By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
EricHiggin on 03 June 2019
Edit Thread
KLAMarine said:
EricHiggin said:

It's not Trump directly but you would think Trump would've been against it. It's possible he was and let it go. He can be controlling but is also a businessman and realizes you can't win them all, and to let them go, especially if it's small pea's. He also has been using lefty tactics and politics against their implementor's, so it's possible it was done on purpose. Hard to say.

I'm saying just because they haven't said or hinted that it has to do with climate change as well, doesn't mean it wasn't taken into account, and in time, it's probably likely we will find out if that was the case. The name change is fairly recent so time would be necessary to find out if there is more to it or not. Maybe it isn't and is a wasted opportunity for the fuel interests. Hard to say.

"The name change is fairly recent so time would be necessary to find out if there is more to it or not."

>Well so far, the Department of Energy still refers to fossil energy as fossil energy.

https://www.energy.gov/fe/about-fossil-energy

So you're saying there is no change so there's no talking point to begin with?



PS1   - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.

PS2  - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.

PS3   - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.

PS4   - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.

PRO  -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.

PS5   - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.

PRO  -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.