I think it is the other way around, if you don't believe there is something fishy going on after reading even a small portion of the two sets of released emails then you are not willing to face facts.
If you think there's a cabal of scientists banding together on global warming for the money and power, then you are either astonishingly ignorant or a total moonbat
Either that or you read the emails of the cabal of scientist banding together on global warming.
I think what he was referring to is not that cars release CO2, but that the CO2 they release is several orders of magnitude less than say coal fired power plants.
The problem with your assertions is that from their own emails we know that these scientists have actively worked to pervert the peer review process therefore nullifying your belief that only published scientists should contribute to the scientific discussion.
Really -- A lot of the stuff I read on his site is the links to the emails written by these so called authority discussing how to "hide the decline." I'm sorry but I think the side that has been more discredited in recent years is the AGW side, further by the release of their own emails describing non-scientific methods used to prop up their arguments.
A "renewable" fuel is a fuel that we can make more of when we need it. It doesn't mean it's something we have to find in a ready state in nature. Hydrogen IS renewable. 100% renewable. We can make shitloads more of it, and you can't differentiate manufactured hydrogen from the stuff you'd find if we ever found it.
By your definition gasoline is also a renewable fuel source. CO2 can be combined with hydrogen and oxygen to build hydrocarbons. The simpler the hydrocarbon the easier it is, but once you have methane it is just more steps to more complex hydrocarbons. It just a matter of how much energy you are willing to spend to create it.
The problem with solar and wind is that they can NEVER match other generation type prices simply because you must build a substantial portion of other types as a redundant back up for when the wind doesn't blow or the sun doesn't shine.
Modern day nuclear reactor designs have handled most of the issues. I would happily live next to reactor simply because that would mean cheap abundant power. By all means build whatever if efficient for the location. For some places that means hydro-electric, others geo-thermal, tidal, the list goes on. But for a majority of places nuclear is the only viable option. Do some reading on some of the new reactor types before you reject it out of hand.
Re:So why don't we try something else...
on
Health Care Reform
·
· Score: 1
This makes more sense than most things I have read on the subject!!
Another issue is how do you deal with the people whose idea of fun is running around stealing candles from the other people's dead bodies? Who should they be able to see?
My first response is - yeah but who would want to.
My next one is -- note he said the majority of people on Earth. You cannot seriously believe that the majority of people on earth would survive without modern agricultural techniques and the industry required to support them do you?
I gave up on tabletop gaming because the mechanics of it are annoying to me. The endless tables and dice rolls to randomize everything. Granted the story in online games can't hold a candle to it but it doesn't take hours to lay out the screens and dice and figurines and hex maps to get ready to play.
I think the big point is to each his own. If you prefer tabletop fine, I'll not denigrate that. But don't expect all people to prefer what you do.
I imagine he is referring to petroleum based fertilizers, but unless that affects the ability to raise chicken feed, I'm not sure where that affects chickens.
I agree this is how it should go down, but our politicians are way too corrupt to even think of giving the people this level of power when they can take it for themselves.
I agree that a lot of the ergonomics stuff is horse crap. However I prefer the split keyboard design because I am a big guy and it is a lot more comfortable to type on than trying to bring my elbows into my sides to line up with a regular keyboard.
Plus, if roof-top PV systems achieve saturation in an area, the power company could sell off their transmission lines, freeing up megatons of recyclable copper and getting rid of an unsightly maintenance headache. I wouldn't mind seeing fewer mangled trees in people's yards.
Even if solar goes through some technological leaps, and you get 100% of your neighbors to cover their roof, you can't get rid of transmission lines. Not until we get energy storage systems to go through similar tech leaps.
Don't forget that rather important part of the US constitution that says that
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
That pretty much means that unless otherwise specified CA constitution trumps the US Constitution.
Sounds like that has more to do with electoral prospects in some coal-heavy states.
or maybe it had more to do with the fact that US has 27% of the worlds coal reserves. If we want to get off middle east oil so we don't have to bow to the king of Saudia Arabia then we need to do something local.
I know coal isn't the ideal option, it has a number of real environmental problems without even looking at CO2 but it has the advantage of being in country.
I wonder how this works at small colleges, actually. Since there are no grad students, you probably don't have as many advanced classes, right? Do you still have discussion-group style classes? Do they feel like research groups?
I enjoyed my mechanical engineering classes that I had at a community college much more than the ones that I attended at the University. And I'm sure I learned more at the community college.
We had maybe 20 people in statics or dynamics at the community college, that had 100 or more at the university. The discussions were more valuable to me than reading the textbooks.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it is the other way around, if you don't believe there is something fishy going on after reading even a small portion of the two sets of released emails then you are not willing to face facts.
you are right I took his 34.2M as the CO2 number incorrectly
If you think there's a cabal of scientists banding together on global warming for the money and power, then you are either astonishingly ignorant or a total moonbat
Either that or you read the emails of the cabal of scientist banding together on global warming.
I think what he was referring to is not that cars release CO2, but that the CO2 they release is several orders of magnitude less than say coal fired power plants.
The problem with your assertions is that from their own emails we know that these scientists have actively worked to pervert the peer review process therefore nullifying your belief that only published scientists should contribute to the scientific discussion.
Really -- A lot of the stuff I read on his site is the links to the emails written by these so called authority discussing how to "hide the decline." I'm sorry but I think the side that has been more discredited in recent years is the AGW side, further by the release of their own emails describing non-scientific methods used to prop up their arguments.
ridiculous
It's actually worse -- it is a combination of Kung Fu Panda and Pokemon
No Kidding -- EQ1 was and still is releasing multiple expansions per year. Guild Wars one per year is not what I call annoying.
A "renewable" fuel is a fuel that we can make more of when we need it. It doesn't mean it's something we have to find in a ready state in nature. Hydrogen IS renewable. 100% renewable. We can make shitloads more of it, and you can't differentiate manufactured hydrogen from the stuff you'd find if we ever found it.
By your definition gasoline is also a renewable fuel source. CO2 can be combined with hydrogen and oxygen to build hydrocarbons. The simpler the hydrocarbon the easier it is, but once you have methane it is just more steps to more complex hydrocarbons. It just a matter of how much energy you are willing to spend to create it.
Someone will probably try to use this to say hydrogen is dangerous. I'd like to remind you gasoline is dangerous
Yes gasoline storage is dangerous, but it is magnitudes easier and safer, for now, to contain gasoline than it is to contain hydrogen.
The problem with solar and wind is that they can NEVER match other generation type prices simply because you must build a substantial portion of other types as a redundant back up for when the wind doesn't blow or the sun doesn't shine.
Modern day nuclear reactor designs have handled most of the issues. I would happily live next to reactor simply because that would mean cheap abundant power. By all means build whatever if efficient for the location. For some places that means hydro-electric, others geo-thermal, tidal, the list goes on. But for a majority of places nuclear is the only viable option. Do some reading on some of the new reactor types before you reject it out of hand.
This makes more sense than most things I have read on the subject!!
4. You make a hot character so spending an hour day looking at her run around the screen is at least more visually stimulating than #1.
Another issue is how do you deal with the people whose idea of fun is running around stealing candles from the other people's dead bodies? Who should they be able to see?
My first response is - yeah but who would want to.
My next one is -- note he said the majority of people on Earth. You cannot seriously believe that the majority of people on earth would survive without modern agricultural techniques and the industry required to support them do you?
I thought that the Korean War never really ended. It was just a cease fire that continues until this day? Although there is an armistice agreement.
I gave up on tabletop gaming because the mechanics of it are annoying to me. The endless tables and dice rolls to randomize everything. Granted the story in online games can't hold a candle to it but it doesn't take hours to lay out the screens and dice and figurines and hex maps to get ready to play. I think the big point is to each his own. If you prefer tabletop fine, I'll not denigrate that. But don't expect all people to prefer what you do.
I imagine he is referring to petroleum based fertilizers, but unless that affects the ability to raise chicken feed, I'm not sure where that affects chickens.
I agree this is how it should go down, but our politicians are way too corrupt to even think of giving the people this level of power when they can take it for themselves.
I agree that a lot of the ergonomics stuff is horse crap. However I prefer the split keyboard design because I am a big guy and it is a lot more comfortable to type on than trying to bring my elbows into my sides to line up with a regular keyboard.
Even if solar goes through some technological leaps, and you get 100% of your neighbors to cover their roof, you can't get rid of transmission lines. Not until we get energy storage systems to go through similar tech leaps.
Don't forget that rather important part of the US constitution that says that
That pretty much means that unless otherwise specified CA constitution trumps the US Constitution.
or maybe it had more to do with the fact that US has 27% of the worlds coal reserves. If we want to get off middle east oil so we don't have to bow to the king of Saudia Arabia then we need to do something local.
I know coal isn't the ideal option, it has a number of real environmental problems without even looking at CO2 but it has the advantage of being in country.
I enjoyed my mechanical engineering classes that I had at a community college much more than the ones that I attended at the University. And I'm sure I learned more at the community college.
We had maybe 20 people in statics or dynamics at the community college, that had 100 or more at the university. The discussions were more valuable to me than reading the textbooks.