Every green initiative has been a disaster

Rune said:
You lost this one.
Total thread fail.
Click to expand...

No you lost. Milgram proved the world would fucking rock if every god damned foot pound of energy came from burning coal and gasoline. Wouldn't that be great?!!! Said while wafting smoke out of his eyes.
 
keep up the good work, mr. tom. somebody must continually fight against the fraud/ antichrist religion/ political tool which is gw/ cc; you are an important voice against the evil and delusional intents of the establishment/ globalist damned of earth. when the judgments upon earth begin there will be no more voice of reason and the damned will deny their judgment and are forever damned to unending torment. it is important. there may be a special crown for your service which you will be glad to cast at the feet of Jesus because he has given you eyes to see and ears to discern good from evil. congratulations.
 
iewitness said:
keep up the good work, mr. tom. somebody must continually fight against the fraud/ antichrist religion/ political tool which is gw/ cc; you are an important voice against the evil and delusional intents of the establishment/ globalist damned of earth. when the judgments upon earth begin there will be no more voice of reason and the damned will deny their judgment and are forever damned to unending torment. it is important. there may be a special crown for your service which you will be glad to cast at the feet of Jesus because he has given you eyes to see and ears to discern good from evil. congratulations.
Click to expand...

Goofball.
 
Milagro said:
This describes you to a T, you think bullshit and bluster is all that is needed to wind debates.

https://co2islife.wordpress.com/201...-the-other-side-of-that-which-you-are-guilty/

Sent from my iPhone 10S
Click to expand...

Your link:

"CO2 is Life
The Definitive Source for Exposing the Global Warming Hoax"

Backtracking to claiming global warming is a vast hoax, perpetrated by a global conspiracy of scientists intent on fooling the public, policy makers, and hogging grant money?

You are a joke.

A link to an obscure blog that makes the case the global warming is a hoax is par for the course for you.

This is why I can not trust you to discuss science honestly. You never actually read or present links to mainstream science sources, with trained experts in climate science who conduct original peer reviewed research. I have attempted to direct you to mainstream scientific literature, but you cling like grim death to your obscure denier blogs.

You are emotionally invested in climate science denial. Not sure what your motivation is. But I think it has something to do with ego, with the fact that you would rather see harm come to your grandchildren, than admit you were wrong about global warming to anonymous internet posters you will never meet.

I guess you get something emotionally out of being a denier; a proponent of fossil fuels, and blathering on endlessly about a topic you have no expertise or training in. Sounds like a shitty gig to me, but it must float your boat!
 
Last edited:
Micawber said:
No you lost. Milgram proved the world would fucking rock if every god damned foot pound of energy came from burning coal and gasoline. Wouldn't that be great?!!! Said while wafting smoke out of his eyes.
Click to expand...

Classic strawman argument, by the way how old are you, when did anybody last use ft pounds?
 
Cypress said:
Your link:

"CO2 is Life
The Definitive Source for Exposing the Global Warming Hoax"

Backtracking to claiming global warming is a vast hoax, perpetrated by a global conspiracy of scientists intent on fooling the public, policy makers, and hogging grant money?

You are a joke.

A link to an obscure blog that makes the case the global warming is a hoax is par for the course for you.

This is why I can not trust you to discuss science honestly. You never actually read or present links to mainstream science sources, with trained experts in climate science who conduct original peer reviewed research. I have attempted to direct you to mainstream scientific literature, but you cling like grim death to your obscure denier blogs.

You are emotionally invested in climate science denial. Not sure what your motivation is. But I think it has something to do with ego, with the fact that you would rather see harm come to your grandchildren, than admit you were wrong about global warming to anonymous internet posters you will never meet.

I guess you get something emotionally out of being a denier; a proponent of fossil fuels, and blathering on endlessly about a topic you have no expertise or training in. Sounds like a shitty gig to me, but it must float your boat!
Click to expand...

I have posted many scientific papers on here and will continue to do so, my motivation is clear enough. I prefer to listen to scientists like Judith Curry, Richard Lindzen, Richard Feynman, Freeman Dyson , Craig Idso, Patrick Michaels, Ivan Giaever, Harrison Schmitt, Anastasios Tsonis, Nils-Axel Mörner, Roger A. Pielke, David Deming, Roy Spencer, Jasper Kirkby and many others.

My main issue with much of so called climate science is the use of computer models, I know of no other branch of science where they are used as some kind of proof. Indeed to quote the results in a scientific paper is actually fraudulent and wholly against the scientific method. I quote from that blog that you object to so vehemently, feel free to tell me which part you take exception to, don't be shy.

"Science isn't a democracy. Science is highly discriminatory. Science demands discipline and accountability. Science has no feelings and isn’t compassionate. There are no safe spaces, affirmative action or participation trophies in science. Science has ridged rules and consequences for failure. Science is “one strike you’re out” intolerant. Science is black and white, Science doesn’t grade on a curve, you are either right or wrong. Science isn’t inclusive, the truth is a very exclusive club that rejects many applicants. There is no grey zone in Science. Science is extremely conservative. In other words, real Science is the pinnacle of political incorrectness.

Politics isn’t bound by the truth, it is bound by the vote, and therefore, the non-scientist has an extreme advantage when it comes to testifying in front of congress."

Impugning my motives is exactly what that article in that blog was describing in detail. I am given to understand that your area of expertise is rocks, so how does that qualify you to discuss climate science any more than my chemistry degree? I will continue to post more in the future, if you don't like it then just ignore me I won't cry. As to the highly unscientific use of the word denier, I will quote Richard Lindzen once again. Here is his opening statement to the House of Commons in 2012. I agree with him 100%.

"Stated briefly, I will simply try to clarify what the debate over climate change is really about. It most certainly is not about whether climate is changing: it always is. It is not about whether CO2 is increasing: it clearly is. It is not about whether the increase in CO2, by itself, will lead to some warming: it should. The debate is simply over the matter of how much warming the increase in CO2 can lead to, and the connection of such warming to the innumerable claimed catastrophes. The evidence is that the increase in CO2 will lead to very little warming, and that the connection of this minimal warming (or even significant warming) to the purported catastrophes is also minimal. The arguments on which the catastrophic claims are made are extremely weak – and commonly acknowledged as such. They are sometimes overtly dishonest."

https://judithcurry.com/2012/02/27/lindzens-seminar-at-the-house-of-commons/



Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
Your link:

"CO2 is Life
The Definitive Source for Exposing the Global Warming Hoax"

Backtracking to claiming global warming is a vast hoax, perpetrated by a global conspiracy of scientists intent on fooling the public, policy makers, and hogging grant money?

You are a joke.

A link to an obscure blog that makes the case the global warming is a hoax is par for the course for you.

This is why I can not trust you to discuss science honestly. You never actually read or present links to mainstream science sources, with trained experts in climate science who conduct original peer reviewed research. I have attempted to direct you to mainstream scientific literature, but you cling like grim death to your obscure denier blogs.

You are emotionally invested in climate science denial. Not sure what your motivation is. But I think it has something to do with ego, with the fact that you would rather see harm come to your grandchildren, than admit you were wrong about global warming to anonymous internet posters you will never meet.

I guess you get something emotionally out of being a denier; a proponent of fossil fuels, and blathering on endlessly about a topic you have no expertise or training in. Sounds like a shitty gig to me, but it must float your boat!
Click to expand...

Here is Judith Curry showing up that arch charlatan Michael Mann for the fraud that he truly is, you would do worse than to watch her eviscerate the old goat, it's only 17 seconds long.


Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
Your link:

"CO2 is Life
The Definitive Source for Exposing the Global Warming Hoax"

Backtracking to claiming global warming is a vast hoax, perpetrated by a global conspiracy of scientists intent on fooling the public, policy makers, and hogging grant money?

You are a joke.

A link to an obscure blog that makes the case the global warming is a hoax is par for the course for you.

This is why I can not trust you to discuss science honestly. You never actually read or present links to mainstream science sources, with trained experts in climate science who conduct original peer reviewed research. I have attempted to direct you to mainstream scientific literature, but you cling like grim death to your obscure denier blogs.

You are emotionally invested in climate science denial. Not sure what your motivation is. But I think it has something to do with ego, with the fact that you would rather see harm come to your grandchildren, than admit you were wrong about global warming to anonymous internet posters you will never meet.

I guess you get something emotionally out of being a denier; a proponent of fossil fuels, and blathering on endlessly about a topic you have no expertise or training in. Sounds like a shitty gig to me, but it must float your boat!
Click to expand...

Classic Alinsky tactics, otherwise translated as play the man not the ball.


c37dabf5f80f11978bb1c510d1d022c7.jpg


Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
Last edited:
I posted this before but it obviously needs to be seen again. There are many here that need to be confronted with reality especially the economics of wind and solar power.


"Four bottom lines up front:

It would cost over $29 Trillion to generate America’s baseload electric power with a 50 / 50 mix of wind and solar farms, on parcels of land totaling the area of Indiana.

Or:It would cost over $18 Trillion with Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) farms in the southwest deserts, on parcels of land totaling the area of West Virginia.

Or: We could do it for less than $3 Trillion with AP-1000 Light Water Reactors, on parcels totaling a few square miles.

Or: We could do it for $1 Trillion with liquid-fueled Molten Salt Reactors, on the same amount of land, but with no water cooling, no risk of meltdowns, and the ability to use our stockpiles of nuclear “waste” as a secondary fuel."


http://energyrealityproject.com/lets-run-the-numbers-nuclear-energy-vs-wind-and-solar/

Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
Last edited:
aloysious said:
"The best way to make a country fail, is to make energy expensive and unstable."

That seems to be the purpose for advocating " green" nrg under the ridiculous guise of changing the weather.

BTW, calling renewable energy green is a misnomer. CO2 is what makes plant life green. lol
Click to expand...
It is good to see somebody sensible contributing, all we get from most of the posters is well worn alarmist​ talking points.

Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
aloysious said:
"The best way to make a country fail, is to make energy expensive and unstable."

That seems to be the purpose for advocating " green" nrg under the ridiculous guise of changing the weather.

BTW, calling renewable energy green is a misnomer. CO2 is what makes plant life green. lol
Click to expand...
It is good to see somebody sensible contributing, all we get from most of the posters is well worn alarmist​ talking points.
Mott the Hoople said:
Talk to him. Like any man of science he's open to legitimate scepticism.
Click to expand...
All I see is the classic bullshit like calling anyone that has a different viewpoints deniers, that is not science ffs!

Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
Micawber said:
He didn't get skeptical from reading peer review scholarly journal articles in nature or science or pnas. There aren't any. Science is whole hog in with it. Thanks
Click to expand...

There are actually a huge number of papers being written, in fact over 650 since 2016. So stop talking out of your arse matey!!

The guideline for the list of 150 scientific papers with links and summaries and graphs has been divided into 3 parts on 2 pages (Parts 1 and 2 are on the same page). *

Part 1. Natural Mechanisms Of Weather, Climate Change**

Solar Influence On Climate (37)
ENSO, NAO, AMO, PDO Climate Influence (20)
Modern Climate In Phase With Natural Variability (8)
Cloud/Aerosol Climate Influence (3)
Volcanic/Tectonic Climate Influence (1)

Part 2. Unsettled Science, Failed Climate Modeling

Climate Model Unreliability/Biases/Errors and the Pause (12)
Failing Renewable Energy, Climate Policies (2)
Warming Beneficial, Does Not Harm Humans, Wildlife (3)
No Trends In Extreme, Unstable Weather In Recent Decades (3)
Natural CO2 Sources Out-Emit Humans (2)
Fires, Anthropogenic Climate Change Disconnect (1)
Miscellaneous (5)

Part 3. Natural Climate Change Observation, Reconstruction

Lack Of Anthropogenic/CO2 Signal In Sea Level Rise (9)
No Net Warming During 20th (21st) Century (10)
A Warmer Past: Non-Hockey Stick Reconstructions (22)
Abrupt, Degrees-Per-Decade Natural Global Warming (1)
A Model-Defying Cryosphere, Polar Ice (10)


http://notrickszone.com/2017/04/03/...sition-on-climate-alarm/#sthash.1hD5moEo.dpbs


Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
Last edited:
aloysious said:
"The best way to make a country fail, is to make energy expensive and unstable."

That seems to be the purpose for advocating " green" nrg under the ridiculous guise of changing the weather.

BTW, calling renewable energy green is a misnomer. CO2 is what makes plant life green. lol
Click to expand...
Prof.Richard Lindzen recently presented a petition to Trump with over 300 signatures from scientists, including many climate scientists. The MSM mostly ignored this and it was left up to climate blogs to report it.


"The petition contains the names of around 300 eminent scientists and other qualified individuals, including physicists, engineers, former Astronauts, meteorologists, immunology specialists, marine biologists, chemists, statisticians, doctors, military weather specialists, geologists, accountants, a former director of NASA, economists, soil specialists, mathematicians, hydrologists, environmental scientists, computer modelling specialists, and many more. It is a long list."

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/02...raw-from-the-un-convention-on-climate-change/
 
I just love watching Mr. Hockey Stick is truly full of shit. It's about time someone pricked the pompous bastard's balloon.


Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
Milagro said:
He is pretty much spot on here, huge sums has been wasted by ignorant politicians virtue signalling and burnishing their green credentials. Booker is specifically talking about the UK but the US is no different really.

http://climatechangedispatch.com/every-green-initiative-has-been-a-disaster-says-christopher-booker/

Sent from my iPhone 10S
Click to expand...

What I find very amusing? The hypocrisy. The same individuals that bitch and protest about using trees to make paper products....use large paper signs when they march in the streets to stop the 1st amendment rights of others....of course after they use their daddy's Ford Expedition to drive across the nation to get noticed in front of Trump Towers....right after they have attended a demonstration in Southern California bitching about how large a Carbon Footprint the Untied States is leaving on the environment. Snowflakes....you have to luv'em.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top