that is blatantly false. solar has already shown itself capable of powering entire nations.
a solar grid ~140 miles on a side could power the globe. not useful in a literal sense, but gives a starting point of the amount of surface area required. as it is, every residential roof in the US alone would provide that much area. add in commercial buildings, which are less likely to have suboptimal roof lines and angles (being typically flat), and the rest of the world, and you've taken into account the need for more than that minimum area (cause the earth spins you know).
and while a "smart grid" would help greatly in distribution, it's not required.
meaning the problem is solvable. today. with current technology. and without all the downsides of nuclear.
the only thing lacking is the political and human will to make it happen.
that is blatantly false. solar has already shown itself capable of powering entire nations.
a solar grid ~140 miles on a side could power the globe. not useful in a literal sense, but gives a starting point of the amount of surface area required. as it is, every residential roof in the US alone would provide that much area. add in commercial buildings, which are less likely to have suboptimal roof lines and angles (being typically flat), and the rest of the world, and you've taken into account the need for more than that minimum area (cause the earth spins you know).
and while a "smart grid" would help greatly in distribution, it's not required.
meaning the problem is solvable. today. with current technology. and without all the downsides of nuclear.
the only thing lacking is the political and human will to make it happen.
(a) The Earth's climate has always changed and always will.
Not this fast; the delineation between natural change and what we're seeing is readily apparent.
(b) The Earth's climate is EXTREMELY COMPLEX and cannot currently be accurately modeled in a computer.
False.
(c) While humans, like EVERYTHING ELSE, have SOME effects on climate, there are plenty of other causes of change including many we probably do not know/understand. Some of these other sources, like the sun, have a far greater impact than humans.
A) Sun: False. We are currently in a solar minimum. If the sun were driving it we would be cooling B) Volcanoes: False. Volcanoes only emit ~ 300 million tonnes of CO2 per year, LESS THAN 1% of what humans emit per year (which is in excess of 40 billion tonnes annually). C) The implication that we don't know everything that goes into climate: False.
I will state it clearly: Human activity is the primary driver of current changes in climate we see. This is indisputable.
(d) The Earth has been both significantly hotter and extremely cold many times in the past before there were enough humans to have had ANY effect on any of those previously very extreme changes.
Irrelevant because (a) the current biosphere of life did not exist at those times. Current life evolved for current changes over the extremely long terms that (b) Those changes occurred over.
if it wasn't then exposure to others with different backgrounds, different beliefs, different ethnicities, different orientations, etc, would not be the number one way that intolerant people become more tolerant. because they learn
just another example of libertarians being doomed to repeatedly relearn the same lessons over and over again that the rest of society has already learned, as they try to recreate from scratch the same systems society already has.
they never were.
blue states generally contribute more federal tax dollars than they receive back. red states generally receive more federal tax dollars than they contribute. and this while blue states also generally tax themselves higher, and have stronger economies, and better supported lower and middle class populations.
its almost like the GOP mantra of low low taxes doesn't actually help the majority of citizens.
actual EMP weapons (not created by a nuclear blast) are still in the realm of scifi. if they were not our troops would be using them daily simply because of how dang useful theyd be in a fight.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't like liars, I especially don't like stupid, unentertaining and transparent liars.
so why do you keep posting the same drivel?
2 years later, you're still posting the same wrong things.
(you cant hide it with your sock puppets)
that is blatantly false.
solar has already shown itself capable of powering entire nations.
a solar grid ~140 miles on a side could power the globe.
not useful in a literal sense, but gives a starting point of the amount of surface area required.
as it is, every residential roof in the US alone would provide that much area.
add in commercial buildings, which are less likely to have suboptimal roof lines and angles (being typically flat), and the rest of the world, and you've taken into account the need for more than that minimum area (cause the earth spins you know).
and while a "smart grid" would help greatly in distribution, it's not required.
meaning the problem is solvable.
today.
with current technology.
and without all the downsides of nuclear.
the only thing lacking is the political and human will to make it happen.
that is blatantly false.
solar has already shown itself capable of powering entire nations.
a solar grid ~140 miles on a side could power the globe.
not useful in a literal sense, but gives a starting point of the amount of surface area required.
as it is, every residential roof in the US alone would provide that much area.
add in commercial buildings, which are less likely to have suboptimal roof lines and angles (being typically flat), and the rest of the world, and you've taken into account the need for more than that minimum area (cause the earth spins you know).
and while a "smart grid" would help greatly in distribution, it's not required.
meaning the problem is solvable.
today.
with current technology.
and without all the downsides of nuclear.
the only thing lacking is the political and human will to make it happen.
Not if its cross-linked with a redundant melacortz ramistat.
Still needs word and character count
Not flame bait.
Mod up, +1 Fact.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Translation:
when judges agree with me: good decision
when they don't: ACTIVIST JUDGES MAKING LAWS!
usual denialist talking points.
(a) The Earth's climate has always changed and always will.
Not this fast; the delineation between natural change and what we're seeing is readily apparent.
(b) The Earth's climate is EXTREMELY COMPLEX and cannot currently be accurately modeled in a computer.
False.
(c) While humans, like EVERYTHING ELSE, have SOME effects on climate, there are plenty of other causes of change including many we probably do not know/understand. Some of these other sources, like the sun, have a far greater impact than humans.
A) Sun: False. We are currently in a solar minimum. If the sun were driving it we would be cooling
B) Volcanoes: False. Volcanoes only emit ~ 300 million tonnes of CO2 per year, LESS THAN 1% of what humans emit per year (which is in excess of 40 billion tonnes annually).
C) The implication that we don't know everything that goes into climate: False.
I will state it clearly: Human activity is the primary driver of current changes in climate we see. This is indisputable.
(d) The Earth has been both significantly hotter and extremely cold many times in the past before there were enough humans to have had ANY effect on any of those previously very extreme changes.
Irrelevant because (a) the current biosphere of life did not exist at those times. Current life evolved for current changes over the extremely long terms that
(b) Those changes occurred over.
he never has sources.
just claims.
you are wrong.
your very premise is 100% wrong.
diversity itself IS educational.
if it wasn't then exposure to others with different backgrounds, different beliefs, different ethnicities, different orientations, etc, would not be the number one way that intolerant people become more tolerant. because they learn
Aluminum alloy wheels on a conductive runway strip.
theres fewer than 100k people in the entire coal industry.
less than half are actual miners.
jeez your worldview is idiotic.
oh shutup with this bullshit.
just another example of libertarians being doomed to repeatedly relearn the same lessons over and over again that the rest of society has already learned, as they try to recreate from scratch the same systems society already has.
obviously the solution is to limit the number operating within the city.
they could be issued some sort of insignia or permit....or medallion.
libertarians: doomed to repeatedly relearn the same lessons over and over again as they try to recreate the same systems society already has.
translation: "its Obama's fault the racists came out of the woodwork and revealed themselves to be racist"
they never were.
blue states generally contribute more federal tax dollars than they receive back.
red states generally receive more federal tax dollars than they contribute.
and this while blue states also generally tax themselves higher, and have stronger economies, and better supported lower and middle class populations.
its almost like the GOP mantra of low low taxes doesn't actually help the majority of citizens.
emp is not even a real weapon yet.
people keep forgetting that.
actual EMP weapons (not created by a nuclear blast) are still in the realm of scifi.
if they were not our troops would be using them daily simply because of how dang useful theyd be in a fight.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Dunkirk ?
Yeah, in the US we prove guilt first — if we can — and then punish accordingly.
Really? Cause you never held yourself to that standard where Clinton was concerned.
oh hey. mi is being racist again.
color me not shocked.