Actually the holy book would be the IPCC reports. The nice thing about anthropogenic global warming as a religion is that it has actual scientific evidence to back it up. If you want to suggest that the primary cause is something other than human activity you need to come up with some actual scientific evidence of your own that holds up under scrutiny.
I think it's pretty clear at this point that Trump will win the presidency. He isn't facing any real competition, and even many Democrats can't bring themselves to vote for either of the potential Democratic candidates. So at least a portion of them will be voting for Trump, in addition to nearly all Republicans who do support Trump. Much of America has become tired and disillusioned after 8 years of leftist rule, and want something different. That gives Trump a win that is nearly guaranteed at this point.
LOL, keep dreaming. There's an awful lot of Republicans who won't be voting for Trump.
Unlike most of you I went to the Nikola Motors website.
While there is undoubtedly some hype here's what they said.
There are 2 electric motors on the front axle and it looks like 4 electric motors on the rear axles. The motors have 2 gear automatic transmissions. The truck has what they call torque vectoring which adjusts the wheel speed while turning or maneuvering. There is a 100 gallon CNG tank powering a nearly 400 kw turbine. The turbine if fuel agnostic running on diesel, gasoline or CNG. You can choose your fuel at the time of purchase. They claim the 100 gallon CNG tank is enough for 800 -1,200 miles depending on terrain and load. The turbine will run for 1 hour out of every 3-5 hours of pure electric driving. It of course had regenerative braking but there are also air powered disk brakes on all 6 wheels (of course they'd have to have an air system so they can hook up to the trailer brakes too). They claim the truck will stop in about half the distance of a normal diesel rig.
For the first 25,000 customers they are offering free fuel for the first million miles. They own the rights to some gas wells and are setting up 55 fueling stations around the country and Canada that are spaced close enough that you can easily make if from one to the next. You can lease the truck for $5,000/month and that includes free fuel, warranty and scheduled maintenance (I doubt tires are included) and at the end of the warranty period (72 months or 1 million miles whichever comes first) you can trade it in on a new one. They also say the Nikola-one is around 2,000 pounds lighter than the equivalent diesel tractor increasing the payload you can carry.
CO2 will gradually, irrevocably be incorporated into carbonate rocks. Volcanism will naturally decrease do to reduced radiogenic heating. In 1.1Gyr photosynthesis will shut down due to *lack* of CO2, ending life on earth. Ponder that environmental wackos.
In 1.1 Gyr the Sun may have gotten enough hotter to make life as we know it impossible anyway. But if humans haven't managed to establish other outposts out in the Milky Way galaxy by then it probably doesn't matter anyway.
So what? If I put you in a room with 280 ppm of hydrogen cyanide in the air you'd be dead in a matter of minutes. Just because a number is small doesn't mean it's insignificant.
Store the carbon in something much easier and cheaper. Trees!!!!. You'd think all these smart guys would have thought of this. Wait, you can't get a $2M research grant for planting trees. Guess that answers that question.
When you're burning the equivalent of thousands of years of tree growth in one year there is no way to plant enough trees to keep up with carbon emissions. Trees help but they're not the answer.
You mean climate science proponents. Maybe those techniques are used because they're the only thing you would understand. Science appears to be a foreign language to you,.
Obviously the climate science deniers listen to them if only to try and shoot them down. It's like the only ones who bring up Al Gore are the same deniers.
The word "know" is usually associated with some level of empirical evidence to back it up, like the fact that all known sources of natural climate change when taken together would indicate that we should be on a slight cooling trend.
Hah! ClimateGate was much ado about nothing. There have been like a dozen investigations of the CG emails by different agencies and organizations and none of them found any scientific malfeasance, just a few nits about being more open.
You don't think the fact that CO2 levels have increased to levels that haven't been seen for over a million years and the year to year increase in atmospheric CO2 is a bit less than half of human emissions has something to do with it? The basic physics of the radiative properties of CO2 are well established. What do you have to counter that? Some conspiracy theory about how scientists are misrepresenting science at the behest of their political masters?
Wow, do you seriously believe that thousands of climate scientists from around the world are willing to be part of a conspiracy that's been going on for at least 30 years (and maybe back to Arrhenius in 1896) to pervert the science just for the sake political ideology? There are a few scientists like that but the vast majority of them are smart enough to know that if they push science they know to be wrong they will be found out and their reputations destroyed. I think most of them have far too much integrity to push false science.
You are making an unwarranted assumption that because humans weren't responsible for previous climate changes they can't be responsible for them now.
But you know, the whole point of being a climatologist is to study the things that affect the climate and how it changes. You must think they're pretty stupid if they're missing the natural changes that are changing the climate now at a rate that is practically unprecedented compared to historical climate changes. You'd have a good chance of winning a Nobel Prize if you can show them the error of their ways.
The Jurassic period. O2 in atmosphere was 130% modern levels. CO2 was at 1950ppm, 5-7 times modern levels. The temperature was a whole 3 DEGREES C over modern times!
What you fail to note is that the Sun was several percent cooler than it is today, the topology of the continents and therefore ocean currents were completely different than today. You can't try to compare then and now without taking all of that into account.
If we did see a nice correlation, it should extend to the rest of the planets. Earth receives far more energy from the sun than Mars. Venus receives far more than Earth. Mercury receives far more than Venus. Yet as far as I know, evidence doesn't show warming on the two inner bodies in the solar system
And interesting factoid, despite being nearly to twice as far from the Sun as Mercury the average surface temperature on Venus higher than it is on Mercury because of the 95% CO2 atmosphere of Venus.
Because when you add up all the known natural forcings the general trend is a slight reduction in total radiative forcing since about 8,000 years ago*. More recently the trend in TSI has been dropping since the 1960s.
*This is expected since the forcing of Milankovitch Cycles hit their peak 8,000 years ago and the drop into the next glacial cycle commenced then. Of course the anthropogenic rise in CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) to a level not seen in over a million years has short circuited that process
Maybe it would be better put as "Without the services provided by the natural order of Earth humans could not survive." The oxygen in the air we breath comes entirely from natural processes. The recycling of water is provided by the natural order. The food we eat is a natural product of the Earth (somewhat enhanced by our modern technology.) The raw materials we use come from the natural world. It's pretty short sighted to just take all of that for granted.
Besides there's 0 evidence of global warming, man made or otherwise, and more and more evidence daily that it's nothing but another con game to extract money.
You don't think that ice melting and sea level rising is evidence of global warming (man made or otherwise)? The oceans are the world great natural thermometer and their level is closely tied to temperature.
Selfishness and greed are quite rational, by the way, they are the results of evolutionary pressures to survive, to promote survival of yourself and of your own offspring.
"No man is an island." (John Donne). Humans are not solitary animals. The well being of you and your family is directly tied to the well being of the society you live in so it's rational to care about the well being of those around you. Too much selfishness and greed will in the end destroy you as well by destroying the society that supports you.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually the holy book would be the IPCC reports. The nice thing about anthropogenic global warming as a religion is that it has actual scientific evidence to back it up. If you want to suggest that the primary cause is something other than human activity you need to come up with some actual scientific evidence of your own that holds up under scrutiny.
I think it's pretty clear at this point that Trump will win the presidency. He isn't facing any real competition, and even many Democrats can't bring themselves to vote for either of the potential Democratic candidates. So at least a portion of them will be voting for Trump, in addition to nearly all Republicans who do support Trump. Much of America has become tired and disillusioned after 8 years of leftist rule, and want something different. That gives Trump a win that is nearly guaranteed at this point.
LOL, keep dreaming. There's an awful lot of Republicans who won't be voting for Trump.
Unlike most of you I went to the Nikola Motors website.
While there is undoubtedly some hype here's what they said.
There are 2 electric motors on the front axle and it looks like 4 electric motors on the rear axles. The motors have 2 gear automatic transmissions. The truck has what they call torque vectoring which adjusts the wheel speed while turning or maneuvering. There is a 100 gallon CNG tank powering a nearly 400 kw turbine. The turbine if fuel agnostic running on diesel, gasoline or CNG. You can choose your fuel at the time of purchase. They claim the 100 gallon CNG tank is enough for 800 -1,200 miles depending on terrain and load. The turbine will run for 1 hour out of every 3-5 hours of pure electric driving. It of course had regenerative braking but there are also air powered disk brakes on all 6 wheels (of course they'd have to have an air system so they can hook up to the trailer brakes too). They claim the truck will stop in about half the distance of a normal diesel rig.
For the first 25,000 customers they are offering free fuel for the first million miles. They own the rights to some gas wells and are setting up 55 fueling stations around the country and Canada that are spaced close enough that you can easily make if from one to the next. You can lease the truck for $5,000/month and that includes free fuel, warranty and scheduled maintenance (I doubt tires are included) and at the end of the warranty period (72 months or 1 million miles whichever comes first) you can trade it in on a new one. They also say the Nikola-one is around 2,000 pounds lighter than the equivalent diesel tractor increasing the payload you can carry.
Lots more information at the website.
CO2 will gradually, irrevocably be incorporated into carbonate rocks. Volcanism will naturally decrease do to reduced radiogenic heating. In 1.1Gyr photosynthesis will shut down due to *lack* of CO2, ending life on earth. Ponder that environmental wackos.
In 1.1 Gyr the Sun may have gotten enough hotter to make life as we know it impossible anyway. But if humans haven't managed to establish other outposts out in the Milky Way galaxy by then it probably doesn't matter anyway.
Why transport it? If you're capturing it from the atmosphere you can just do it at the sequestering facility.
So what? If I put you in a room with 280 ppm of hydrogen cyanide in the air you'd be dead in a matter of minutes. Just because a number is small doesn't mean it's insignificant.
Store the carbon in something much easier and cheaper. Trees!!!!. You'd think all these smart guys would have thought of this. Wait, you can't get a $2M research grant for planting trees. Guess that answers that question.
When you're burning the equivalent of thousands of years of tree growth in one year there is no way to plant enough trees to keep up with carbon emissions. Trees help but they're not the answer.
You mean climate science proponents. Maybe those techniques are used because they're the only thing you would understand. Science appears to be a foreign language to you,.
Obviously the climate science deniers listen to them if only to try and shoot them down. It's like the only ones who bring up Al Gore are the same deniers.
But the satellite measurements say sea level is rising. Aren't satellites the gold standard? They appear to be when it comes to temperatures.
I'm not sure that Hawking has ever been to the US. He would have been dead decades ago if he had to use the American system of health care.
The word "know" is usually associated with some level of empirical evidence to back it up, like the fact that all known sources of natural climate change when taken together would indicate that we should be on a slight cooling trend.
Hah! ClimateGate was much ado about nothing. There have been like a dozen investigations of the CG emails by different agencies and organizations and none of them found any scientific malfeasance, just a few nits about being more open.
You don't think the fact that CO2 levels have increased to levels that haven't been seen for over a million years and the year to year increase in atmospheric CO2 is a bit less than half of human emissions has something to do with it? The basic physics of the radiative properties of CO2 are well established. What do you have to counter that? Some conspiracy theory about how scientists are misrepresenting science at the behest of their political masters?
Wow, do you seriously believe that thousands of climate scientists from around the world are willing to be part of a conspiracy that's been going on for at least 30 years (and maybe back to Arrhenius in 1896) to pervert the science just for the sake political ideology? There are a few scientists like that but the vast majority of them are smart enough to know that if they push science they know to be wrong they will be found out and their reputations destroyed. I think most of them have far too much integrity to push false science.
You are making an unwarranted assumption that because humans weren't responsible for previous climate changes they can't be responsible for them now.
But you know, the whole point of being a climatologist is to study the things that affect the climate and how it changes. You must think they're pretty stupid if they're missing the natural changes that are changing the climate now at a rate that is practically unprecedented compared to historical climate changes. You'd have a good chance of winning a Nobel Prize if you can show them the error of their ways.
What will you do when you finally figure out that AGW is a real thing with actual consequences?
The Jurassic period. O2 in atmosphere was 130% modern levels. CO2 was at 1950ppm, 5-7 times modern levels. The temperature was a whole 3 DEGREES C over modern times!
What you fail to note is that the Sun was several percent cooler than it is today, the topology of the continents and therefore ocean currents were completely different than today. You can't try to compare then and now without taking all of that into account.
If we did see a nice correlation, it should extend to the rest of the planets. Earth receives far more energy from the sun than Mars. Venus receives far more than Earth. Mercury receives far more than Venus. Yet as far as I know, evidence doesn't show warming on the two inner bodies in the solar system
And interesting factoid, despite being nearly to twice as far from the Sun as Mercury the average surface temperature on Venus higher than it is on Mercury because of the 95% CO2 atmosphere of Venus.
Because when you add up all the known natural forcings the general trend is a slight reduction in total radiative forcing since about 8,000 years ago*. More recently the trend in TSI has been dropping since the 1960s.
*This is expected since the forcing of Milankovitch Cycles hit their peak 8,000 years ago and the drop into the next glacial cycle commenced then. Of course the anthropogenic rise in CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) to a level not seen in over a million years has short circuited that process
In this context GW is short for Global Warming and AGW for Anthropogenic Global Warming.
Context is everything.
Maybe it would be better put as "Without the services provided by the natural order of Earth humans could not survive." The oxygen in the air we breath comes entirely from natural processes. The recycling of water is provided by the natural order. The food we eat is a natural product of the Earth (somewhat enhanced by our modern technology.) The raw materials we use come from the natural world. It's pretty short sighted to just take all of that for granted.
Besides there's 0 evidence of global warming, man made or otherwise, and more and more evidence daily that it's nothing but another con game to extract money.
You don't think that ice melting and sea level rising is evidence of global warming (man made or otherwise)? The oceans are the world great natural thermometer and their level is closely tied to temperature.
How, exactly, would it harm me if we wiped out everyone in the Middle East and Africa?
A disturbance in The Force?
Selfishness and greed are quite rational, by the way, they are the results of evolutionary pressures to survive, to promote survival of yourself and of your own offspring.
"No man is an island." (John Donne). Humans are not solitary animals. The well being of you and your family is directly tied to the well being of the society you live in so it's rational to care about the well being of those around you. Too much selfishness and greed will in the end destroy you as well by destroying the society that supports you.