Yes, Americans are so special they are the only people who live in warm places...(What's Canada's excuse?)
You think Nigeria is the world average for household electricity consumption? And I'm the one who is deliberately maliciously flawed?
You could cut back (closer) to other first world country levels and then you wouldn't have to use more coal powered electricity per person than China does.
Since America is just about the worst CO2 producer, and it's households wastes the most energy, and it's people are one of the richest. They could afford to pay a bit more for green energy to help save the environment.
You could cut back your use at the same time and it wouldn't even cost a cent more. Just an incentive to be less wasteful. You don't really need to use 3x everyone else.
Look Windy, renewables are becoming less and less of your new electricity...
2015 66%
2016 62%
2017 55%
2018 36%
No wonder your CO2 will rise this year.
How about reading all the way to the bottom of the summary...
According to the EIA, "in February 2018, for the first time in decades, all of the new generating capacity coming online within a month were non-fossil-fueled. Of the 475 MW of capacity that came online in February, 81 percent was wind, 16 percent was solar photovoltaic, and the remaining 3 percent was hydro and biomass."
Firstly, deniers gunna deny.
So why didn't you link to any of those before? Because when we look at the links we will find out your are misrepresenting those too...
Why do you constantly link to sites that don't agree with what you claim they say?
If you look at the literature, the specific meaning of the 97% claim is: 97 percent of climate scientists agree that there is a global warming trend and that human beings are the main cause--that is, that we are over 50% responsible.
So you wan't the rest of us to discuss it, then jump in later with. Yes I'm so smart and knew all along? I just didn't tell you...because I'm so smart...some other reason?
Why do you keep commenting here if you don't want to discuss it or share your insights with the rest of us?
You are trying to convince us it's not money, but there is some conspiracy to make people think that it is. You have evidence to show us, but are keeping it from us. Doesn't sound like the best course of action to expose their agenda if you wan't to keep all your 'information/evidence' a secret.
Yes this is well know, which is why I mentioned it.
Still seems strange he denied it was money, told us it was 'magic' and now is claiming he knew all along it was education and money, but thought it was some secret he didn't wan't others to know.
I, unlike you, have access to more sources of information than just this article.
He has access to some extra information, and to just trust him that he knows best. He may as well have just told us it was magic or Jesus.
If it's not money, time, education, tell us why not. And what is the reason instead.
(not expecting you to answer for him obviously)
He will have to do better than a handwave, trust me 'argument'.
So with all your better sources of information, you still didn't tell anyone what you think the reason is. But still commented numerous times.
Why, if it's not money? (It's money, and time, and education btw.)
No, being the LynnwoodDenier makes you ant-science. Picking and choosing what studies you believe based on your denial of global warming makes you anti-science. Linking to denialist sites already shown to massage the figures and pick and choose what years to use to get the results you want, makes you anti-science.
If you aren't the LynwoodDenier, then you are right, I don't know anything about your background. So why did you direct your comment to me?
Things like this show what non science 'thinking' goes through his/your head.
Most religious people have no problem with science; in fact, it can be argued that strict atheism is, in fact anti-science. For you cannot prove the existence of a higher power one way or another, so thus the scientific method would require you acknowledge the possibility for existence of a higher power is equal to the probability there is not a higher power. A real scientist could be a believer (who will claim it on faith, and thus not scientifically provable) or an agnostic; never an atheist.
If you can't know something it must be 50% true...not something a 'scientific mind' would come up with.
Anything can look out of context when taken out of context...
Who made the rule that questions can't be stupid?
"So then, with all the specialized training and assessment which doctors undergo, I guess we're forced to assume that all botched surgeries are deliberate and premeditated?"
No that's a stupid assumption, the training may not be as good as it should be.
No that's absurd, no matter how good someones training is they can still make mistakes.
Yes it's a little known fact that lizard people deliberately and premeditatedly kill off certain dangerous people.
So then, with all that specialized training and assessment, I guess we're forced to assume that all of the drone strikes on weddings are deliberate and premeditated?
Again with the currency manipulation? Didn't you learn from all the other times you claimed this nonsense? Show even some slightly credible information to suggest that is in the slightest way relevant.
As long as they do what you did first and remove enough of the 'd's. As they tend to get stuck in the throat and cause discomfort in such large quantities as multiple litres.
Every single person who buys a Tesla has it clearly explained to them that it is not a self driving car. None of them buy one thinking it is 'full self-driving'.
Appears Tesla has better marketing than all those other brands you mentioned previously.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, Americans are so special they are the only people who live in warm places...(What's Canada's excuse?)
You think Nigeria is the world average for household electricity consumption? And I'm the one who is deliberately maliciously flawed?
You could cut back (closer) to other first world country levels and then you wouldn't have to use more coal powered electricity per person than China does.
Since America is just about the worst CO2 producer, and it's households wastes the most energy, and it's people are one of the richest. They could afford to pay a bit more for green energy to help save the environment.
You could cut back your use at the same time and it wouldn't even cost a cent more. Just an incentive to be less wasteful. You don't really need to use 3x everyone else.
Look Windy, renewables are becoming less and less of your new electricity...
2015 66%
2016 62%
2017 55%
2018 36%
No wonder your CO2 will rise this year.
According to the EIA, "in February 2018, for the first time in decades, all of the new generating capacity coming online within a month were non-fossil-fueled. Of the 475 MW of capacity that came online in February, 81 percent was wind, 16 percent was solar photovoltaic, and the remaining 3 percent was hydro and biomass."
According to this solarscorecard, China is the cleanest/best First and third place goes to China...
Scale and government incentives were/are the main reason China became/is dominant.
Looks like your power costs could do with a little skyrocketing.
Firstly, deniers gunna deny.
So why didn't you link to any of those before? Because when we look at the links we will find out your are misrepresenting those too...
Why do you constantly link to sites that don't agree with what you claim they say?
Things are being improved, they will still always find something else to complain about.
If you look at the literature, the specific meaning of the 97% claim is: 97 percent of climate scientists agree that there is a global warming trend and that human beings are the main cause--that is, that we are over 50% responsible.
Did you even read your own link?
Was it higher or lower? Was it higher or lower than the corresponding wage increases?
China targets 3% inflation anyway...
A 2013 survey cited by Nature found that the dataset generated $2 billion in economic activity.
If you aren't even going to read the summary all the way to the end...
So you wan't the rest of us to discuss it, then jump in later with. Yes I'm so smart and knew all along? I just didn't tell you...because I'm so smart...some other reason?
Why do you keep commenting here if you don't want to discuss it or share your insights with the rest of us?
You are trying to convince us it's not money, but there is some conspiracy to make people think that it is. You have evidence to show us, but are keeping it from us. Doesn't sound like the best course of action to expose their agenda if you wan't to keep all your 'information/evidence' a secret.
Yes this is well know, which is why I mentioned it.
Still seems strange he denied it was money, told us it was 'magic' and now is claiming he knew all along it was education and money, but thought it was some secret he didn't wan't others to know.
I, unlike you, have access to more sources of information than just this article.
He has access to some extra information, and to just trust him that he knows best. He may as well have just told us it was magic or Jesus.
If it's not money, time, education, tell us why not. And what is the reason instead.
(not expecting you to answer for him obviously)
He will have to do better than a handwave, trust me 'argument'.
So with all your better sources of information, you still didn't tell anyone what you think the reason is. But still commented numerous times.
Why, if it's not money? (It's money, and time, and education btw.)
THANOS.
Contraception.
Education.
No, being the LynnwoodDenier makes you ant-science. Picking and choosing what studies you believe based on your denial of global warming makes you anti-science. Linking to denialist sites already shown to massage the figures and pick and choose what years to use to get the results you want, makes you anti-science.
If you aren't the LynwoodDenier, then you are right, I don't know anything about your background. So why did you direct your comment to me?
Things like this show what non science 'thinking' goes through his/your head.
Most religious people have no problem with science; in fact, it can be argued that strict atheism is, in fact anti-science. For you cannot prove the existence of a higher power one way or another, so thus the scientific method would require you acknowledge the possibility for existence of a higher power is equal to the probability there is not a higher power. A real scientist could be a believer (who will claim it on faith, and thus not scientifically provable) or an agnostic; never an atheist.
If you can't know something it must be 50% true...not something a 'scientific mind' would come up with.
Anything can look out of context when taken out of context...
Who made the rule that questions can't be stupid?
"So then, with all the specialized training and assessment which doctors undergo, I guess we're forced to assume that all botched surgeries are deliberate and premeditated?"
No that's a stupid assumption, the training may not be as good as it should be.
No that's absurd, no matter how good someones training is they can still make mistakes.
Yes it's a little known fact that lizard people deliberately and premeditatedly kill off certain dangerous people.
So then, with all that specialized training and assessment, I guess we're forced to assume that all of the drone strikes on weddings are deliberate and premeditated?
Same answers work for both.
Again with the currency manipulation? Didn't you learn from all the other times you claimed this nonsense? Show even some slightly credible information to suggest that is in the slightest way relevant.
Don't project your anti-science onto everyone.
As long as they do what you did first and remove enough of the 'd's. As they tend to get stuck in the throat and cause discomfort in such large quantities as multiple litres.
He agreed to come to the table before Trump broke the agreement. And now after he broke the agreement. There may not even be a summit anymore.
Are you starting to learn how time works yet?
Their pollution is half America's...
Every single person who buys a Tesla has it clearly explained to them that it is not a self driving car. None of them buy one thinking it is 'full self-driving'.
Appears Tesla has better marketing than all those other brands you mentioned previously.