2015 Warmest Year on Record

Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Enviroalarmists always want to draw on O3 as the blueprint for what should happen with the AGW theory. Couple big problems with that though.
1. Science behind O3 alarm, though not definitive, is vastly more sound than AGW. It still has holes and still weights man's impact too heavily but much more sound.
2. The economic cost to "fix" O3 was not an economy killer. Vastly lower cost than any "fix" proposed for AGW. Not even comparable unless you think we are on the brink of a runaway greenhouse effect, like S.Hawking does smh.
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...all-diesel-and-petrol-cars-and-vans-from-2040

Not exactly tied to AGW but in the same vein. Coming to America in.....?

I love how London is taxing owners of "older cars" 10 pounds a day. That's a hefty annual tax on citizens that are probably least able to afford it. Anyone know what the most abundant source of energy powers London homes? I'm doubting it's hydro or nuclear so I'm not sure how beneficial this whole plan is to cleaner air. Something to look up now....
 

MountainBuzzMan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,707
Location
South Forsyth
From the article, I thought it was a proposal. Did it actually pass? Also, 60% of their electricity is from fossil fuels and the proposal also wants to ban all new gas and diesel power cars and vans by 2040
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Whiskey_Clear said:
http://news.trust.org/item/20170726060325-colqn

So much to smh at in this article I don't even know where to start.
Click to expand...

Well, one perspective you could take is that since they are doing all this they have essentially released us from the Paris Accord and we are free to live our lives and run our economy as we see fit. If this technology works at all, there is no longer any reason - in their own words and admissions - for us to do anything differently.

Of course, the punch line is that all this money eliminates the emissions of 45 people. In a world of 7 billion. These people are not scientists. You can't say eliminating 0.00000000642 or 1 150-millionth of the CO2 is anything but a joke. If you scale that ratio by $23 million (the cost of this project that eliminates the emissions of 45 people), that means to eliminate the entire populations' emissions would cost 3,500+ trillion dollars per year. This is a hilarious joke. Worse than fake news.
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Huge fans being used to scrub carbon from the atmosphere. How much energy required to power them? :banghead:

Releasing emissions to reflect solar radiation from the sun...that alarmists say isn't the primary factor in climate change....and isn't factored at ALL in the much vaunted climate models! :banghead::banghead::banghead:

Yes it's about $$$$ and big government/ socialism. Our DNC politburo and well connected investors will make bank while the middle class funds this stupid :poop:
 
AE 87

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,026
I suspect that in a hundred years, there will be a kid shaking his head at his science textbook. When asked by his dad why he's shaking his head, he'll say, "This book wants me to believe that the gas naturally produced by animals and used by vegetation was considered a pollutant by people at the beginning of the 21st century." smh
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
AE 87 said:
I suspect that in a hundred years, there will be a kid shaking his head at his science textbook. When asked by his dad why he's shaking his head, he'll say, "This book wants me to believe that the gas naturally produced by animals and used by vegetation was considered a pollutant by people at the beginning of the 21st century." smh
Click to expand...

I assure you if you ever spent much time with me you would think my gas is a harmful pollutant.
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
awbuzz said:
Let them waste their money on it if they want. Don't mandate it to us.
Click to expand...

I agree to a point. There should be zero government subsidies going to any of this.

The plans to reflect solar radiation could be quite harmful to the environment. I'd hate to see that occur.....in the name of saving the environment....
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Whiskey_Clear said:
I agree to a point. There should be zero government subsidies going to any of this.

The plans to reflect solar radiation could be quite harmful to the environment. I'd hate to see that occur.....in the name of saving the environment....
Click to expand...

Yep, the tree huggers won't like the plans to restrict sunlight and CO2 - the two life blood fuel that plants need.
 

MountainBuzzMan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,707
Location
South Forsyth
How about they iron fertilize parts of the pacific ocean. That would be a whole lot cheaper. Even if only 5% of the carbon finally makes it to the bottom it would be a lot more than this hair brained idea.
 
potatohead

potatohead

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
602
Great to see all the scientists on here that devoted their lives to climate research. I hope you guys are actively publishing your research as it appears the overwhelming scientific community, and your colleagues, believe the world is warming faster and due to human impact than ever before.

/s
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
potatohead said:
Great to see all the scientists on here that devoted their lives to climate research. I hope you guys are actively publishing your research as it appears the overwhelming scientific community, and your colleagues, believe the world is warming faster and due to human impact than ever before.

/s
Click to expand...

You're confusing science with scientists.
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
potatohead said:
Great to see all the scientists on here that devoted their lives to climate research. I hope you guys are actively publishing your research as it appears the overwhelming scientific community, and your colleagues, believe the world is warming faster and due to human impact than ever before.

/s
Click to expand...

Climate scientists like the fraud Michael Mann? He who refuses to turn over his data and data manipulation measures the way the Dems refused to turn over hard drives, cell phones, and blackberries?

I also love how only "climate scientists" matter in this debate. Physicists, meteorologists, and all others need not voice their insights. Because if they did the 97% malarkey would be even more bull:poop: than it already is.

Btw, not all those 97%ers think AGW is catastrophic or close to it. They just believe human activity does have an important bearing on the global climate.

Maybe you'd like to bash Judith Curry for being a 3percenter after devoting her life to climate science????
 
potatohead

potatohead

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
602
Whiskey_Clear said:
Climate scientists like the fraud Michael Mann? He who refuses to turn over his data and data manipulation measures the way the Dems refused to turn over hard drives, cell phones, and blackberries?

I also love how only "climate scientists" matter in this debate. Physicists, meteorologists, and all others need not voice their insights. Because if they did the 97% malarkey would be even more bull:poop: than it already is.

Btw, not all those 97%ers think AGW is catastrophic or close to it. They just believe human activity does have an important bearing on the global climate.

Maybe you'd like to bash Judith Curry for being a 3percenter after devoting her life to climate science????
Click to expand...

No one is bashing researchers that are in the minority, I'm bashing you guys for thinking you're right while simultaneously being condescending. Impressive! I wish I had the balls to take a position a slender minority held and espouse that position..

If curry, as a researcher holds a dissenting opinion from the rest of her colleagues that's her perogative and One she's earned. Further she won't be the first or last in lots of research and fields

what is troublesome is that you all reference the few holdouts as the Truth while the rest of the community is wrong. You do this because of your political believes. For that, shame on you.


"My friends friend survived a car wreck because he wasn't buckled up and flung from the car. Had he not been, he would've burned up when the car caught fire. Ergo seat belts are bad"
 
Top