Interesting reading for those who slavishly cling

 Post Reply    Back to Forums
26–50 out of 70 messages
Author Message

proudliberal Posted - 8/12/2013 9:25:24 AM | show profile | flag this post

I'm still open to debate...

Global warming is a reality...empirical data shows that. I still am not 100% convinced it is all because of man's activities. Show me the information that proves otherwise and I will be happy to listen. But I will say this...even if it isn't through burning fossil fuels, I would still be for renewable energy sources. It would be cheaper, cleaner for the planet and would end about half the wars. How can anyone not be for a policy like that? Only the oil people want to keep polluting the planet and starting wars to keep King Crude flowing. Anyone who really thinks about this issue would be hard pressed to come up with a reason not to go green.

cruiser Posted - 8/12/2013 10:28:26 AM | show profile | flag this post

"I would still be for renewable energy sources.

It would be cheaper..."

The fact is, it isn't. All forms of renewable energy have environmental issues of their own.

Wind farms kill birds including protected and endangered species, solar panels cover huge expanses of land with photovoltaic eyesores. These are just two examples.

And the busbar costs (meaning electricity at the output of the powerplant) of both wind and solar are significantly higher than either coal or oil or natural gas or hydro or nuclear.

Grateful Deadline Posted - 8/12/2013 12:22:40 PM | show profile | flag this post

*** solar panels cover huge expanses of land with photovoltaic eyesores. ***

The Edison solar farm off the 395 around Boron covers a blasted-looking piece of torn-up desert. It's an improvement.

Grateful Deadline Posted - 8/12/2013 12:26:21 PM | show profile | flag this post

Here's a cost comparison:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

cruiser's contradiction to the DOE's calculations comes from right-wingnut websites and the fossil fuel industry.

cruiser Posted - 8/12/2013 1:44:43 PM | show profile | flag this post

You need to understand what you're looking at

and you clearly don't.

What your chart calls "advanced" nuclear means with all the late-arriving regulatory costs added...those that the so-called "greens" caused to be layerd on with their obsessive and irrational hatred of nuclear technology.

The costs for conventional nuclear...meaning without the burden of these added regulatory costs, under which 104 reactors in the US operated for decades with no serious incidents...is much less expensive than most generating technologies, hydro being the most notable exception.

The figures for wind generation are grossly underestimated and the environmental impacts are totally ignored.

The others are exactly as I described. Your source was Wiki and...because it is editable by virtually anyone...you have no idea who posted the figures or how accurately they were repeated.

Since you couldn't possibly be an expert in electric generation...in addition to being an ace crackerjack "journalist" and "college professor"...you need to defer to someone who has researched and written about this industry.

Grateful Deadline Posted - 8/13/2013 12:26:06 AM | show profile | flag this post

I pull up Wikipedia so that YOU'LL understand it. Pal.

Grateful Deadline Posted - 8/13/2013 12:34:33 AM | show profile | flag this post

Geniuses don't insult and demean people. They don't close themselves off from ideas different from their own. They don't try to convince everyone that they know all and see all and are therefore entitled to make pronouncements about everybody and everything, all slathered in vitriol

Think about THAT, little dearie buddy pal, the next time you're tempted to try to shut anyone up by slamming them.

You're a fake and a loser, and that's all you are. Not a genius. You're highly trained in bupkis.

cruiser Posted - 8/13/2013 1:42:23 AM | show profile | flag this post

Uhh...seems we've been here before

You need to take your own advice.

etaoin shrdlu Posted - 8/13/2013 8:38:20 AM | show profile | flag this post

Cruzo...

has more facts he wants us to know here: http://theflatearthsociety.org/\


etaoin shrdlu Posted - 8/15/2013 9:44:06 AM | show profile | flag this post

BTW....

all climate research pointing to global warming and the subsequent climate change it's bringing takes into account solar activity.

That still shows human activity is still partially responsible for the rapid rise in CO2 content in the air, rising sea levels and rising global temperatures -- all resulting in climate change.

Though I do have to laugh at the term "IPCC-connected scientists."

Since the IPCC is a clearinghouse which doesn't do any research of it's own, ALL climate scientists are technically "IPCC-connected."

So the only "non-IPCC-connected scientists" out there are the ones NOT studying climate.

cruiser Posted - 8/15/2013 12:17:06 PM | show profile | flag this post

"the IPCC is a clearinghouse

which doesn't do any research of it's own"

That's exactly right. All the IPCC does is publish politically-motivated policy papers (their so-called "assessment reports).

And they only include excerpts from those who agree with them. They ignore real scientists who disagree with their political position (and there are a LOT of them)...and, in fact, even try to discredit or destroy them in the eyes of the scientific community.

This is one of the UN's gigantic wealth redistribution schemes. They want industrialized countries (principally the US) to transfer huge sums of money to non-industrialized countries as some sort of "compensation" for the "pollution" they cause.

However, they do NOT go after some of the biggest "polluters" such as China, India, Brazil, etc.

The sooner left wingers wake up to this fact the better off we'll all be.

cruiser Posted - 8/15/2013 1:55:08 PM | show profile | flag this post

I need to correct part of my previous post

"...discredit or destroy them in the eyes of the scientific community."

That's not correct. It should read "...discredit or destroy them in the eyes of the public."

The IPCC is not pandering to scientists...it is pandering to ordinary citizens, most of whom don't have the background to rationally analyze their dishonest efforts.

Grateful Deadline Posted - 8/16/2013 9:50:07 AM | show profile | flag this post

(Got a feeling that last post is totally cracking up our "casual readers"!)

Oop! I forgot: The genius needs to have the last post in every thread. He calls it "winning."

Hahahahaha!

cruiser Posted - 8/16/2013 11:35:24 AM | show profile | flag this post

If one were to look back at all the threads on this forum

one would discover that in excess of 70 percent of the time the last post...the "winning post" as the previous poster dubbed it...is done by left wingers.

But their "winning" is not done by posting facts...they are sorely lacking in those...but by ad hominem and personal insults.

Just look at the post immediately above this one for a consummate example.

etaoin shrdlu Posted - 8/16/2013 2:45:37 PM | show profile | flag this post

Wind farms...

kill a tiny fraction of birds compared to coal plants, cruzo.

Wind farms are hardly a killer at all:

"A study from the National Research Council last year (2008) tallied bird kills from total anthropogenic bird deaths, and found collisions with wind turbines comprised a minute fraction of human interaction bird deaths. Only 3 out of 100,000 anthropogenic bird deaths were from turbines. Cats and buildings had a far higher kill rate."

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=wind-turbines-dont-kill-birds-coal-2009-10

Walk around a coal-fired plant sometime -- near the smokestacks. There are people dedicated to scooping up the dead carcasses of birds.

cruiser Posted - 8/16/2013 3:23:15 PM | show profile | flag this post

Here's another thing

etwinkie makes believe he's an expert on. If you look back at all the topics on which he claims expertise, you'll have to agree with me that he's just too good to be true.

A legend in his own mind.

Grateful Deadline Posted - 8/16/2013 10:24:22 PM | show profile | flag this post

He doesn't claim to be an expert -- he cites sources.

You're the one who claims to be an expert on everything and who says he doesn't need no stinkin' sources.

Grateful Deadline Posted - 8/16/2013 10:27:39 PM | show profile | flag this post

For a genius, you sure do backfire in your unending attempts to cast other posters in a bad light.

etaoin shrdlu Posted - 8/17/2013 11:57:36 AM | show profile | flag this post

I'm grateful to you,

Grateful.

Cruzo seems to be the one posting on every topic under the sun. But he can't seem to come up with his own sources when someone does the slightest bit of research to disprove his talking point thesis.

Cruzo's posts and failure to defend his points shows his inability to be either an expert or a researcher.

cruiser Posted - 8/17/2013 12:01:20 PM | show profile | flag this post

Uhh, you need to re-read his posts, dearie

He is so conceited and imperious he SELDOM cites sources...yet tries to offer his commentary as the voice of God...which it ain't.

When I don't cite sources it is because I'm recounting from my own personal knowledge or offering my opinion.

cruiser Posted - 8/17/2013 12:04:21 PM | show profile | flag this post

My non-response to your lunacy

is just that. me declining to respond to your lunacy.

mpdodgson Posted - 8/17/2013 1:53:06 PM | show profile | flag this post

"My non-response"

Is a response--because that's what I HAVE to do!! I don't need no stink sources!!! I'm a scientist, legal expert, and a friggin genius in everything else!!

"If one were to look back at all the threads on this forum one would discover that in excess of 70 percent of the time the last post...the "winning post" as the previous poster dubbed it...is done by left wingers."

Yea right. And you had to prove that by adding two posts that said absolutely nothing so you could have the last word.

(BTW; if you want to look at 'posts' here?? cruise at 2155 posts is by far and away the most prolific. It saves time when you just spout off shit instead of looking something up)

Grateful Deadline Posted - 8/17/2013 4:59:06 PM | show profile | flag this post

That whole concept of "last word" comes from the Mary Poppins books.

Grateful Deadline Posted - 8/17/2013 5:01:10 PM | show profile | flag this post

*** (BTW; if you want to look at 'posts' here?? cruise at 2155 posts is by far and away the most prolific. It saves time when you just spout off shit instead of looking something up) ***

Wow. Just wow. And when did y'all come over here from the other site? Doofy Boy is making a career out of posting.

Grateful Deadline Posted - 8/17/2013 5:02:07 PM | show profile | flag this post

Hey, Doof, all the posting in this forum doesn't raise your Klout score.


26–50 out of 70 messages

 Post Reply    Back to Forums