Reconta

please dont do this.

Yeah lol, I got banned from his Discord server for suggesting that the mods should only show a warning ("not tested on this version of LSPDFR") instead of completely disabling themselves for minor LSPDFR version updates. Makes no sense at all, and is very hostile to users. 

If those plugins disable themselves with a version check instead of actual incompatibility, that's not the LSPDFR team's issue.

I, for one, accept and embrace friendly fire. You never know when one of your so-called "pals" is going to step out of line, and corrective measures must be taken.
 
I appreciate that you guys are putting so much effort into developing this mod, the mod loader and RDRFR. Although I don't have the time to try them out right now (summer cannot come fast enough!), it's still nice to see new features and fixes from you guys.

Go into the vehicle's VCF and under MISC there should be a line that says:
 
<VehicleIsSlicktop>true</VehicleIsSlicktop>
 
Change that line from true to false and it should cast lights in all directions instead of mostly behind.

He's saying that if you had done a search on the internet you probably would have found the solution to this problem, since its been addressed many times already. Please make sure you have already done things like reading the instructions, looking at the comments and a quick google search BEFORE creating another thread for an already solved problem. If you don't it just annoys all the people that can help you and clutters up the forums.
 
If you haven't done this stuff before then it would probably be best if you read that guide ScarletDraconis linked you to. It will go over the basics for you and directly addresses the problem you are having. If you have read that guide AND the comments and still need help, post again and I will try to assist you.

It would be more helpful if you said what solutions you have already tried.

No your point about the 'repeated failed predictions of the scientific community' does not stand. since most of those 'predictions' you are referring to are either misreported by the media, declarations by misinformed people, or misenterpreted by the public. The vast majority of actual predictions have been correct.
 
The part about snow stopping falling is a load of crap spouted by sensationalist media who just want a story, I thought we had established that already, keep up.
 
The ice caps have been melting for the past 30 years. Thats basic climate knowledge. The only exception has been 2013 and nobody has been able to explain that and back up their claims with evidence.
 
The whole temperature rising by only less then 1 degrees thing is widely misenterpreted.
First of all, If you are going by fahrenheit then the global temperature has already risen by over 1 degree, 1.4 to be exact.
Also you fail to understand that a temperature increase of only 2-3 degrees celcius is enough to cause further melting of the ice, water level  increase and frequent weather anomalies. Since most of the world is held back by ignorance of the topic and a general lack of action, we are likely to surpass that by the turn of the century.
 
As for the coastal cities flooding, this will only happen due to a SUSTAINED temperature increase of around 2+ degrees celcius over maybe 2,000 years. The idea that all our major cities will be imminently flooded is exaggerated.
 
MY point still stands, you should do some proper research.

14 years is hardly a reasonable comparison to 40.

Anthropomorphic climate change is NOT believed to be the only climate change earth has ever had. What it is is a very rapid one, powered by the increase in greenhouse gases, that could make earth a different place than what it was when humans came into existence. In addition, natural climate change (barring dramatic acts such as supervolcanoes and meteors) generally takes hundreds to hundreds of thousands of years to come to fruition. Anthropomorphic climate change is caused by the very rapid increase in CO2 concentrations in our atmosphere, which heats the planet under the very simple process known as the greenhouse effect. Now, unless there is another species that has built a global civilization on earth that is dependent on the burning of hydrocarbons to provide the basics of survival for all 7 billion+ members of their species, it's fair to say that humans are causing this increase in CO2. 
 
Why are they melting? They aren't. The oft cited study that mars is experiencing global warming is talking about a very short time period, from the 1970s to the 1990s. Mars has, on average, been slightly warmer in those 20 years than in years past. This evidence is mainly based one a few images of the planet right after a dust storm contrasted with it during one. However, this isn't doing much to the polar ice caps there, and more importantly, the planet is NOT being warmed from an excess of CO2, nor is there evidence to suggest long term warming. Since the 1850s, it has always been warmer on earth than it was in previous years. The climate variability on mars comes from their atmosphere being vastly thinner than earth and the fact that massive dust storms, which block out the sun and can cool the planet (or in this case, if they don't happen enough, can have a net warming impact) are the driving change in Mars' climate. It is a myth to suggest that Mars is suffering from any provable long term global warming.
 
(Bold by me) If a scientist could legitimately prove that anthropomorphic climate change is not occurring, or even just prove that the thousands of papers published showing that it is caused by human activity are fundamentally flawed and incorrect, then that scientist would be remembered as one of the single most important contributors to modern science. If the paper had verifiable and irrefutable evidence that climate change is not being caused by humans, thus proving one of the most widely accepted facts of the 20th and 21st centuries, then it would spawn many a lifetime of followup studies and research grants. It would be the most important paper published in at least the last 25 years. Yet, somehow, that hasn't happened. Every time a climatologist sets out to figure out why the earth is getting warmer, the evidence points to the increase in CO2 in our atmosphere since the late 1700s. History tells us that a widespread species starting doing a lot of things that puts CO2 into the air around the same time. We have yet for a legitimate scientist to propose a plausible and evidence backed alternative theory (scientific theory, not colloquial. So one backed with evidence and peer-reviewed verifiable data) that gives us a different mechanism for the heating.

I blame the widespread political disbelief in a scientific fact not on Republicans, but on certain conservatives, mass hysteria, crap reporting by the media and fossil fuel lobbies. The Republican party might cater to some of these groups more than the Democrats (which party always tries to roadblock environmental legislation?), but both sides have said ignorant and blatantly false or misleading things about climate change. After all, the Kyoto protocol was shut down by both parties in the Senate in 1998. It just so happens that conservatives tend to be doing more to prevent responses to climate change than anyone else, however, and I felt the need to bring this into the discussion, since there is no scientific debate to be had here. Unless there is a paper that can fundamentally prove every university system, climatologist and government in the United States, Canada, the UK, France, Germany, Russia, Japan, Australia and Italy wrong, we have nothing to discuss but why we aren't doing something and what we need to do today. 
 
The only reason we are debating the existence of global warming is because the media treats this as an open issue; something that is still being tested. But by the people who are educated as to how climate science works? This is a done deal. It's a fact. You can believe that 5 is a bigger number than 15, but that doesn't make you right. Jon Oliver did a lovely sketch explaining what this 'debate' would look like if we gave each side the debating power that it has in the scientific world. 

I really, really wish global warming was a hoax. That we could keep burning fossil fuels and not worry about any long term damage to the planet or our ecosystem. But just like I wish I had a million dollars, or that I wish there was no suffering in the world, or that I wish my crappy car was a new Dodge charger, no matter how much I want something to be true, even if I believe it is, it doesn't make it true. Denying anthropomorphic climate change is denying one of the most universally accepted and proven facts of the 21st century. You'd have more luck holding an alternative theory to Newtonian physics, cell theory or string theory than to suggest climate change is anything other than a Human caused problem. 

Something that always has bothered me whenever climate change is 'debated' is that the denying side always tends to claim two things:
1. 'Global Warming' is a bad name for Global Climate Change (therefor the theory is bunk) and
2. We don't have enough data.
I think both sides can agree on the first part of number 1, since it's a bad name that is much too overused. Yes, the earth is getting hotter, but as an average, not as a day-to-day thing. As a result, it'll be colder some places and warmer others on any given day, but if you look at what the average temperature is every year, it is always going up. Seriously, check it out. By calling it Global Warming, it makes people in Minnesota think it is bullshit every time it snows. XKCD has a decent comic explaining the negative impact of calling climate change global warming.
 
Number two on the other hand? Bullshit, plain and simple. There are no legitimate scientific bodies that believe the current heating of the planet is primarily caused by anything other than human beings. None. The last one changed its opinion in 2007, and it was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists. Seriously. It's one of the most wildly agreed upon things in the scientific world, up there with vaccines being safe and physics being real. I know we, or at least I, really don't want us to be causing climate change, because if we aren't, it means we don't need to change anything. We can keep pumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year and never get worried. But the sad fact is we are most definitely doing it, and no one who knows what they are talking about disagrees. Of course, obviously some people do. Who? Primarily the fossil fuels lobby and the Koch brothers, or people who have a lot of interest in keeping people using coal, natural gas and oil, instead of renewables. Just like when scientific consensus was reached that smoking and chewing tobacco was detrimental to the health of a human being, a bunch of deniers appeared on behalf of the Tobacco industry shedding 'doubt' on the studies. Between 2002 and 2010, conservative billionaires secretly donated nearly $120 million (£77 million) to more than 100 organizations seeking to cast doubt on the science behind climate change. If climate change was so obviously bunk, or so plainly easy to see as unresearched and not our problem, then why would businesses and politicians be spending millions of dollars to suppress information and raise doubt about scientific consensus? 

We are causing climate change. It isn't going to end life on earth, but it could very well end our life. Humans are an immensely species. We've built machines that have taken us off of our own planet, and right now you are reading something that was shot at a satellite with a beam of light less than 3 seconds before you could read it. Unfortunately, we have become powerful enough to, in small steps and over hundreds of years, impact the balance of a very delicate system of things. No one reading this is likely to be severely impacted by climate change. But our children will be. And theirs. We have to work today to mitigate the future consequences of our actions, and anyone telling you otherwise is either misinformed about the facts or willingly ignoring them for personal gain. 

You believed the media.
You're still going off the fact that you think climate change is all about the heating up of the earth. The effect of our influence on climate change has led to more than just an increase in temperatures. We had no snow this year at all, where at my dad's house we usually get 6ft snow drifts during the majority of the winter months. We've had storms more recently, more severe flooding, stronger winds etc. Go to somewhere like Turkey, and they've had shifts in typical weathers too.
 
If the entire investment was based on a theory that failed why are we getting these shifts in normalities? Why are the ice caps actually melting? Why is it that pollution within the atmosphere is getting worse? Why is it that costs of resources are going through the roof?
Whether you like it or not, these things are happening, the data has recorded those things. Just because the media says "say goodbye to the snow forever" doesn't mean that is what the scientific data showed. these things are happening, and we need to do what we can to stop them happening. Otherwise we will fall down into a hole we cannot get out of.
 
200 years. No more resources. And you are still saying "don't spend the money on science, spend it on infrastructure". I agree, that other things need funding too. But don't detract from the fact that we need the scientific research to improve the conditions we live in. Because if you ignore them what are you going to do if they turn round and say "we told you so".
Like I said before, we can recover from an economic collapse should it happen. But if we deplete everything and leave this planet in a state that we cannot control, there will be no recovery. And we can't just jump ship and pick a new planet. "lol, restart"

Yes there is a difference, but one causes the other. There is a small town in Wales, coastal where my friend currently lives. Recently the entire coast was destroyed due to huge amounts of flooding caused by messed up jetstreams which altered the weather, we got more rain than we are stereotypically perceived to get. Their predictions may not be 100% accurate, but if they are coming out with those predictions to begin with something isn't right.
 
And what if we don't make all those investments and turn out to be wrong?
 
If we invest all that money into research NOW, and it doesn't happen, we've got a huge foot in the door for research, and can better our futures anyway for when the obvious happens, like destroying all the trees. But if we invest now and it does happen? We survive.
We can recover from spending huge amounts of money, we can't recover from destroying the earth.
 
I would rather like to live thanks.

We weren't around all that time though were we, and those things were natural occurrence which we cannot control, but have studied the effects of. In the space of time that we have been on this planet we've taken nearly everything it has to offer us, and we've ruined it.
 
In approximately 200 years from now we wont have any natural resources left to use, and the current rate that scientific technology is developing means we wont be around for much longer after. So what do you propose we do then really?
"oh I wont be alive then so it doesn't matter" great, shall we tell the future generations that too? "Oh son, I'll be dead before then so it's not my problem, good luck" wonderful.
 
But the population of the earth won't stop increasing just so we can think about this, the population will continue to expand, we will continue to deforrest huge areas to use for living space and eventually we will be outputting so much CO2 that we won't be able to breath because we cut down all the things which make oxygen naturally. So what about that idea?
 
I feel very strongly about this topic, we need to attempt to do something to better our future rather than sit idle and take the attitude that it's all made up. Our solar system is halfway through it's life, in another 4 billion years our planet will no longer be capable of sustaining life, let's not kill it off.

Oppressing your people.

So you need to get the spider off your chest..? I suggest calling an exterminator asap.

We have a logo?

I don't see anything :(

What 28 days?