PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Jim Logajan on July 07, 2023, 07:58:38 PM
-
The WSJ made the following editorial yesterday that is dead on relevant to some of the questions raised in the closed thread:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-white-house-tells-the-truth-about-climate-change-global-warming-gdp-temperature-economic-growth-52aaf575?st=qo0bho4bvfhmlbr&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink (https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-white-house-tells-the-truth-about-climate-change-global-warming-gdp-temperature-economic-growth-52aaf575?st=qo0bho4bvfhmlbr&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink)
In case the link fails to work, here is the text (the actual article includes a projected GDP change vs Temperature change graph):
"The White House Tells the Truth About Climate Change
A report reveals that global temperature changes barely affects economic growth.
The journalist Michael Kinsley famously noted that “a gaffe is when a politician tells the truth.” By that standard, the White House committed a doozy in March when it released a paper on climate change’s effect on the U.S. economy. Its findings undermine any claims of an ongoing climate crisis or imminent catastrophe.
The report, produced by the Council of Economic Advisers and the Office of Management and Budget, assesses how the economic consequences of climate change could be integrated into federal budgeting. The report’s first figure—reproduced nearby—shows 12 independent peer-reviewed estimates of how America’s gross domestic product would decline as the global temperature rises.
While the estimates differ, each shows an economic impact of less than a few percentage points for a few degrees of warming. The consensus, apart from two counterbalancing outliers, is that today’s warming of 2.2 degrees Fahrenheit has reduced GDP by less than 0.5%. That is trivial, considering real GDP has grown by more than 800% since 1950. If warming reaches 4.5 degrees—about what the United Nation’s climate panel projects for 2100 under plausible scenarios for future global emissions—the consensus reduction amounts to less than 2%. In other words, if the average annual GDP growth rate is 1.5% for the next 80 years, the economy would grow 232%. A 2% climate-change effect would reduce that growth to 225%. As physicists say, that’s a difference “in the noise.”
Economic modeling combined with climate modeling can only be described as a doubly dismal enterprise, rife with uncertainties and untestable assumptions. The White House report offers caveats appropriate to its projections, including that the impact estimates are uncertain, that the consequences of climate may be uneven across sectors and regions, that GDP isn’t the only measure of climate’s effect, and that some types of impacts are omitted.
But, critically, the report also omits America’s amazing capacity to adapt, if not thrive, under a changing climate. The U.S., excluding Alaska and Hawaii, has warmed about 2 degrees Fahrenheit since 1901. Despite that warming, the nation has flourished: Its population has quadrupled, its average life expectancy soared, to 79 years from 48, and its economic activity per capita multiplied around sevenfold. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects a comparable warming for early next century, but our nation’s experience should lead us to believe that climate change will be only a minor detriment to national welfare. Even hypothetical tipping points—practically irreversible changes such as disintegration of the Greenland ice sheet—are projected to have only minimal effect on the global economy.
A later section of the White House report reinforces how little future greenhouse-gas emissions are expected to affect the U.S. economy in coming decades. It projects that today’s “debt-to-GDP ratio” will rise to 111.2% at midcentury if the world is on a path to achieve net-zero emissions by 2075, while it would rise to 112.6% under an equally unlikely high-emissions scenario. There is little doubt that many factors other than climate—such as technology and trade—will be far more consequential for the economy and debt over the next 25 years. The 1.4% difference between these two extreme scenarios is, again, in the noise.
The report’s authors should be commended for honestly delivering likely unwelcome messages, even if they didn’t make a show of it. The rest of the Biden administration and its climate-activist allies should moderate their apocalyptic rhetoric and cancel the climate crisis accordingly. Exaggerating the magnitude, urgency and certainty of the climate threat encourages ill-considered policies that could be more disruptive and expensive than any change in the climate itself."
-
We better pray the climate warms instead of cools.
-
They can't even measure temperatures without changing them to fit their big Government solutions and taxes narrative. They have to LIE and cheat because it is ALL A HOAX. Like Covid only worse. Way worse.
-
They can't even measure temperatures without changing them to fit their big Government solutions and taxes narrative. They have to LIE and cheat because it is ALL A HOAX. Like Covid only worse. Way worse.
The problem is the lying and the grift. If they’d been honest from the start they would have credibility. But just like the CDC with Covid, they destroyed any semblance of credibility and now wonder why we don’t trust their “science”.
Covid is a real disease and there were ways to manage it properly. Perhaps the vax is good for old people. But we now know it is unnecessary and problematic for the very young. Maybe we learned that ventilators were counterproductive. We definitely learned that masks and lockdowns create more problems than they solve, to the point of being disastrous. If the “experts” and politicians had been honest about all of this all along, and had some humility and admitted that they are learning as we go, instead of lying and forcing unproven mandates on us, we wouldn’t now mistrust them so much.
The climate change people did the exact same thing. Maybe climate change is something to be concerned about. But if it is, the self-anointed activists have totally burned their bridges with public trust by lying, exaggerating, censoring debate, cherry picking models, blacklisting dissenting scientists, and abusing the issue for personal enrichment. Why the hell would I believe anything they say now?
I think what Little Joe is saying is we can separate the wheat from the chaff and address the actual real concerns, which he believes exist at least to a degree. I agree there are some environmental issues. We should preserve “jungles” for example (why the hell is that a bad word now?) but not because the whole planet will die if we don’t, but because they are the source of new medications, and are the habitat of non-human primates which we don’t want to go extinct.
We should limit air pollution just for health reasons and clean up trash for aesthetic reasons. But the fear mongering about the world is going to end in x number of years if you don’t give the government more money, they have cried wolf too many times. Now, even if it turns out to be true (and why do I think it won’t) we owe them no trust whatsoever.
-
^^^^^^This! Plus NONE of their doom and gloom predictions have come true. NONE!
-
^^^^^^This! Plus NONE of their doom and gloom predictions have come true. NONE!
I’m old now and I’ve been hearing the doom and gloom, world is gonna end in ten years, all my life and it never happened. So I am wiser and can’t be fooled anymore. The young whippersnappers hearing it for the first time think they know truth and are all full of piss and vinegar and like most of us when young think they’re gonna go out and change the world but in reality they lack perspective and don’t know shit. These are the idiots gluing themselves to roads.
-
Joe decided his thread was “going nowhere” because he didn’t like where it was going.
Joe, before you protest that’s not true, and that I’m picking on you, go back and carefully read all the posts. And then the posts on this thread. And think. If any issue is “large, and contains multitudes,”* it is this one. But there is a distillation, and it is that we are fearing the climate because we are being grifted to fear it. The grifters are training us to forget winter and gasp in horror at normal summer temperatures. Now Biden is talking about trying to block the sun. The sun that sustains life and, ironically, generates electricity via the sacred solar panels.
Do. Not. Be. A. Sheep.
Love, Becky
*Walt Whitman: Do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself. I am large. I contain multitudes.
-
Amusing.
https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.planet-today.com%2F2023%2F07%2Fwef-says-fashion-will-be-abolished-by.html%3Fm%3D1
-
Amusing.
https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.planet-today.com%2F2023%2F07%2Fwef-says-fashion-will-be-abolished-by.html%3Fm%3D1
Looks like I'll be limited to one new pair of socks and underwear per year.
-
Looks like I'll be limited to one new pair of socks and underwear per year.
Mao said this was all anyone needed. Or else.
(https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/105753032-1550760729485untitled-2.jpg?v=1550760756&w=740&h=416&ffmt=webp&vtcrop=y)
-
Joe decided his thread was “going nowhere” because he didn’t like where it was going.
Joe, before you protest that’s not true,
Sorry, but that's not true.
I didn't lock it because I didn't like where it was going. If I were to do that, I would have locked dozens of my threads.
First, I locked it because I saw those buttons on the bottom for the first time and sort of wondered what they would do. It turns out they DO lock the thread, except apparently, for administrators.
And as far as me not liking where the thread was going, that isn't true either.
The thread was going EXACTLY where I figured it would go; nowhere. Which is what I told you would happen when you encouraged me to start this thread.
Also:
I wasn't about to sit here and defend the likes of AOC or Algore.
I wasn't trying to say the earth was going to end in 12 years.
I wasn't going to defend stupid government mandates for things like Electric Vehicles or putting up giant sun shades or banning gas stoves.
Yet that is what I felt like everyone thought I was doing and I vigorously deny that. But denying it tends to NOT have any effect anyway. Witness the fact that a while back I said Hillary had more balls than many other politicians. Anthony tried to say that mean that I though Hillary was a leader. I didn't say that, I didn't mean that and the more I denied it the more everyone else joined him. (Just in case nobody noticed, that was when my attitude toward this place turned sour, except towards Rush).
-
Joe decided his thread was “going nowhere” because he didn’t like where it was going.
Joe, before you protest that’s not true, and that I’m picking on you, go back and carefully read all the posts. And then the posts on this thread. And think. If any issue is “large, and contains multitudes,”* it is this one. But there is a distillation, and it is that we are fearing the climate because we are being grifted to fear it. The grifters are training us to forget winter and gasp in horror at normal summer temperatures. Now Biden is talking about trying to block the sun. The sun that sustains life and, ironically, generates electricity via the sacred solar panels.
Do. Not. Be. A. Sheep.
Love, Becky
*Walt Whitman: Do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself. I am large. I contain multitudes.
That’s one of my favorite quotes. My best friend used to say it. The gay one I met when I was 18 and stayed friends with until he died a few years ago, the one who introduced me to Ayn Rand and libertarianism. (He met her, said she was a snob.) And Milton Friedman. And Will and Ariel Durant. And Walt Whitman! He was a well known astrologer who was on the radio all the time. Before that he served in the Navy during the Vietnam War.
He is spinning in his grave over leftism today.
-
Sorry, but that's not true.
I didn't lock it because I didn't like where it was going. If I were to do that, I would have locked dozens of my threads.
First, I locked it because I saw those buttons on the bottom for the first time and sort of wondered what they would do. It turns out they DO lock the thread, except apparently, for administrators.
And as far as me not liking where the thread was going, that isn't true either.
The thread was going EXACTLY where I figured it would go; nowhere. Which is what I told you would happen when you encouraged me to start this thread.
Also:
I wasn't about to sit here and defend the likes of AOC or Algore.
I wasn't trying to say the earth was going to end in 12 years.
I wasn't going to defend stupid government mandates for things like Electric Vehicles or putting up giant sun shades or banning gas stoves.
Yet that is what I felt like everyone thought I was doing and I vigorously deny that. But denying it tends to NOT have any effect anyway. Witness the fact that a while back I said Hillary had more balls than many other politicians. Anthony tried to say that mean that I though Hillary was a leader. I didn't say that, I didn't mean that and the more I denied it the more everyone else joined him. (Just in case nobody noticed, that was when my attitude toward this place turned sour, except towards Rush).
Well for some reason I get the nuance and usually understand what you mean.
-
The original Climate Change thread remains locked to anyone not named nddons, Anthony, or Lucifer. They at least get to continue the conversation.
-
can't you unlock your own thread?
-
I can't see the reason for locking a thread except to make some sort of statement.
-
can't you unlock your own thread?
Yes you can. I did it. I locked the Anthony thread then unlocked it.
-
I can't see the reason for locking a thread except to make some sort of statement.
Well he said he found the button and wanted to test it. That’s a reason. But yes he also was done with the topic. I understand that. Although people can just take it up elsewhere. But if we start a thread I guess we can have a certain “ownership” of it, including killing it. But I hope everybody doesn’t just start locking threads willy nilly.
-
The original Climate Change thread remains locked to anyone not named nddons, Anthony, or Lucifer. They at least get to continue the conversation.
I looked for a button to unlock it but couldn't find one. I've never even seen the lock button.
-
Jesus Joe, you really have to bring up my Hillary comment. That STILL bothers you? It was totally inocous and we all know how this can be a flawed medium.
-
I looked for a button to unlock it but couldn't find one. I've never even seen the lock button.
I got the impression, perhaps mistaken, that as moderators you three could at least still post to a closed thread. Otherwise I have no objection to it remaining closed.
-
I got the impression, perhaps mistaken, that as moderators you three could at least still post to a closed thread. Otherwise I have no objection to it remaining closed.
I'm opposed to censorship. When someone locks a thread because they don't want any opposing commentary, that's essentially censorship.
-
Locking a thread because you don’t like how people disagree with your premise is cowardice.
-
I'm opposed to censorship. When someone locks a thread because they don't want any opposing commentary, that's essentially censorship.
On any other forum that would be true. Here it is only a symbolic gesture - this thread being proof of the futility of locking a thread.
-
On any other forum that would be true. Here it is only a symbolic gesture - this thread being proof of the futility of locking a thread.
There is a difference between moderators locking threads (authority) and the “common man” being able to lock or delete only the thread he started. Although you can argue he or she is then messing with other people’s posts. But do we have a “right” to have all posts we make remain up, or remain open to responses?
I guess the idea is: You start a thread, you are asking for input on a subject, and by mutually agreed convention, we usually try to stay within the bounds of the subject. This isn’t a hard rule because we want as few rules as possible, but voluntary compliance is good to keep things orderly. Otherwise chaos ensues. It’s the foundation of any free but functional society.
So following that logic, we might grant that the originator of the thread has more “ownership” or stakes, than the respondees. Therefore if the originator feels the thread now fails to meet his or her goal of enjoyment, or becoming more informed, or whatever, and the continued life of the thread becomes annoying instead, maybe it’s not unreasonable to give him or her the power to lock or delete it.
Or alternatively we can say the originator has no more rights over the thread than any of the respondees and maybe we should get rid of the lock and delete buttons for thread starters. The respondees have First Amendment rights to speak indefinitely and repeatedly in that particular thread, even though they weren’t the ones who started it.
But then, you have a right to free speech, but not the right to say it anywhere. Like, go into someone else’s home and speak freely. So, maybe the question is whether we view a thread as somehow more personally “owned” by the initiator, or not.
The problem at PoA is the ones with more relative power (power over everyone) locking threads because of political bias, perceived personal attack and/or efforts to control the dialogue by censoring so-called “misinformation”. Here, as you say, it is futile to lock threads for any of those reasons, because somebody else can make a new thread and carry on. So here it’s more like, “I wish I’d never brought this up and I’m out.” That’s about all it can be. I’m sure Little Joe has no problem with us continuing the discussion in some other thread, otherwise he would be over on PoA and not here. By locking his thread, he’s merely saying, “I’m not responding anymore, and now I don’t have to see this thread popping up in my feed where I’ll have to ignore the new posts.” I can see that. Although I guess he also has to ignore the new thread too, so maybe it doesn’t really accomplish anything.
Having said all that, I still hope we don’t start a trend. It would be annoying to have to take extra steps to get around people locking threads all over the place. Although easy to get around, it can be argued it’s technically a censorship obstacle. Any small step in that direction requires vigilance or it will start to snowball. I offer the AOPA forum and the PoA forum as historical examples. Both started out unmoderated and look where they both ended up, step by step.
I doubt that will ever happen here though.
-
Rush: you are overlooking the reality of thread drift. Some threads go far far FAR afield of the original topic.
Perhaps this only really needs to be addressed if the lock/unlock/delete buttons end up being abused.
So far, we've been doing ok.
-
Rush: you are overlooking the reality of thread drift. Some threads go far far FAR afield of the original topic.
Perhaps this only really needs to be addressed if the lock/unlock/delete buttons end up being abused.
So far, we've been doing ok.
True. Nobody here abuses anything. Except each other. ;D
-
Still the best climate site.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/
-
Still the best climate site.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/
Thanks for posting that website.
-
[/color]date=1688840260]
That’s one of my favorite quotes. My best friend used to say it. The gay one I met when I was 18 and stayed friends with until he died a few years ago, the one who introduced me to Ayn Rand and libertarianism. (He met her, said she was a snob.) And Milton Friedman. And Will and Ariel Durant. And Walt Whitman! He was a well known astrologer who was on the radio all the time. Before that he served in the Navy during the Vietnam War.
He is spinning in his grave over leftism today.
Walt Whitman died in 1892 so he couldn’t have been on the radio or in the Vietnam war.
Walt wrote “O Captain, My Captain,” which was used in my favorite movie of all time, “Dead Poets Society.”
-
Walt Whitman died in 1892 so he couldn’t have been on the radio or in the Vietnam war.
Walt wrote “O Captain, My Captain,” which was used in my favorite movie of all time, “Dead Poets Society.”
My bad writing. It’s was my friend who was on the radio and served in the Vietnam War. The green font shows you were kidding? ;D
I think I missed Dead Poets Society. 1989, I had a toddler and was pregnant. I didn’t go see movies around then.
-
The Federal government can't predict everything that will come of climate change nor its effects on Americans. Good example is the outbreak real of fires in Alberta. Now you might say that Alberta is in Canada and doesn't affect the US, and while you're geographically correct your conclusions are dead wrong. The smoke from those fires wound up in the US East Coast and midwest, and the air quality plummeted to the point where I promise it interfered with economic activity. Can't say how much, but it did.
-
The Federal government can't predict everything that will come of climate change nor its effects on Americans. Good example is the outbreak real of fires in Alberta. Now you might say that Alberta is in Canada and doesn't affect the US, and while you're geographically correct your conclusions are dead wrong. The smoke from those fires wound up in the US East Coast and midwest, and the air quality plummeted to the point where I promise it interfered with economic activity. Can't say how much, but it did.
What was the cause of those fires?
-
What was the cause of those fires?
Clearly mikey believes that conservatives and free speech caused all those forest fires. In his delusion only communism can ‘cure’ the problem.
-
What was the cause of those fires?
ARSON. By a man made climate change activist!
-
That’s one of my favorite quotes. My best friend used to say it. The gay one I met when I was 18 and stayed friends with until he died a few years ago, the one who introduced me to Ayn Rand and libertarianism. (He met her, said she was a snob.) And Milton Friedman. And Will and Ariel Durant. And Walt Whitman! He was a well known astrologer who was on the radio all the time. Before that he served in the Navy during the Vietnam War.
He is spinning in his grave over leftism today.
Sidebar: My wife and I were watching an episode of Suits on Netflix (I HIGHLY recommend it!) and at one point in season 3 Mike Ross says to Louis Litt “O Captain! My Captain!”
My wife and I both turned to each other and, having both been products of Catholic school education and a liberal arts college, simultaneously said “Walt Whitman!!”
If anyone doesn’t know, that poem was written in 1865 about the death of Abraham Lincoln. We had to memorize it in school.
-
[SUITS]
Great show. At least as good as Breaking Bad.
And later you will hear quotes from "A Few Good Men.'
-
[SUITS]
Great show. At least as good as Breaking Bad.
And later you will hear quotes from "A Few Good Men.'
Is it woke?
-
Is it woke?
I'm only on season 2, but it doesn't seem to be blatantly woke. There are more black women CEOs than you may find in real life though. But some other series I watched recently got woker and woker as time went on.
-
I'm only on season 2, but it doesn't seem to be blatantly woke. There are more black women CEOs than you may find in real life though. But some other series I watched recently got woker and woker as time went on.
I’ll try it. Nothing wrong with black women. But if it gets preachy or “hate men” or anything I’ll drop it.
-
Netflix is Woke as Hell, but you can't avoid everything. I subscribe to YouTube Music premium. ::)
-
Is it woke?
I don't think I've watched any new series on TV or the net since about 2009 (when Stargate Atlantis ended.) I think I missed most of the rise of such stuff. Contemporary references go woosh over my head.
On the other hand, lately I've been woke most days after about 7:30 AM. I hope that doesn't mean anything bad about me.
-
I watched the Russian movie “White Tiger”. It is not the least bit woke. Very refreshing. Tank battles.
-
Spoiler Alert
I'm on season 6 of SUITS and I would not call it woke at all. Not even when they manage to get a wrongly convicted black guy off death row.
-
I watched the Russian movie “White Tiger”. It is not the least bit woke. Very refreshing. Tank battles.
I watch a lot of Russian war movies about WWII and never disappointed.
-
I watch a lot of Russian war movies about WWII and never disappointed.
Same here. My eyes get tired on the subtitles after a while, but the movies are outstanding. The one about the front-line fighter squadron with female pilots was amazing. Wish I could remember its name. Those chicks were vicious.
-
Same here. My eyes get tired on the subtitles after a while, but the movies are outstanding. The one about the front-line fighter squadron with female pilots was amazing. Wish I could remember its name. Those chicks were vicious.
Night Witches?
-
https://www.history.com/news/meet-the-night-witches-the-daring-female-pilots-who-bombed-nazis-by-night
-
Night Witches?
Found it in watch it again: "The Attackers". "On the Road to Berlin" was pretty good. "T-34" was outstanding. "The Dawns Here are Quiet" is also outstanding.
-
I’ll try it. Nothing wrong with black women. But if it gets preachy or “hate men” or anything I’ll drop it.
Not woke at all. One thing that took me back was Meghan Markle. I was planning on disliking her just because of the way she screwed up Harry, etc.
Instead, she is a half way decent actress, and a sympathetic character on this show. I was pleasantly surprised.
-
Not woke at all. One thing that took me back was Meghan Markle. I was planning on disliking her just because of the way she screwed up Harry, etc.
Instead, she is a half way decent actress, and a sympathetic character on this show. I was pleasantly surprised.
I didn’t realize she was in it.
-
I didn’t realize she was in it.
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1632701/
-
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1632701/
The red head Sarah Rafferty (Donna) is sassy and smoking hot.
-
Same here. My eyes get tired on the subtitles after a while, but the movies are outstanding. The one about the front-line fighter squadron with female pilots was amazing. Wish I could remember its name. Those chicks were vicious.
I dislike subtitles too but I have to have them all the time now. If English the closed caption is on. Otherwise even with my hearing aids I cannot pick up all the dialogue. Often because they have music going on and I can’t differentiate the soft consonants. I think I’m going to eventually have to get cochlear implants. But it means there is no disadvantage at all watching foreign shows. In fact I actually love listening to the language and trying to pick up what I can, but then I have to turn on the subtitles in the foreign language because I can’t hear what they say well enough.
-
Had no idea this was a thing, but I approve. Cleanse the gene pool of people who think we can wrench the climate into a steady state.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/mar/12/birthstrikers-meet-the-women-who-refuse-to-have-children-until-climate-change-ends
-
Had no idea this was a thing, but I approve. Cleanse the gene pool of people who think we can wrench the climate into a steady state.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/mar/12/birthstrikers-meet-the-women-who-refuse-to-have-children-until-climate-change-ends
It’s probably a good thing that snowflake won’t be adding children thru her gene pool.
-
Had no idea this was a thing, but I approve. Cleanse the gene pool of people who think we can wrench the climate into a steady state.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/mar/12/birthstrikers-meet-the-women-who-refuse-to-have-children-until-climate-change-ends
IDIOT. She will find herself at 75 years old with no catastrophe, the climate is just fine, and all alone.
-
IDIOT. She will find herself at 75 years old with no catastrophe, the climate is just fine, and all alone.
and she’ll be thinking that she helped save the world
-
and she’ll be thinking that she helped save the world
True. They never leave their delusions.
-
These brainwashed morons need to get a life and stop obsessing over propaganda. WTF? She looks like a 50s, early 60s Beatnik. Just stop.
-
https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1681086126138748941
-
https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1681086126138748941
That woman is beyond ignorant.
But notice she says "National climate emergency now". Take this seriously, the communist desperately want another lockdown, the last one worked beyond their wildest dreams. The next one will be brutal.
-
That woman is beyond ignorant.
But notice she says "National climate emergency now". Take this seriously, the communist desperately want another lockdown, the last one worked beyond their wildest dreams. The next one will be brutal.
They want everyone 100% on electricity for heat, cooking, and transportation so they can shut us off very easily.
-
They want everyone 100% on electricity for heat, cooking, and transportation so they can shut us off very easily.
New cars (not sure of the start date) will have remote kill switches installed. Gee, how convenient huh?
-
They want everyone 100% on electricity for heat, cooking, and transportation so they can shut us off very easily.
There's no way the grid can support that unless much more reliable generation is built. Fossil fuel, nuke or hydro. All three actually.
-
There's no way the grid can support that unless much more reliable generation is built. Fossil fuel, nuke or hydro. All three actually.
Everyone knows that.
The issues are being worked on feverishly.
The holdup is political, not technical or logistics.
But hydro will be playing less and less of a role. Hydro power is generally more environmentally devastating than solar, and maybe even wind.
I have no problem with going totally renewable and nuclear, as long as it is done in an economically prudent manner. And it can be done.
Shutting down coal mines and putting the miners on welfare is not economically viable. Neither is retraining coal miners to be programmers, except for a very few.
-
There is absolutely nothing wrong with natural gas and clean coal, especially with the scrubbers they have in all the coal fired plants. C02 is not a pollutant.
-
Everyone knows that.
The issues are being worked on feverishly.
The holdup is political, not technical or logistics.
But hydro will be playing less and less of a role. Hydro power is generally more environmentally devastating than solar, and maybe even wind.
I have no problem with going totally renewable and nuclear, as long as it is done in an economically prudent manner. And it can be done.
Shutting down coal mines and putting the miners on welfare is not economically viable. Neither is retraining coal miners to be programmers, except for a very few.
Everyone knows that? Jennifer Granholm said the US Army is going to be fully electric vehicles by 2030. Bull shit everyone knows that.
And it is completely impossible to be totally renewable. Fossil fuels will continue to be required to power engines, make plastics and other petroleum products, etc etc etc.
-
... C02 is not a pollutant.
ok, maybe technically not a pollutant, and technically not a poison. But too much of it will kill you.
-
ok, maybe technically not a pollutant, and technically not a poison. But too much of it will kill you.
So will water and many other benign things in unusually large quantities.
-
ok, maybe technically not a pollutant, and technically not a poison. But too much of it will kill you.
More C02 in the air simply means more plant growth that turn it back into oxygen.
-
More C02 in the air simply means more plant growth that turn it back into oxygen.
A study published around 2016 found that more CO2 was greening the planet (other studies have noted that desert areas are shrinking - including the Sahara - projected precipitation changes are adding to the possibility that the Sahara desert may bloom again. The opposite of an apocalyptic result.)
From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.
An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.
Complete article on the NASA web site:
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth (https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth)
-
Everyone knows that?
Ok, once again I fell into the "every" trap. Almost any time someone uses "every", there is/are exception/s
Jennifer Granholm said ...
And SHE would be an exception. Not only is she Canadian, but she is also:
A lawyer,
An educator,
A political commentator
and a politician (Democrat). So she would be an exception to almost any statement about logic.
the US Army is going to be fully electric vehicles by 2030. Bull shit everyone knows that.
I agree that the 2030 date is bullshit, but someday . . .
And it is completely impossible to be totally renewable. Fossil fuels will continue to be required to power engines, make plastics and other petroleum products, etc etc etc.
I thought it was obvious I as talking about energy, which IS possible SOMEDAY. That would leave petroleum for plastics and other products, although even that will be replaced eventually unless we find a better way to recycle those plastics so they don't accumulate forever, and I think we will.
-
Ok, once again I fell into the "every" trap. Almost any time someone uses "every", there is/are exception/s
And SHE would be an exception. Not only is she Canadian, but she is also:
A lawyer,
An educator,
A political commentator
and a politician (Democrat). So she would be an exception to almost any statement about logic.I agree that the 2030 date is bullshit, but someday . . .
I thought it was obvious I as talking about energy, which IS possible SOMEDAY. That would leave petroleum for plastics and other products, although even that will be replaced eventually unless we find a better way to recycle those plastics so they don't accumulate forever, and I think we will.
Why do you think we will run out of petroleum?
-
Why do you think we will run out of petroleum?
Gotta run so can't look back now, but did I really say that?
-
Gotta run so can't look back now, but did I really say that?
I inferred that from your statement: “ That would leave petroleum for plastics and other products, although even that will be replaced eventually unless we find a better way to recycle those plastics….”
I assume you think the reason we will replace petroleum is because we will eventually run out of it. But maybe that’s not what you meant. Are you saying we will replace petroleum because we will find or invent something from which to make biodegradable fake plastic?
Also I have to run too. I actually have a job. You wouldn’t know it as much as I post.
-
I remember reading somewhere that we have an essentially unlimited supply of hydrocarbons. The surface stuff is from dead dinosaurs and plants and stuff. But way deeper is stuff from when the Earth was formed. The huge amounts of hydrocarbons in asteroids, meteors, and various moons show that it is very abundant across the solar system. It's there in the Earth, too. Just have to find it.
-
I remember reading somewhere that we have an essentially unlimited supply of hydrocarbons. The surface stuff is from dead dinosaurs and plants and stuff. But way deeper is stuff from when the Earth was formed. The huge amounts of hydrocarbons in asteroids, meteors, and various moons show that it is very abundant across the solar system. It's there in the Earth, too. Just have to find it.
And even if we don’t, we have at least 500 years worth of known deposits, and that’s at the current rate of usage, but the world’s population growth is going to reverse and begin to decline long before that.
The problem isn’t finite hydrocarbons, the problem is the economic process of getting them out. You need investors and you need a stable political environment. There are so many countries with massive hydrocarbon deposits that haven’t even begun to be tapped because of constant social and political upheaval. The made up “climate crisis” is another factor obstructing our taking advantage of cheap fossil fuel. Through regulation and meddling in the free market it creates disincentives to access them. It’s a large capital investment and requires the promise of future profits. The greenies are constantly trying to kill that promise.
-
And even if we don’t, we have at least 500 years worth of known deposits, and that’s at the current rate of usage, but the world’s population growth is going to reverse and begin to decline long before that.
The problem isn’t finite hydrocarbons, the problem is the economic process of getting them out. You need investors and you need a stable political environment. There are so many countries with massive hydrocarbon deposits that haven’t even begun to be tapped because of constant social and political upheaval. The made up “climate crisis” is another factor obstructing our taking advantage of cheap fossil fuel. Through regulation and meddling in the free market it creates disincentives to access them. It’s a large capital investment and requires the promise of future profits. The greenies are constantly trying to kill that promise.
Remember all of the "The earth is running out of oil" headlines over the past few decades? That's before the cultist shifted to climate change.
-
I inferred that from your statement: “ That would leave petroleum for plastics and other products, although even that will be replaced eventually unless we find a better way to recycle those plastics….”
I assume you think the reason we will replace petroleum is because we will eventually run out of it. But maybe that’s not what you meant. Are you saying we will replace petroleum because we will find or invent something from which to make biodegradable fake plastic?
Also I have to run too. I actually have a job. You wouldn’t know it as much as I post.
Sorry if I confused you.
No, I don't think we will run out of petroleum. I just don't like petroleum and I don't understand people that seem to love it and resist all attempts to develop better, cleaner more efficient energy sources. But YES, I do agree with those that don't like to be forced into something new and unproven "just because".
I have lived near refineries in Pennsylvania. They stunk and polluted the air and water.
I have lived near coal mines in West Virginia and would not go back. And "Clean Coal" is laughable. That is like saying clean dirt. Mining is a dirty nasty business which is one of my complaints about electric cars and their batteries.
And I don't want to replace plastic with something else because I think we will run out of petroleum. I want to develop a plastic replacement because I don't liek plastic. I wouldn't call it "fake plastic" because plastic itself is fake. It is a manufactured product that (almost) NEVER degrades. Almost all the plastic we have ever made or will make will be with us always Get a blood test. You probably have plastic in your blood stream. Perhaps we will make a new kind of degradable plastic out of petroleum. But I don't like things, like my MIL, that never go away (except money and health).
-
Sorry if I confused you.
No, I don't think we will run out of petroleum. I just don't like petroleum and I don't understand people that seem to love it and resist all attempts to develop better, cleaner more efficient energy sources. But YES, I do agree with those that don't like to be forced into something new and unproven "just because".
I have lived near refineries in Pennsylvania. They stunk and polluted the air and water.
I have lived near coal mines in West Virginia and would not go back. And "Clean Coal" is laughable. That is like saying clean dirt. Mining is a dirty nasty business which is one of my complaints about electric cars and their batteries.
And I don't want to replace plastic with something else because I think we will run out of petroleum. I want to develop a plastic replacement because I don't liek plastic. I wouldn't call it "fake plastic" because plastic itself is fake. It is a manufactured product that (almost) NEVER degrades. Almost all the plastic we have ever made or will make will be with us always Get a blood test. You probably have plastic in your blood stream. Perhaps we will make a new kind of degradable plastic out of petroleum. But I don't like things, like my MIL, that never go away (except money and health).
Interesting. We seem to have opposing experiences. I live near the largest refinery in the U.S right now and it doesn’t stink at all and doesn’t appear to be polluting anything. It provides a lot of jobs for people around here.
I haven’t lived near mines but I have worked in coal burning power plants. The pollution control technology has advanced tremendously in the past few decades. My own husband was involved in installing a new device invented by a small firm based in Sweden. He put those devices on power plants and industrial boilers all over the U.S., Europe and China in the 90s and early 2000s. China of course cheats and turns theirs off when nobody’s looking. But we have cleaned up U.S. pollution from coal a lot since I was young.
When I was a small kid in the 60s we visited my mom’s family in Johnstown PA and the air pollution was so bad from the steel mills that at the end of the day playing outside, we would bathe and the washcloths were black with soot from our skin. When we blew our noses the snot was black. I don’t know how everyone who lived there didn’t get lung cancer from breathing that stuff.
But I’ve also worked in a nuclear plant and that’s what we should be doing, building more nuclear plants for electricity. Coal and gas will always be useful for power generation for quick peak loads but we should have built far more nuke plants for reliable base energy. You can blame the wacko greenie nuts and the government for the fact that we haven’t. Oil will always be better for transportation. Electric freight trains, container ships, airplanes and cars just aren’t near as practical and never will be. And even if they did, now you’re back to having to supply the electricity to charge them.
I agree with you about plastic, although I don’t buy that there are bits of plastic floating around in my blood. I just don’t like how it doesn’t degrade. It would be nice to come up with something as strong and practical but would biodegrade after a few years.
I don’t like how we have replaced glass jars and bottles with plastic for condiments and stuff. Nothing wrong with glass ketchup bottles. Those upside down plastic squirt bottles are gross. I hate them.
-
Sorry if I confused you.
No, I don't think we will run out of petroleum. I just don't like petroleum and I don't understand people that seem to love it and resist all attempts to develop better, cleaner more efficient energy sources. But YES, I do agree with those that don't like to be forced into something new and unproven "just because".
I have lived near refineries in Pennsylvania. They stunk and polluted the air and water.
I have lived near coal mines in West Virginia and would not go back. And "Clean Coal" is laughable. That is like saying clean dirt. Mining is a dirty nasty business which is one of my complaints about electric cars and their batteries.
And I don't want to replace plastic with something else because I think we will run out of petroleum. I want to develop a plastic replacement because I don't liek plastic. I wouldn't call it "fake plastic" because plastic itself is fake. It is a manufactured product that (almost) NEVER degrades. Almost all the plastic we have ever made or will make will be with us always Get a blood test. You probably have plastic in your blood stream. Perhaps we will make a new kind of degradable plastic out of petroleum. But I don't like things, like my MIL, that never go away (except money and health).
I don't know anyone that is resisting new, cleaner forms of energy but the conversion needs to be MARKET DRIVEN not government mandates and COST needs to be the same or cheaper adjusted for inflation of course. ::)
-
Sorry if I confused you.
No, I don't think we will run out of petroleum. I just don't like petroleum and I don't understand people that seem to love it and resist all attempts to develop better, cleaner more efficient energy sources. But YES, I do agree with those that don't like to be forced into something new and unproven "just because".
I have lived near refineries in Pennsylvania. They stunk and polluted the air and water.
I have lived near coal mines in West Virginia and would not go back. And "Clean Coal" is laughable. That is like saying clean dirt. Mining is a dirty nasty business which is one of my complaints about electric cars and their batteries.
And I don't want to replace plastic with something else because I think we will run out of petroleum. I want to develop a plastic replacement because I don't liek plastic. I wouldn't call it "fake plastic" because plastic itself is fake. It is a manufactured product that (almost) NEVER degrades. Almost all the plastic we have ever made or will make will be with us always Get a blood test. You probably have plastic in your blood stream. Perhaps we will make a new kind of degradable plastic out of petroleum. But I don't like things, like my MIL, that never go away (except money and health).
Interesting. You don’t like petroleum, but you enjoy using its products recreationally.
-
I don't know anyone that is resisting new, cleaner forms of energy but the conversion needs to be MARKET DRIVEN not government mandates and COST needs to be the same or cheaper adjusted for inflation of course. ::)
Cost is the key issue. Without fossil fuel, hundreds of millions are left in poverty and prevented from modernizing. The poor countries are crippled by “clean” policies such as world banks refusing to loan them money to build coal plants and instead loaning them money to build inefficient expensive (per kw) solar farms and windmills. These are countries brimming with fossil fuels under their feet but aren’t being allowed to tap them. Meanwhile the people are still cooking with dung. The leading cause of air pollution disease and death is open cooking fires. The fastest way to pull them out of poverty is to get them cheap electricity and that means coal and gas. Once they have a decent standard of living they begin to care about the environment and will migrate to more environmentally friendly options.
-
Interesting. You don’t like petroleum, but you enjoy using its products recreationally.
-
Love the video!! That’s the thing about virtue signaling. It doesn’t have to have any basis in reality.
-
I just don't like petroleum...
Weird. What does _your_ airplane run on?
I love petroleum.
-
Weird. What does _your_ airplane run on?
I love petroleum.
Me too but I have evolved. Years ago I read “Peak Oil” and worried about running out. For a while there I was in favor of meddling in the Mideast “to protect our oil interests” because I, like many Americans, was misled into believing we didn’t have any more oil in North America. We’d bled ourselves dry. I also used to worry about global warming and rising sea levels.
More reading and learning over the years made me realize I was wrong about all of it.
-
Me too but I have evolved. Years ago I read “Peak Oil” and worried about running out. For a while there I was in favor of meddling in the Mideast “to protect our oil interests” because I, like many Americans, was misled into believing we didn’t have any more oil in North America. We’d bled ourselves dry. I also used to worry about global warming and rising sea levels.
More reading and learning over the years made me realize I was wrong about all of it.
We've got oceans of oil and natural gas under our feet and oceans of oil and natural gas under the ocean just off shore. The entire MAN made climate change hoax is a power and money grab by the Fascist elite of the world and even seemingly "conservative", intelligent and reasonable people have been duped by it
If you say something over and over it gets believed by many. Even if it is and out and out LIE.
-
If you think about it a bit, you can understand why the move to Climate Change. It's the only way they can attack oil anymore since the truth was learned about how much oil we actually have.
-
I don't know anyone that is resisting new, cleaner forms of energy but the conversion needs to be MARKET DRIVEN not government mandates and COST needs to be the same or cheaper adjusted for inflation of course. ::)
Exactly. I'm very happy that various companies are developing ways to produce clean energy and clean ways to consume it. I'm even willing to let my tax dollars be used on basic research and development of these technologies. But the public acceptance of these technologies should be based on the individual's perception that the product is superior to what else is out there either in performance or some other measure like "I'm saving the planet even tough I'm spending more to do it." Where I draw the line is the government shutting down technology that works and forcing us to go to currently inferior technology. Just like they banned incandescent lights and forced us to go to the stupid and inferior and ecologically terrible compact fluorescent. That action delayed the deployment of the far superior LED technology. I suspect that all this Wind / Solar / whatever is also going to delay some far superior technology. And all this highly toxic battery technology is going to delay some other far superior energy storage technology.
Hydrogen technology is the future. If only there was a way to bind hydrogen to carbon and store in some easy to transport and store and distribute form, like a liquid. That just might be the future.
-
This bullshit of the government manipulating markets has to cease.
There are new rules coming out about appliances and small gas driven engines. One of these rules will outlaw production of roughly 95% of portable generators being manufactured or sold in the US. There are new rules which will take the industry a while to adapt.
Of course, these new rules will also drive up the prices.
-
Weird. What does _your_ airplane run on?
I love petroleum.
You LOVE Petroleum? That's just plain weird.
I love some of the things petroleum products can do for me, or provide for me, but I have no love for or attachment to petroleum itself.
-
You LOVE Petroleum? That's just plain weird.
I love some of the things petroleum products can do for me, or provide for me, but I have no love for or attachment to petroleum itself.
Petroleum underlies our entire economy and civilization.
-
Petroleum underlies our entire economy and civilization.
^^^^This!
-
Petroleum underlies our entire economy and civilization.
That's still no reason to "love petroleum" and resist new forms of energy.
I really don't believe that anyone here actually "loves petroleum". You might depend on petroleum and you might love some of the things that are derived from petroleum, but come on, LOVE Petroleum? That's the kind of idiotic statement that would have 20 people jumping on me if I said it.
-
That's still no reason to "love petroleum" and resist new forms of energy.
I really don't believe that anyone here actually "loves petroleum". You might depend on petroleum and you might love some of the things that are derived from petroleum, but come on, LOVE Petroleum? That's the kind of idiotic statement that would have 20 people jumping on me if I said it.
I'll just say I'm very fond of it because it is a very versatile, useful, reliable, affordable and efficient means to power our lives.
-
That's still no reason to "love petroleum" and resist new forms of energy.
I really don't believe that anyone here actually "loves petroleum". You might depend on petroleum and you might love some of the things that are derived from petroleum, but come on, LOVE Petroleum? That's the kind of idiotic statement that would have 20 people jumping on me if I said it.
Not love in the way you love a person. But I love the industry. I love the sight of the refineries and cracker plants. They look like some advanced civilization on an alien planet. Especially at night. The amount of brainpower that conceived and designed them and the massive amount of manpower to build and operate them - a mind blowing display of human engineering. They’re magical.
-
Not love in the way you love a person. But I love the industry. I love the sight of the refineries and cracker plants. They look like some advanced civilization on an alien planet. Especially at night. The amount of brainpower that conceived and designed them and the massive amount of manpower to build and operate them - a mind blowing display of human engineering. They’re magical.
Imagine all that technology is used to make the two most useful products on the planet: avgas and petroleum jelly.
-
Imagine all that technology is used to make the two most useful products on the planet: avgas and petroleum jelly.
There is literally a Chevron "lubricant" plant near here.
-
"Record-breaking U.S. oil production helps thwart Saudi efforts to drive up prices" - July 8, 2023
https://seekingalpha.com/news/3986338-record-breaking-us-oil-production-helps-thwart-saudi-efforts-to-drive-up-prices (https://seekingalpha.com/news/3986338-record-breaking-us-oil-production-helps-thwart-saudi-efforts-to-drive-up-prices)
U.S. crude oil production is on track to set a record this year, up 9% Y/Y through April, helping to keep energy prices stable and blunt the efforts of Saudi Arabia and other oil exporters to drive them higher.
The Energy Information Administration has forecast total U.S. output will hit 12.61M bbl/day in 2023, topping 2019's record of 12.32M bbl/day and easily beating last year's 11.89M bbl/day.
[...]
Companies' efforts to improve efficiency have provided more ability to remain profitable even when oil prices are falling, and improvements since 2014 have cut the cost of drilling and fracking in the U.S. shale by 36%, according to J.P. Morgan.
The increased efficiency means EOG, for example, can earn as much from oil priced at $42/bbl today as it would have from $86/bbl oil in 2014; meanwhile, the budget of Saudi Arabia's government reportedly requires ~$81/bbl oil.
U.S. producers are continuing to seek ways to improve efficiency; Exxon Mobil (XOM) CEO Darren Woods has said the industry still recovers only ~10% of the oil it theoretically could from the Permian Basin.
-
"Record-breaking U.S. oil production helps thwart Saudi efforts to drive up prices" - July 8, 2023
https://seekingalpha.com/news/3986338-record-breaking-us-oil-production-helps-thwart-saudi-efforts-to-drive-up-prices (https://seekingalpha.com/news/3986338-record-breaking-us-oil-production-helps-thwart-saudi-efforts-to-drive-up-prices)
No thanks to Joe Biden, although I'm sure he'll take credit for it.
-
No thanks to Joe Biden, although I'm sure he'll take credit for it.
Refined products are constrained by the number of refineries, which have been decreasing in capacity since at least 2018:
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pnp_cap1_dcu_nus_a.htm (https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pnp_cap1_dcu_nus_a.htm)
So while crude oil production is up, likely more is getting exported than refined in the U.S.
-
https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fcolumns%2Fkevindowneyjr%2F2023%2F07%2F21%2Fwrap-tinfoil-around-your-doorknob-to-keep-eco-doom-nutjobs-away-56-years-of-climate-codswallop-that-never-happened-n1712542
Let’s see how many old-timey words for “nonsense” I can squeeze into one article about 56 years of climate change balderdash.
Soap-dodging prairie fairies have been ringing the Chicken Little climate klaxon for at least five decades. That means we are celebrating more than 50 years of “the sky is falling” horsefeathers.
Every climate gloomster has one thing in common: when it comes to their grim predictions for the planet, they’re all batting zero.
A lot of them also seem to ignore actual climate-related emergencies, like the ongoing train derailment trauma in East Palestine, Ohio, where residents suffered vomiting, rashes, nose-bleeds, and bronchitis as they watched their pets and livestock die.
Let’s take a look at some of the greatest pork pies ever told about the yet-to-be-seen calamity that will end humanity and deliver the planet back to the apes.
-
It’s our fault, guys. But Steingar is off the hook for sure.
(http://)
-
https://twitter.com/goddeketal/status/1683527463018831872
-
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/features/interactive-map-how-has-local-sea-level-united-states-changed-over-time
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2023GL103814
-
Good news!
We can get rid of our hot tubs.
No hot tub needed in South Florida this week. Water temperatures in the bays between the mainland and the Florida Keys were so warm Monday that meteorologists say they were among the hottest ocean temperatures ever recorded on Earth.
Water temperature at a buoy in Manatee Bay south of Miami reached an incredible 101.1 degrees Monday evening.
That could be a new world record, besting an unofficial 99.7 degree temperature once reported in Kuwait.
-
what water temps were recorded whenever an undersea volcano erupts (e.g., new island forms...)?
-
https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/phoenix/yearly-days-of-100-degrees#:~:text=Number%20of%20Days%20of%20100%20%C2%B0F%20in%20Phoenix,%20%20145%20%20115%20more%20rows%20 (https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/phoenix/yearly-days-of-100-degrees#:~:text=Number%20of%20Days%20of%20100%20%C2%B0F%20in%20Phoenix,%20%20145%20%20115%20more%20rows%20)
No, Phoenix is not having an unusually hot summer.
-
https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/phoenix/yearly-days-of-100-degrees#:~:text=Number%20of%20Days%20of%20100%20%C2%B0F%20in%20Phoenix,%20%20145%20%20115%20more%20rows%20 (https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/phoenix/yearly-days-of-100-degrees#:~:text=Number%20of%20Days%20of%20100%20%C2%B0F%20in%20Phoenix,%20%20145%20%20115%20more%20rows%20)
No, Phoenix is not having an unusually hot summer.
You do realize that summer 2023 is only about 1/3 over? Not exactly a fair comparison.
But I do suspect that when the year is over, 2023 will probably not even break the top 5 for the past 100 years.
-
You do realize that summer 2023 is only about 1/3 over? Not exactly a fair comparison.
But I do suspect that when the year is over, 2023 will probably not even break the top 5 for the past 100 years.
Now true, the summer is not yet over but even if the daily temperature in Phoenix went above 100 every day for the remainder of July and every single day in August (46 additional days) for a total of 104 days with temperatures above 100, where would that place 2023 on that list? Tied for 47th place along with 3 other years that had 104 days of temperatures in excess of 100 degrees.
And what were some of this other years that would place above 2023 on that list? Try 1910 when Phoenix had 121 days of temperatures above 100
And how likely are those 104 days of temperatures above 100 to actually happen? Unlikely given the fact that Phoenix has now entered their annual Monsoon rainy season.
So if your local weather person is reporting that Phoenix is experiencing a "Record setting heat wave" please forward this NOAA temperature data to them.
-
Facts are so racist…
-
You do realize that summer 2023 is only about 1/3 over? Not exactly a fair comparison.
But I do suspect that when the year is over, 2023 will probably not even break the top 5 for the past 100 years.
The hottest two weeks in the year are the last two weeks in July. Which is now. After that it starts moderating again.
-
Facts are so racist…
Especially facts that are manipulated or taken out of context.
What do you think the statistics would be if we counted the number of days over 110 instead of over 100? 100+ is just about average daily high temp for Phoenix in the summer.
-
https://www.prageru.com/video/how-dangerous-is-nuclear-waste?utm_source=Iterable&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=campaign_7317151
-
Especially facts that are manipulated or taken out of context.
What do you think the statistics would be if we counted the number of days over 110 instead of over 100? 100+ is just about average daily high temp for Phoenix in the summer.
i
Hahahahahahaha….
-
Link in Reply 105 in this thread should be listened to carefully.
Arguing about a few degrees and the validity of the analysis used is a waste of time.
Photos of landmarks and land masses around the world from over 100 years ago when cameras were invented, compared to photos today, show no change in sea level at all.
I can’t believe I even wasted my time responding.
We Americans have bigger fish to fry. Worry about the climate, and thinking we can change it, is a sign of too much prosperity and leisure, and of succumbing to the propaganda of the climate grifters.
-
Link in Reply 105 in this thread should be listened to carefully.
Arguing about a few degrees and the validity of the analysis used is a waste of time.
Photos of landmarks and land masses around the world from over 100 years ago when cameras were invented, compared to photos today, show no change in sea level at all.
I can’t believe I even wasted my time responding.
We Americans have bigger fish to fry. Worry about the climate, and thinking we can change it, is a sign of too much prosperity and leisure, and of succumbing to the propaganda of the climate grifters.
The thing about the sea level going down in Alaska because the land rose up because the ice age glaciers melted totally lost me. Do these people expect to be taken seriously?
-
The thing about the sea level going down in Alaska because the land rose up because the ice age glaciers melted totally lost me. Do these people expect to be taken seriously?
With glaciers melted, would it be all that unbelievable that less weight on the land would make it easier to lift the land - subterranean forces lifting land?
Of course, we should NOT ignore lifting and sinking of land mass that has been going on FOREVER.
-
With glaciers melted, would it be all that unbelievable that less weight on the land would make it easier to lift the land - subterranean forces lifting land?
Of course, we should NOT ignore lifting and sinking of land mass that has been going on FOREVER.
That makes it all totally meaningless. Which it is. Land levels and sea levels are not static and never have been, so them changing now is no indication of man made climate catastrophe.
-
That makes it all totally meaningless. Which it is. Land levels and sea levels are not static and never have been, so them changing now is no indication of man made climate catastrophe.
Exactly. The Northern US has been rising since the last ice age ended.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/ice_age/ice_age.pdf
Removal of the ice through melting permitted the slow rebound of the crust to its
former position of relative equilibrium. Such movement, common in glaciated areas, is best documented in Scandinavia and Finland. Evidence of similar uplift can be observed in
the region of the Great Lakes and Lake Champlain, where old shorelines, originally
horizontal, are now raised and tilted so that the greatest uplift is to the north.
Islands rise and fall. Land masses move about the crust. Mountains rise and are eroded away. There is NOTHING humans can do that will stop this. Just like climate. NOTHING humans can do will have any long-term impact on the climate. Yes, we should be good stewards of the Earth and reduce pollution and such. But because that's the right thing to do. Not because some government entity says we must. If rising sea levels was an emergency that needed immediate action, we would see far fewer elites with coastal mansions.
-
More on the uplifting of the land due to less ice. I didn't realize it was that fast!
https://www.ontariobeneathourfeet.com/rising-land-isostatic-rebound
In northern Ontario, along the shores of Hudson Bay and James Bay, the land is rising really quickly. The land between Fort Severn, Peawanuck, and Cape Henrietta Maria is rising faster than any other area land in Ontario (Figure 1 - red and pinky white area). That land along the southern coast of Hudson Bay coast is rising at about 1 to 1.3 meters (3.4 to 4.3 feet) per hundred years. Farther south along James Bay, towards Moosonee, and into southern Ontario, the land is still rising, but less dramatically.
-
Not woke at all. One thing that took me back was Meghan Markle. I was planning on disliking her just because of the way she screwed up Harry, etc.
Instead, she is a half way decent actress, and a sympathetic character on this show. I was pleasantly surprised.
Speaking of Meghan Markle, I am still watching suits and I have a question:
Why do women hate it when men open the fridge, drink from the carton (or bottle) and then put the carton back?
I might understand it if it was a carton that others might drink out of too, but if you are the only one going to drink it, what's the problem? Why dirty up a glass?
-
Speaking of Meghan Markle, I am still watching suits and I have a question:
Why do women hate it when men open the fridge, drink from the carton (or bottle) and then put the carton back?
I might understand it if it was a carton that others might drink out of too, but if you are the only one going to drink it, what's the problem? Why dirty up a glass?
The problem is indeed that others drink that beverage. If no one else drinks it, it’s not a problem. Coincidentally I was thinking about this just today. My husband and I both will drink from a bottle and put it back in the fridge, but we have separate locations, so we know whose bottle is whose. Why do I not want his “germs” you ask? I kiss him on the mouth so what’s the difference? The difference is once it leaves the mouth it changes into something different. It’s like hair. The hair on someone’s head is perfectly fine to touch. But find a hair in the sink and suddenly it’s gross. You make out with someone, you’re consuming their spit. But if they spit into a spoon and offer it to you, would you slurp it up? Hell no. It becomes a completely different substance, something disgusting, after it has departed from the body. That’s why women freak out if you drink from the carton.
Edit: There are certain exceptions, like passing around a bottle of liquor. In such cases it’s like the 5 second rule. If it happens immediately, especially if alcohol is involved, the gross factor hasn’t had time to develop.
-
I live alone. I never drink out of containers from the fridge nor anywhere else. It's uncivilized. ;)
-
I live alone. I never drink out of containers from the fridge nor anywhere else. It's uncivilized. ;)
True. Like leaving your shopping cart randomly in parking lots, and sticking an item any old where around the store because you changed your mind about buying it and don’t want to walk all the way back to put it in its proper place.
-
Crisis! Paint yer roofs white, boyz.
https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1684606839164370955?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1684606839164370955%7Ctwgr%5E5f22270ea66153ed91b0abc9b25a82bc2b6153c8%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpatriots.win%2F
-
Codswallop. All of it.
https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1684673768528986112?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1684673768528986112%7Ctwgr%5E18fcb22b4515b810dfd61fd8ea4de67c82a08576%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpatriots.win%2Fnew%3Ffrom%3D16bjA23RPn
-
"Codswallop" - learned a new word today. Thanks
(not being snarky)
-
Alert! Alert! Hey, have you noticed that we don’t hear much in the winter about climate change, but it’s everywhere 24/7 in the summer?
Now they have pandemics for winter, to give climate change a break.
But President Trump is the all-season scapegoat.
-
Alert! Alert! Hey, have you noticed that we don’t hear much in the winter about climate change, but it’s everywhere 24/7 in the summer?
Now they have pandemics for winter, to give climate change a break.
But President Trump is the all-season scapegoat.
And when we have brief heat wave the MEDIA has "the Earth is boiling" as front page news like the Philadelphia Inquirer had recently.
Now that Temps are actually below normal, nothing.
-
Cold in winter, hot in summer, fires, floods, nice days, January 6th, 9/11, the plague, Covid, hurricanes, lack of hurricanes. All due to climate change. But all this can be solved if you give your money to government.
-
Cold in winter, hot in summer, fires, floods, nice days, January 6th, 9/11, the plague, Covid, hurricanes, lack of hurricanes. All due to climate change. But all this can be solved if you give your money to government.
And Corporations by purchasing EVs.
-
Interesting. We seem to have opposing experiences. I live near the largest refinery in the U.S right now and it doesn’t stink at all and doesn’t appear to be polluting anything. It provides a lot of jobs for people around here.
I haven’t lived near mines but I have worked in coal burning power plants. The pollution control technology has advanced tremendously in the past few decades. My own husband was involved in installing a new device invented by a small firm based in Sweden. He put those devices on power plants and industrial boilers all over the U.S., Europe and China in the 90s and early 2000s. China of course cheats and turns theirs off when nobody’s looking. But we have cleaned up U.S. pollution from coal a lot since I was young.
When I was a small kid in the 60s we visited my mom’s family in Johnstown PA and the air pollution was so bad from the steel mills that at the end of the day playing outside, we would bathe and the washcloths were black with soot from our skin. When we blew our noses the snot was black. I don’t know how everyone who lived there didn’t get lung cancer from breathing that stuff.
But I’ve also worked in a nuclear plant and that’s what we should be doing, building more nuclear plants for electricity. Coal and gas will always be useful for power generation for quick peak loads but we should have built far more nuke plants for reliable base energy. You can blame the wacko greenie nuts and the government for the fact that we haven’t. Oil will always be better for transportation. Electric freight trains, container ships, airplanes and cars just aren’t near as practical and never will be. And even if they did, now you’re back to having to supply the electricity to charge them.
I agree with you about plastic, although I don’t buy that there are bits of plastic floating around in my blood. I just don’t like how it doesn’t degrade. It would be nice to come up with something as strong and practical but would biodegrade after a few years.
I don’t like how we have replaced glass jars and bottles with plastic for condiments and stuff. Nothing wrong with glass ketchup bottles. Those upside down plastic squirt bottles are gross. I hate them.
When I was growing up, nearly every liquid was packaged in glass jars or bottles. We returned pop and beer bottles to the store where we bought it. We put the groceries in paper bags which were used to help start BBQ or fireplace fires, or nicely held the daily newspapers, which we took to church once a month to walk it into a steel shipping container for recycling.
McDonalds burgers were wrapped in paper, and the cups were paper.
Then the leftists thought they’d save the trees and gave us plastic bags, and everything turned to plastic vs glass or paper.
-
My city makes beer cans. And has world class walleye and perch fishing. Coincidence?
-
My city makes beer cans. And has world class walleye and perch fishing. Coincidence?
Chicken/ egg question.
-
Chicken/ egg question.
Fish. The beer can plant is only a few years old. But it makes sense since a lot of beer is consumed fishing.
-
-
John Stossell grew a beard?