pigseye

With all due respect, if you have to think about that then there is something wrong with you.

Here's some good news, https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/chinese-city-bans-the-eating-of-cats-and-dogs/ar-BB124Yqx?ocid=spartandhp Chinese city bans the eating of cats and dogs

A whopping 2% of GDP, good luck riding that wave, Alberta was a bump on the road before the oil industry came along.

No it doesn't come up with some numbers if that's the case.

Welfare perhaps?

Yes, if you are denied EI, then you qualify for this benefit.

And to summarize, All told, even with these new measures, workers can expect to see 55% of their income after three or four weeks without pay. That is going to create a very desperate situation for many workers in this country.

This part should have been before my foirst post, An Emergency Care Benefit was announced that will pay a $450 flat rate per week for 14 weeks (prior income doesn’t matter). You’ll have to apply for the EI or EI sickness benefit first, but if that’s denied you’ll get this one instead. The benefit is for anyone who is ill, who is self-isolating, who is in quarantine, who is caring for someone who is ill or who had to take off time due to school closures. You’ll be able to apply in April. If that seems a little late, it’s because this package of measures has to pass a vote in the House of Commons first.

This is about the best explanation you will get, Likely, people hoping to access the Emergency Support Benefit will have to apply for EI first, be denied and then move to this secondary system, which will also likely aim for a 55% replacement rate up to the EI weekly maximum benefit of $573. They may also forgo a replacement rate approach and shoot for a full-time or part-time flat rate approach, as happened during the 2003 SARS program for health care workers. This change also needs to pass a House of Commons vote and so won’t come into effect until April.

If you don't have any economy you can't pay for public services, like it or not Alberta's economy is tied to the oil industry, economy, jobs, pipelines, wasn't that the slogan. Call it ideology but what else is there in Alberta to build the economy around?

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this news, But early reviews of Trump's handling of the crisis suggest that's not necessarily the case. A new Gallup poll found Trump's approval rating has shot up to 49% – matching the best of his presidency and a 5-point boost since the outbreak started. What's more, 60% of Americans in the Gallup poll approved of Trump's response to the outbreak. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/us-election-2020/analysis-trumps-approval-rating-is-rising-amid-the-coronavirus-crisis-what-could-it-mean-for-november/ar-BB11SyyQ?ocid=spartandhp

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/north-american-stock-markets-rebound-from-steep-losses-on-promised-stimulus/ar-BB11jqYg?ocid=spartandhp A trillion dollars, did I just read that right?

According to L’Ecuyer et al., 2019, the global annual net cloud radiative effect (CRE) at the Earth’s surface is estimated to be -24.8 ±8.7 W/m². In other words, when cloud cover increases, surface temperatures cool because the net shortwave effects of cloud (-51 W/m²) exceed the net longwave effects of cloud (+26.3 W/m²). The uncertainty value associated with this overall surface forcing estimate, ±8.7 W/m², has a range of 17.4 W/m². If CO2’s net radiative effect in surface forcing is 0.02 W/m² per year and the uncertainty the radiative effects of clouds is ±8.7 W/m² per year, this means that uncertainty is 870 larger than the CO2 influence. A CO2 forcing signal is therefore not detectable in the Earth’s energy balance.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/03/17/an-effective-treatment-for-coronavirus-covid-19-has-been-found-in-a-common-anti-malarial-drug/ Encouraging news: three new medical studies show a commonly available anti-malaria drug known as chloroquine aka chloroquine phosphate is showing strong results against COVID-19 infections in both China and South Korea. Excerpts from three studies, including one published in Nature are below.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/judge-rules-manitoba-government-had-right-to-cancel-metis-benefits-deal/ar-BB11juZ1?ocid=spartandhp

I never claimed it was a fact did I? You jumped to that conclusion all on your own despite me saying a few times that it was a best guess. You created a straw man argument with yourself.

Land has nothing to do with the study, it's about what happens to clouds when you increase the CO2 concentration. Turns out that water vapor and clouds have a negative feedback effect, ie. they basically cancel and then overwhelm anything CO2 can do. The biggest problem with the GCM (Global Circulation Models) is that we don't know how to model clouds so they are the big wildcard in this. It's not CO2 that is the problem, CO2 is well understood and scientists know it can only increase temperature a degree or two on it's own, it needs a positive feedback from water vapor to increase the temperatures beyond. Water vapor is the most powerful green gas and it was thought that with a warmer wetter world started off by CO2 that it would increase the water vapor in the atmosphere and cause run away greenhouse effects. Turns out the opposite may be true. When someone tells you the science is settled, agree, because as far as CO2 is concerned it pretty much is, CO2 will cause a little bit of extra warming. What they still don't have a full understanding on is what everything else in the system does. This is just another small piece in the puzzle but it should improve the way the models work in the future.

When your Holy Bible is the The Robber Barons you know you got big problems a coming down the pike.

You can't prove that a hypothesis is true, you can only disprove it, so good luck with that one.

Does anyone really believe that they want to stop the spread of this virus? 10B people by 2030, Trump and Putin know they have to thin the heard, those evil bastards.

Back to the drawing board for the warmists, they are going to need new models after this, Now, in another new paper (Drotos et al., 2020), several more scientists are asserting the Earth system has an internal, self-amplifying negative cloud feedback mechanism so powerful that “at CO2 concentrations beyond four times the preindustrial value, the climate sensitivity decreases to nearly zero as a result of episodic global cooling events as large as 10 K”. The cooling events spawned by the high CO2 concentrations lead to temperature “drops below the coldest values of the control [278 ppm pre-industrial CO2]” such that the climate sensitivity to CO2 doublings is “practically zero” over time. “In particular, the climatological mean value of the global mean surface temperature practically stops responding to an increase in the CO2 concentration. This practically zero climate sensitivity suggests that the effect of a feedback on the global mean surface temperature may turn out to be as strong as the radiative effect of CO2.” In other words, scientists have found yet another way the claimed “runaway greenhouse” response of the climate system to elevated CO2 turns out to be a false alarm.

The boomers are the ones who effed it all up for this generation.

I'm going to enjoy watching this next generation fall flat on their faces and I won't be reaching down with a hand up.