Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

whats interesting is that we kick man in the ass for changing the climate and this video wants man to do more of it

Florida will be gone, but check out Bangladesh.  8x the people and growing faster.

If he sets the goal of winning the national championship and merely wins the MAC three times, has he really failed?

Yes, he has failed at his goals. However, how you respond depends on the consequences for failure.

I like to aim for perfection in most things I do. I know I'm not going to achieve it. But by striving for perfection, we arrive at excellence. 

But sometimes excellence isn't enough... Such as:

If you set a goal, and fail to meet it, you failed to meet it.  We're not even going to get close to these goals.

The notion it is at all rational to talk about cutting emissions in half by 2030 should just stop being part of any conversation.  We should consider what is going to happen as a result and how to mitigate that.

I'd like to lose 30 pounds.  If I tried and lost 10, it would be a something.  We're looking at maybe losing a pound, at best.

It really is that bad, despite the trillions we likely will throw at the problem.

If Cincydawg was told that:

• Not losing any weight would cause the planet would become unable to support 75% of our current population. 
• Losing 30 pounds would cause the planet to be able to support our current population and projected growth. 
• Losing 1 pound would cause the planet to become unable to support 74.9% of our current population.
• Losing 10 pounds would cause the planet to become unable to support 68% of the population.

If he then turned around and told you that his goal was to lose 10 pounds, but that his actual plan was unlikely to lose more than 5, I'd consider it a failure with enormous consequences. 

Your argument, Sam, is that if we need to lose weight and we don't lose enough, then we've still gained a lot. The opposite argument is if the plan as achieved kills 68% of the world's population, then even achieving the plan is a failure. 

Achieving the Paris Accords is still a monumental failure, according to those models. And all projections are that we're going to fall well short of it. 

So... That's facing reality. 

Yes, he has failed at his goals. However, how you respond depends on the consequences for failure.

I like to aim for perfection in most things I do. I know I'm not going to achieve it. But by striving for perfection, we arrive at excellence.

But sometimes excellence isn't enough... Such as:
If Cincydawg was told that:

• Not losing any weight would cause the planet would become unable to support 75% of our current population.
• Losing 30 pounds would cause the planet to be able to support our current population and projected growth.
• Losing 1 pound would cause the planet to become unable to support 74.9% of our current population.
• Losing 10 pounds would cause the planet to become unable to support 68% of the population.

If he then turned around and told you that his goal was to lose 10 pounds, but that his actual plan was unlikely to lose more than 5, I'd consider it a failure with enormous consequences.

Your argument, Sam, is that if we need to lose weight and we don't lose enough, then we've still gained a lot. The opposite argument is if the plan as achieved kills 68% of the world's population, then even achieving the plan is a failure.

Achieving the Paris Accords is still a monumental failure, according to those models. And all projections are that we're going to fall well short of it.

So... That's facing reality.

So, there's one of those trashy shows on TLC called the 1000 pound sisters (or something like that).  They are seriously overweight sisters who want to lose weight. One of them is like 400 pounds, and the other is 600 pounds.  They are big. So they want to get the weight loss surgery to lose weight, which causes delightful hijinks like getting weighed at a truck stop.

Anyways, they go to the doctor and instead of just lining them up for surgery, the doctor tells them they need to lose a certain amount of weight before he will approve the surgery.  The 400 pound one has to lose like 25 pounds, the 600 pound one has to lose like 45 pounds.  Now, are these "goals" somehow precise targets that must occur?  Obviously not.  They wouldn't even be close to the same size.  The "goals" are just aimed at getting the girls to demonstrate an ability to make changes that help them lose weight and make the surgery successful.  There isn't that much difference between being 400 and 375 pounds.

The Paris Accords goals aren't some sort of magical number that must occur.  They don't really matter at all. The entire point is that for any attempt to be worthwhile, a majority of the world needs to sign on and have some sort of target. Taking a serious shot requires some serious changes, and like with losing weight, if you talk about goals and don't change anything, then there is no chance of any sort of sustained change that does make a real difference.  

So this idea that we need to "face facts" is besides the point.  We are facing the facts.  Looking at some arbitrary numbers then declaring failure is besides the point.  Of course we won't meet the targets, but the problem isn't that the targets are wrong or the numbers don't add up.  The problem is we aren't trying to meet the targets at all. This discussion feels like the 600 pound sister sitting around eating Fritos and complaining that her 45 pound goal just isn't realistic, as if the problem was having a goal in the first place.

If your plan involves everyone on Earth enthusiastically working together towards a common goal, then good luck with that. 

Nuke China.

I knew our School Board held out until the last minute.Hell even FFs neck of the woods got to stay at home while we had to go in