson. I have a friend who lives there who went in halves with a neighbor on season tickets. People in that area are BEGGING for professional sports. Thank God the Golden Knights got going before the Raiders, though. That would have been a tough sell.
The casino's won't be handing out freebies to the game for your couple of hundred you blew on the blackjack tables. There will be package deals where you come in for a weekend and get tickets for a game, but the price of the ticket is going to be included in the package deal.

have a snickers
- Tumbleweed

Just wanted you to know, I laugh out loud every time I scroll by your post. It's perfect!

Just wanted you to know, I laugh out loud every time I scroll by your post. It's perfect!
- duxcup07

It's fantastic. I wish I had posted it.

James, I know how much you love facts. So here is something that I consider to be a fact. Smart, educated, informed and intelligent people don't have to tell others that they are those things even remotely as much as you do.


- MJL

B I N G O

Astute observation!

It's fantastic. I wish I had posted it.
- MJL

i think he's upset that he's been told to quit the political trolling. He's lashing out at posters and is being overly defensive of himself because of it.

it'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

You're correct on all accounts. the show times are 1 hour 44 minutes MAX. I had a friend who played in a great cover band and they were killing it at the old Tropicana hotel. They came out to play an encore and the Trop pulled the plug on them at 1hr. 50 min and the casino boss almost didn't pay them he was so pissed!
There are a LOT of people from out of the area who live in North Las Vegas and Henderson. I have a friend who lives there who went in halves with a neighbor on season tickets. People in that area are BEGGING for professional sports. Thank God the Golden Knights got going before the Raiders, though. That would have been a tough sell.
The casino's won't be handing out freebies to the game for your couple of hundred you blew on the blackjack tables. There will be package deals where you come in for a weekend and get tickets for a game, but the price of the ticket is going to be included in the package deal.
- duxcup07

Do you remember how much the tix were?

I could see a scenario where you buy a pair of season seats, and sell off the games to the Chicago, Toronto, Montreal, etc for double or triple.

You could then see all the Monday to Thursday night games for free.

Do you remember how much the tix were?

I could see a scenario where you buy a pair of season seats, and sell off the games to the Chicago, Toronto, Montreal, etc for double or triple.

You could then see all the Monday to Thursday night games for free.
- Atomic Wedgie

Edit: found it (duh - looked on their website!).

Uppers (as part of a 22 game package) are $55 each (USD). Actually more expensive than uppers in Toronto.

Lower bowl about $100 (USD). Helluva lot cheaper than Toronto!

i think he's upset that he's been told to quit the political trolling. He's lashing out at posters and is being overly defensive of himself because of it.

it'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
- Tumbleweed

I am in no way upset. Just telling it like it is.

I am in no way upset. Just telling it like it is.
- james_tanner1

Tanner knows ALL!!!! If he says it and he finds research that he agrees with than nobody can contradict him!!!

He is the all knowing professor of Hockeybuzz

Oh yah....what college were u a professor at?