You know, the efforts to suppress any scientific opposition to the PC view looks more like RELIGION than science.
Why is that?
|
You know, the efforts to suppress any scientific opposition to the PC view looks more like RELIGION than science.
Why is that?
There you go Elliot tilting at windmills I knew there was something of the Don about youQuote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
Windmills are only 20% efficient unless you have a perpetual North sea gale but both are really only good in a distributed system solution. The idea that you can use them for large scale power production rivaling base load stations is ridiculous. However set them up to supply a small local need where you are not transmitting power long distances and they are both cheap and effective as long as you don't expect them to meet 100% of your requirements. Therein lies the problem:)Quote:
Originally Posted by spitvenom
You must never let the truth get in the way of a good story and a photo opportunityQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
But the President holds all the cards in this debate .Thanks to our idiot Supreme Court (SCOTUS) which made the absurd ruling 2 years ago that CO2 is a pollutant under the Clean Air Act;the EPA ruled in April that global warming is caused by man made C02 emissions despite the report by Carlin.
That opened the door for the EPA to act on regulating CO2 emissions whether our Congress acts ,and the President signs cap and trade into law.
This will happen in a matter of weeks after the mandatory public commnet phase is complete.
I do wish those who think CO2 is a pollutant would stop exhaling it.
CO2 is not a pollutant, it is vital to life as we know it, the question is; do we have too much of a good thing? Now if we hadn't destroyed so much of the forests, we wouldn't have the problem we think we have but it is really interesting to note that in geological terms the era we live in hardly registers on the graph. What we have is statistics taken out of context and used to pursue a political agenda.Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
By this I am not saying we do not need to mend our ways and stop using up resourses in an unsustainable way, but we should do this for rational reasons.:)
I assume when you say this you also mean the use of rare earth minerals needed to produce hybrid batteries ,electric motor magnets and wind turbine generators. Metals like neodymium.Quote:
By this I am not saying we do not need to mend our ways and stop using up resourses in an unsustainable way, but we should do this for rational reasons
John Kerry has finally found his national security backbone... by fear mongering about climate change.
And you thought Republicans were the only fear mongers...Quote:
On August 6, 2001, President George W. Bush famously received an intelligence briefing entitled, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." Thirty-six days later, al Qaeda terrorists did just that.
Scientists tell us we have a 10-year window -- if even that -- before catastrophic climate change becomes inevitable and irreversible. The threat is real, and time is not on our side.
Yes, Tom, all resources are finite and we are wasteful. Uranium is a case in point. We have a use for it to feed our insatiable thurst for power but is the nuclear industry of today the best use for this mineral. There are other ways to generate power. In the same way using rare materials to make batteries for mobile phones, what is basically a fashion item, is not a good use for it, in fact, it is wasteful because nobody really needs to have instant communications every minute of the day. We live in the instant, everything must serve the moment, but this is wasteful because our technology doesn't often make the best use of resources. We cut down trees to make paper, and kid ourselves that the trees are a renewable resource. If this is so where are the forests? They are disappearing rapidly and at the same time fueling the very climate change we are trying to combat by other means.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
You see, Tom, I don't actually believe climate change can be affected by changing the way we produce energy, therefore the emphasis on the "green" industries is a great deal of effort misplaced to achieve that end, when what we really need to do is curb the production of energy based appliances. How often have you seen a product placed on the market which operates in a manual way only next season it reappears with batteries or an electric motor.
Nuclear submaries have been phased out in Russia over the past few years due to the dangerous radiation and leakage. I don't think this is a good source of power period. Coal is a better source to generate electricity. Also water such as at Niagra Falls would be a better choice than nuclear power.
The lithium needed to power the hybrid cars is going to result in a fiasco shortly as there is only just so much of this mineral and it is located in one area of the globe as well. It will be expended too soon to do any of us much good.
Maybe we need to start rethinking our options on energy.
The earth is getting cooler - not warmer.
The Australian continent has been slowly drained of it's water in some places on purpose to make the continent less habitable.
The weather is manipulated to a greater degree than what you would even imagine.
Twinkie go back to twinkingQuote:
Originally Posted by twinkiedooter
You cannot have a scrap of evidence of your allegations
It is a renewable resource. Between 1990 and 2000, the US gained an average of 364,600 hectares of forest per year.Quote:
We cut down trees to make paper, and kid ourselves that the trees are a renewable resource. If this is so where are the forests?
Luddite... shall we go back to being cave dwellers ?Quote:
what we really need to do is curb the production of energy based appliances.
Tom how short sighted you are, how much forest was destroyed in Brazil and south east Asia during this time. When I talk, I talk about the world when you talk you talk about your back garden.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
You didn't stop to think that all our great advancements in electric appliances have increased the need for power and therefore add to the problem of dealing with the growth in the number of power stations and consumption, that is the real problem, everything else is a symptom of it. We now have the great idea of turning the car into an electric appliance so we can build more power stations
Seems there was a time when the temperatures were way below average too.
Historical Weather & Climate Timeline From 1900 A.D. to 1950 A.D.
I don't know how accurate their records are,but it is interesting to see the changes through the years.
These are short term measurements. Over geological ages the temperature has been relatively stable within the range of a few degrees but that has included ice ages and periods of higher temperature. That is the most interesting of all. It all depends what scale you draw your graph on. We have observed higher temperatures in the past decade and when you have a graph that focuses on the short term the movements seem massive but over the long term they are hardly a blip.Quote:
Originally Posted by firmbeliever
The real question is whether Mankind is having the effect we think we are or it is all part of a bigger oscillation we haven't discerned yet and our ability to change anything is zero. So it is back to whether it is ego or ergo. The graphs you have there illustrate my point if the data were taken as a whole you would see that it all fits the pattern
Why are you using your computer if that's your concern ? Maybe you should invent one that is powered by a gerbil on a treadmill .Quote:
You didn't stop to think that all our great advancements in electric appliances have increased the need for power and therefore add to the problem of dealing with the growth in the number of power stations and consumption, that is the real problem, everything else is a symptom of it. We now have the great idea of turning the car into an electric appliance so we can build more power stations
The answer is that we are not going to go back. Therefore we need to keep an open mind on ALL sources of energy production . If generation by coal is dirty ,invent a device that cleans it ,but don't think we can stop using coal ,petroleum ,natural gas, nuclear anytime soon .We need to expand our capacity ;not shrink it.
Have you been following the solar minimum ? Until this week we were in a 53 day cycle without any sunspots... the 4th longest since 1849. This solar minimum, is far longer than most. The average length of a minimum is 485 days. This one is into it's 700th day. This is approaching the Maunder Minimum type numbers (well that's a bit of an exageration since that lasted between 1645 to 1715 ) .The Earth cooled by more than 3 degrees Fahrenheit during the minimum. By contrast ;with all our industrialization the earth has cooled 1 degree since 1900. If you ask me ;there is a far greater danger to the world that we will plunge into another "Little Ice Age" .Quote:
The real question is whether Mankind is having the effect we think we are or it is all part of a bigger oscillation we haven't discerned yet and our ability to change anything is zero. So it is back to whether it is ego or ergo.
Yes and now fires in late winter and early spring, two months early. Last year we didn't have summer, Hardly turned on the AC at all. I wonder if we had it last week. Statistics suggest that it is natural, we couldn't affect the weather that much in the Southern hemisphere even if there is huge CO2 output in the Northern hemisphere. Just like el nino is an oscillation, so there is a longer term oscillation about 100 years and even longer term oscillations. Where I live there used to be snow on the ground in winter but not in a long time now. No need to build snow roofs anymoreQuote:
Originally Posted by Skell
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:10 AM. |