1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Climate change - anthropogenic or not?

Discussion in 'Environmental Discussion' started by radioprius1, Dec 30, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
  2. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    I really like the graphs the guy at C3 constructs. I think they are nice enough to print out and hang up! Maybe put on tshirts, coffee mugs, posters?

    So, check this out.

    - Bishop Hill blog - New Scientist onglaciers

    [​IMG]

    Not that New Scientist has any credibility, but it's kinda funny. So much for the IPCC quoting only peer-reviewed literature in its report. I guess quoting an article in a science mag is the same thing. Who cares about checking primary sources huh? We have to promote global warming alarmism! From what I understand they eventually figured out that NewScientist was quoting a russian paper and New Scientist made a type, it should have been 2350, not 2035.
     
  3. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    Some Tshirts:

    [​IMG]
     
  4. guinness_fr

    guinness_fr Junior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2009
    68
    13
    0
    Location:
    france
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    I hope you guys are on some big oil company's payroll, because given the amount of time you spent polluting this forum with your pseudo-scientist denials, I'm sure you don't have much time left to do any other kind of work.
     
    2 people like this.
  5. spiderman

    spiderman wretched

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    7,543
    1,558
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    :rolleyes:
     
    2 people like this.
  6. Organik

    Organik New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    6
    6
    0
    Location:
    Huntington Beach
    Vehicle:
    2008 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Well, from this thread and so many others around the interwebs, I've pretty much decided we ARE going to argue ourselves to death.

    Regardless of what you think about global warming, do you think:

    Generating green jobs is bad?
    Having clean air is bad?
    Having abundant clean energy is bad?

    Just a thought.

    Also, follow the money. Some folks seem to be desperately clinging to outdated business models and technology, by any means necessary.

    Carry on.
     
    2 people like this.
  7. icarus

    icarus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    4,884
    976
    0
    Location:
    earth
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    "Generating green jobs is bad?
    Having clean air is bad?
    Having abundant clean energy is bad?"

    I've asked the same question a thousand time (Metaphor alert!), so save your breath. What you will get back in response is how any environmental regulation is only going to cripple the economy, or steal my money through taxes, or add to the socialist/commie/eco-freak take over of our precious bodily fluids or some combination thereof.

    We should/will just leave this thread to the "true believers" of Jack T. Ripper!
    (Social history reference!)
     
  8. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    A thousand times? That's not a metaphor. That's hyperbole.

    Coming from the guy who likes to say how everyone else can't read, this is pretty sad.
     
  9. icarus

    icarus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    4,884
    976
    0
    Location:
    earth
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Well by strict definition, it might be considered both metaphor and Hyperbole.

    metaphor |ˈmetəˌfôr; -fər|
    noun
    a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable : “I had fallen through a trapdoor of depression,†said Mark, who was fond of theatrical metaphors | her poetry depends on suggestion and metaphor.
    • a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, esp. something abstract


    hyperbole |hīˈpərbəlē|
    noun
    exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

    So in fact, you are right, I didn't expect to be take LITERALLY, unless of course you wish to count up the times that I have actually asked the question on this forum.

    Now that the grade 8 english lesson is over, perhaps you'd like to go back to geography. Found Naknek with out having to look it up on Google yet?
     
  10. spiderman

    spiderman wretched

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    7,543
    1,558
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    Easy,,, southwest Alaska.
     
  11. icarus

    icarus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    4,884
    976
    0
    Location:
    earth
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Easy for you perhaps, aparentlly not so easy for RP in another thread!
     
  12. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    :rolleyes:

    Here's an interesting article:

    NCAR’s dirty little secret Watts Up With That?

    It's about NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research) building a new supercomputer for predicting outcomes of atmospheric and related sciences. The article goes into depth on the energy consumption of this computer. It will be 30 times stronger than anything we currently have, it's on the order of the processing power of 100,000 PCs. Pretty impressive. Pretty impressive energy consumption too!

    Too bad, that no matter what, garbage in = garbage out.
     
  13. NevadaPrius

    NevadaPrius New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    216
    20
    0
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    V
    There's some interesting comments on the post at WUWT!
     
  14. NevadaPrius

    NevadaPrius New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    216
    20
    0
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    V
     
    1 person likes this.
  15. ufourya

    ufourya We the People

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    1,258
    336
    42
    Location:
    Texas
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius c
    Model:
    Two
    Junior Member

    Join Date: Jan 2010
    Location: Huntington Beach
    Posts: 2
    My Car: 2008 Prius
    Model: N/A
    Package: N/A
    Thanks: 0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    [​IMG]


    Friends: 0

    Somehow I think two whole posts doesn't put you in much danger of arguing yourself to death.

    Those ignorant of economics don't appreciate what creating 'green jobs' really costs. Any time government interjects itself into free markets via subsidies, etc., the odds are overwhelming that something WILL go wrong and the costs will be greater than doing nothing. Indeed, positive HARM is more often the result than not.
    Spain is often put forward as an example of successful implementation of 'green' jobs and energy. Here's the reality:
    Green Job Destruction: The Spain Study (Netting to negative via government) — MasterResource

    That’s why this study, from the Universidad Rey Juan Carlos in Spain should be kept handy (the report is in English).
    After examining Spain’s experience with an aggressive wind-power program, the researchers concluded:
    1. As President Obama correctly remarked, Spain provides a reference for the establishment of government aid to renewable energy. No other country has given such broad support to the construction and production of electricity through renewable sources. The arguments for Spain’s and Europe’s “green jobs” schemes are the same arguments now made in the U.S., principally that massive public support would produce large numbers of green jobs. The question that this paper answers is “at what price?”
    2. Optimistically treating European Commission partially funded data, we find that for every renewable energy job that the State manages to finance, the Spanish experience cited by President Obama as a model reveals with high confidence, by two different methods, that the U.S. should expect a loss of at least 2.2 jobs on average, or about 9 jobs lost for every 4 created, to which we have to add those jobs that non-subsidized investments with the same resources would have created.
    3. Therefore, while it is not possible to directly translate Spain’s experience with exactitude to claim that the U.S. could lose at least 6.6 million to 11 million jobs, as a direct consequence were it to actually create 3 to 5 million “green jobs” as promised (in addition to the jobs lost due to the opportunity cost of private capital employed in renewable energy), the study clearly reveals a tendency that means the U.S. should expect such an outcome.
    The study has other fascinating facts, including the cost of creating a green job (571,000 Euros each!), and how many jobs are lost in the economy as a result of putting on more renewable power.

    Opposing government intervention for the purpose of 'generating green jobs' does not mean that one doesn't want clean air, clean water, or clean energy.

    I'm sure that one day remewable energy will prove to be efficient, reliable and cost effective. That will evolve, it should not be forced or coerced. There is no reason to force it.

    By the way, CO2 is a harmless, even positively beneficial gas, regardless what the EPA, IPCC or the Supreme Court say. It is not pollution just because some hoaxers say it is.

    It's a good thing CO2 is harmless, because here is what has happened in Spain since thay implemented their job-killing green revolution.

    [​IMG]

    Good job!
     
    4 people like this.
  16. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    How dare you post facts and data!!
     
  17. hyo silver

    hyo silver Awaaaaay

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    15,232
    1,562
    0
    Location:
    off into the sunset
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    What do you think of all the subsidies given to the oil industry? By your reasoning, tax writeoffs for exploration would be...'positively HARM' -ful, wouldn't they? You're right, we should end those, and petroleum products should be priced at their true, full cost. If you genuinely understood economics, you'd see that renewable energy already IS cheaper in the long run.
     
  18. dg1014

    dg1014 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    63
    4
    0
    Location:
    WI
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    You do realize there is a major difference between a tax write off and a direct subsidy dont you?
     
  19. ufourya

    ufourya We the People

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    1,258
    336
    42
    Location:
    Texas
    Vehicle:
    2012 Prius c
    Model:
    Two
    I personally do not believe that government should subsidize ANY industry.

    However, if subsidies do exist, they will do less harm if they support efficient rather than inefficient energy producing sources.

    Your assertion that 'renewable energy already IS cheaper in the long run' is confusing in both syntax and meaning. But if I catch your meaning, it is also entirely wrong.

    Here's why, Tonto:
    http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/energy_in_brief/energy_subsidies.cfm
     
    1 person likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.