More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[bripat9643]

You're right, the number of suckers falling for the warmist scam is declining.

Todd, you are really living in La La land if you believe that. I have no doubt that, in the right-wing tea-party conservative Republican counties, this is so. And it may be the case among the under 100 IQ crowd.

But the under 100 IQ crowd and the right-wing tea-party wack jobs are irrelevant. (Isn't that the same group?)

The only ones with money that still don't get it are the Koch Bros who commissioned their own study and were told quite unequivocally that AWG is a fact.

If any of the political bias allegations are correct and fitting, it would be that he Koch brothers intentionally ignore science for the sake of monetary gain.

For someone that sees this kind of behavior as significant, I'd think you'd get this much.

Mitigation techniques will not cost you or I a single penny in purchasing power or standard of living. But, they will cost the Koch Bros. The difference is in that all prices are relative to the standard basket. (Unless you own an oil refinery, a coal power plant or something)

Costs spread out across every product, spread out across every individual, are no costs at all because they are nothing relative to everything.

On the other hand, if the Koch Bros source of income is predominately in the industry to be affected, then it will cost them because it is more relative to everything else.

I'm not one to focus on political motivations much. But it is pretty common knowledge who has something economically to lose and gain when it comes to AWG.

Todd, you are really living in La La land if you believe that.

LOL!

Costs spread out across every product, spread out across every individual, are no costs at all because they are nothing relative to everything.

So if I can only buy 5 widgets, instead of 6, because every product is more expensive, that's no cost to me?

Wow, liberals are worse at economics than I thought.

Yeah, so if the "cost" is a 50% reduction in the amount of electric power available, and it is spread out across every individual, that means we haven't experienced any reduction in our standard of living! Happy days are here again!

Do you believe anyone could be stupid enough to believe something so obviously wrong?

 

[PMZ]

All those doomsday preppers building underground shelters and stocking them with 2 years of food are preparing for the future. Is that your idea of smart?

What on earth are you talking about?

You said it was "smart" to prepare for the future. Doesn't that mean doomsday preppers are smart? Don't you know what a doomsday prepper is?

Doomsday is the result of doing nothing in the face of huge problems. There are only a few so easily fooled to support that.

 

[PMZ]

You're right, the number of suckers falling for the warmist scam is declining.

Todd, you are really living in La La land if you believe that. I have no doubt that, in the right-wing tea-party conservative Republican counties, this is so. And it may be the case among the under 100 IQ crowd.

But the under 100 IQ crowd and the right-wing tea-party wack jobs are irrelevant. (Isn't that the same group?)

The only ones with money that still don't get it are the Koch Bros who commissioned their own study and were told quite unequivocally that AWG is a fact.

If any of the political bias allegations are correct and fitting, it would be that he Koch brothers intentionally ignore science for the sake of monetary gain.

For someone that sees this kind of behavior as significant, I'd think you'd get this much.

Mitigation techniques will not cost you or I a single penny in purchasing power or standard of living. But, they will cost the Koch Bros. The difference is in that all prices are relative to the standard basket. (Unless you own an oil refinery, a coal power plant or something)

Costs spread out across every product, spread out across every individual, are no costs at all because they are nothing relative to everything.

On the other hand, if the Koch Bros source of income is predominately in the industry to be affected, then it will cost them because it is more relative to everything else.

I'm not one to focus on political motivations much. But it is pretty common knowledge who has something economically to lose and gain when it comes to AWG.

Todd, you are really living in La La land if you believe that.

LOL!

Costs spread out across every product, spread out across every individual, are no costs at all because they are nothing relative to everything.

So if I can only buy 5 widgets, instead of 6, because every product is more expensive, that's no cost to me?

Wow, liberals are worse at economics than I thought.

Not as bad as conservatives are at science. And logic. And problem solving. And critical thinking. And independent thought.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Todd, you are really living in La La land if you believe that. I have no doubt that, in the right-wing tea-party conservative Republican counties, this is so. And it may be the case among the under 100 IQ crowd.

But the under 100 IQ crowd and the right-wing tea-party wack jobs are irrelevant. (Isn't that the same group?)

The only ones with money that still don't get it are the Koch Bros who commissioned their own study and were told quite unequivocally that AWG is a fact.

If any of the political bias allegations are correct and fitting, it would be that he Koch brothers intentionally ignore science for the sake of monetary gain.

For someone that sees this kind of behavior as significant, I'd think you'd get this much.

Mitigation techniques will not cost you or I a single penny in purchasing power or standard of living. But, they will cost the Koch Bros. The difference is in that all prices are relative to the standard basket. (Unless you own an oil refinery, a coal power plant or something)

Costs spread out across every product, spread out across every individual, are no costs at all because they are nothing relative to everything.

On the other hand, if the Koch Bros source of income is predominately in the industry to be affected, then it will cost them because it is more relative to everything else.

I'm not one to focus on political motivations much. But it is pretty common knowledge who has something economically to lose and gain when it comes to AWG.

Todd, you are really living in La La land if you believe that.

LOL!

Costs spread out across every product, spread out across every individual, are no costs at all because they are nothing relative to everything.

So if I can only buy 5 widgets, instead of 6, because every product is more expensive, that's no cost to me?

Wow, liberals are worse at economics than I thought.

Not as bad as conservatives are at science. And logic. And problem solving. And critical thinking. And independent thought.

Costs spread out across every product, spread out across every individual, are no costs at all because they are nothing relative to everything.

Yeah, that's a pretty fucking stupid thing to say. Typical for a liberal though.

 

[PMZ]

What is the cost comparison between fossil fuels and sustainable energy when fossil fuels are gone?

 

[westwall]

Good God Troll --- PLEASE just tell us the INTELLIGIENT plan.. And go back to your planet..

You got some thermionic heterosynchronous doohickey that you want us to make electricity with??

Or a bivalent isotropic esther to put in our cars? Just spit it the hell out and let us MARVEL at the presents the annointed ones lay at our feet..

Quit playing with an empty deck.. I CALL !!! All in...

Keep longing for the return of the past. Let us know how it works out for you.

If you ever get to the future, look us up.

Future? Windmills are things of the past, EV's are technological dead ends, and you think you're the "future"


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_Kh7nLplWo]What A Maroon! - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Abraham3]

Future? Windmills are things of the past, EV's are technological dead ends, and you think you're the "future"

But you think coal is the future. Yeah...

Coal powered rockets.

Coal-powered scramjets

Coal-powered bullet trains

Computer chips made of coal

Coal-powered transoceanic passenger submarines

Coal lasers

Flying coal cars

Pure water through coal

Clear air through coal

America's gleaming smokestacks, from sea to shining sea

Yeah... you just can't take the future out of COAL !

 

[bripat9643]

What on earth are you talking about?

You said it was "smart" to prepare for the future. Doesn't that mean doomsday preppers are smart? Don't you know what a doomsday prepper is?

Doomsday is the result of doing nothing in the face of huge problems. There are only a few so easily fooled to support that.

So you agree that it's smart to build an underground shelter in your backyard and stock it with 2 years of food as well as arm yourself to the teeth?

 

[skookerasbil]

Easily my favorite gay MSPAINT Photobucket Classic to post up in this forum >>>>

 

[skookerasbil]

So.....back to the domination......

And whats in the news today? Oooops.......yet more bad news for the k00ks!!!

Oil Production in the northern US at record levels!!!! >>>


Rockin? in the Bakken: ND oil output sets another record in August as daily production tops 900,000 barrels for first time | AEIdeas




Geee......all that consensus science is really impacting production of fossil fuels in 2013!!!!

 

[PMZ]

You said it was "smart" to prepare for the future. Doesn't that mean doomsday preppers are smart? Don't you know what a doomsday prepper is?

Doomsday is the result of doing nothing in the face of huge problems. There are only a few so easily fooled to support that.

So you agree that it's smart to build an underground shelter in your backyard and stock it with 2 years of food as well as arm yourself to the teeth?

It could be is there is a big trend reversal and conservatism becomes popular again.

 

[PMZ]

So.....back to the domination......

And whats in the news today? Oooops.......yet more bad news for the k00ks!!!

Oil Production in the northern US at record levels!!!! >>>


Rockin? in the Bakken: ND oil output sets another record in August as daily production tops 900,000 barrels for first time | AEIdeas




Geee......all that consensus science is really impacting production of fossil fuels in 2013!!!!

Oil production in North Dakota is a measure of what?

From Forbes.

There has been increasing chatter in the Internet aether about the possibility that world oil demand might peak sometime in the near future. The thinking is informed primarily by falling demand in areas like the US and Europe, but especially the perception that a plethora of new transportation technologies, such as plug-in hybrids, electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are now viable.
Economists agree to the possibility, often citing the aphorism, “The Stone Age didn’t end because we ran out of stones,” which was used to refute the ‘peak oil’ view of scarce resources. But it also referred to the fact that resources are much less likely to ‘run out’ than to be replaced by better resources–better meaning cheaper, more convenient, and cleaner, among other attributes.
Clearly, the weak demand for oil in the industrialized nations could prove permanent, as it reflects not just recent weak economic growth, but also population decline in some countries and especially price-driven efficiency, most notably in the US. Transport fuel demand has fallen by over 1 million barrels per day in the US in the past 5 years, although it is not clear if lower gasoline prices would see a reversal of this trend.
The problem is that we don’t yet have a ‘better’ energy source than petroleum, especially for transportation. Compressed natural gas comes closest. It is great for fleet vehicles, but inconvenient for passenger cars and trucks, requiring a large tank and lacking many fueling stations. But the market is likely to remain a niche one, not expanding beyond current areas.
This is not to say that there aren’t many applications where oil is overused. In some countries like Japan, significant amounts of oil (a quarter million barrels a day last year) are used for power generation where gas would be better, but is overpriced (see Coffee, Tea or Gas? The Mispricing of Gas on World Markets).

 

[westwall]

Future? Windmills are things of the past, EV's are technological dead ends, and you think you're the "future"

But you think coal is the future. Yeah...

Coal powered rockets.

Coal-powered scramjets

Coal-powered bullet trains

Computer chips made of coal

Coal-powered transoceanic passenger submarines

Coal lasers

Flying coal cars

Pure water through coal

Clear air through coal

America's gleaming smokestacks, from sea to shining sea

Yeah... you just can't take the future out of COAL !

No, I don't. But it is cheaper and more efficient. You idiots want to lop the tops off of mountains in Europe so you can build giant reservoirs and you think that won't have a ecological effect?

Every one of your fixes is worse than the problem you're trying to resolve. How about this, we keep using fossil fuels and abandon technological dead ends that make you feel good but in actual fact do nothing or in fact do more harm to the environment. Then we take that money that would be squandered on stupid projects and just do pure research on fuel cells, fusion, and a Tesla global power distribution system.

Let's REALLY go for a technological advancement that will have a GOOD environmental impact instead of your avian cuisinarts, and mountain top destruction.

 

[PMZ]

Future? Windmills are things of the past, EV's are technological dead ends, and you think you're the "future"

But you think coal is the future. Yeah...

Coal powered rockets.

Coal-powered scramjets

Coal-powered bullet trains

Computer chips made of coal

Coal-powered transoceanic passenger submarines

Coal lasers

Flying coal cars

Pure water through coal

Clear air through coal

America's gleaming smokestacks, from sea to shining sea

Yeah... you just can't take the future out of COAL !

No, I don't. But it is cheaper and more efficient. You idiots want to lop the tops off of mountains in Europe so you can build giant reservoirs and you think that won't have a ecological effect?

Every one of your fixes is worse than the problem you're trying to resolve. How about this, we keep using fossil fuels and abandon technological dead ends that make you feel good but in actual fact do nothing or in fact do more harm to the environment. Then we take that money that would be squandered on stupid projects and just do pure research on fuel cells, fusion, and a Tesla global power distribution system.

Let's REALLY go for a technological advancement that will have a GOOD environmental impact instead of your avian cuisinarts, and mountain top destruction.

All of those technologies are being explored.

While that is going on we continue to build a new climate, by dumping fossil fuel wastes into our atmosphere, that we'll have to adapt civilization to.

Doing nothing in addition to developing technologies that may or may not bear fruit is completely unaffordable. A huge waste of money.

 

[PMZ]

One conservative scotoma is the inability to see progress, and belief only in the grand solution. We already have the technology for progress. Plug in hybrid cars powered by sustainable sources would be a huge improvement over today's automotive abortions. Zero new technology. CNG trucks. Hybrid busses. All are being adopted now. But only at a global rate that keeps up with ceaseless demand growth. Only when we actually start closing down coal fired plants can we claim adequate progress at reducing AGW adaptation costs.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

One conservative scotoma is the inability to see progress, and belief only in the grand solution. We already have the technology for progress. Plug in hybrid cars powered by sustainable sources would be a huge improvement over today's automotive abortions. Zero new technology. CNG trucks. Hybrid busses. All are being adopted now. But only at a global rate that keeps up with ceaseless demand growth. Only when we actually start closing down coal fired plants can we claim adequate progress at reducing AGW adaptation costs.

In 2012, coal-fired power plants generated 45% of total electricity demand in Germany, followed by renewables, with a 22% share, nuclear at 16% and gas at around 11%, according to Germany's statistical office.

CHEAP CARBON EXTENDS COAL'S DOMINANCE IN GERMAN POWER MIX

For 2013, coal-fired power's share in the German generation mix is on track to rise above 50%, an analysis of the data shows.

Meanwhile, renewables may struggle to improve on last year's record 22% contribution, mainly due to lower wind power generation in the first quarter, but this will depend on weather scenarios during the final quarter.

ANALYSIS: German coal extends dominance in power mix as gas wanes - Coal | Platts News Article & Story

LOL!

 

[PMZ]

One conservative scotoma is the inability to see progress, and belief only in the grand solution. We already have the technology for progress. Plug in hybrid cars powered by sustainable sources would be a huge improvement over today's automotive abortions. Zero new technology. CNG trucks. Hybrid busses. All are being adopted now. But only at a global rate that keeps up with ceaseless demand growth. Only when we actually start closing down coal fired plants can we claim adequate progress at reducing AGW adaptation costs.

In 2012, coal-fired power plants generated 45% of total electricity demand in Germany, followed by renewables, with a 22% share, nuclear at 16% and gas at around 11%, according to Germany's statistical office.

CHEAP CARBON EXTENDS COAL'S DOMINANCE IN GERMAN POWER MIX

For 2013, coal-fired power's share in the German generation mix is on track to rise above 50%, an analysis of the data shows.

Meanwhile, renewables may struggle to improve on last year's record 22% contribution, mainly due to lower wind power generation in the first quarter, but this will depend on weather scenarios during the final quarter.

ANALYSIS: German coal extends dominance in power mix as gas wanes - Coal | Platts News Article & Story

LOL!

Turn around 180 degrees. Face the future. That's the direction that time goes.

Going in the direction that you are facing now is not possible.

 

[PMZ]

From Todstertraitor's reference.

''Coal plants increased production by about 5%, or 8.4 TWh, to 189.4 TWh in the first three quarters of 2013 as output from gas-fired power plants fell 6.5 TWh, or 18%, to just 29 TWh compared with the same period of 2012, data that ISE compiled from the EEX transparency platform and Germany's statistical office show.''

What does that have to do with fuel and waste less sustainable energy?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What is the cost comparison between fossil fuels and sustainable energy when fossil fuels are gone?

High cost energy in the future is bad.

We must protect ourselves from high cost energy in the future by making energy expensive now!!!

Democrat progress, gotta love it.......

 

[PMZ]

What is the cost comparison between fossil fuels and sustainable energy when fossil fuels are gone?

High cost energy in the future is bad.

We must protect ourselves from high cost energy in the future by making energy expensive now!!!

Democrat progress, gotta love it.......

Conservative non-thinking, gotta love it.

The cheapest path to the future is ignoring the problems of today.

Can anyone imagine that working for any enterprise, from family to business to church to education to government?

If there is one thing that separates man from monkeys as well as liberals and conservatives it is the ability to envision, plan, and execute towards an advantageous future.