More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[skookerasbil]

Now do we not have some naïve fukcing people on here or what??!!!

 

[Abraham3]

God are you stupid.

 

[skookerasbil]

God are you stupid.

but not losing........



10 predictions for the world's energy future » News » OPB

http://energy.gov/articles/eia-report-estimates-growth-us-energy-economy-through-2040

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/consensus-on-changing-climate-just-pr-campaign/story-e6frg6zo-1226718828707


http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/430649/What-climate-change-Fewer-people-than-EVER-believe-the-world-is-really-warming-up


http://phys.org/news/2013-02-global-surveys-environmental.html


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/18/the-ensemble-of-models-is-completely-meaningless-statistically/

 

[skookerasbil]

From todays REALCLEARENERGY...........On: electric cars fAiL >>>>


Why Electric Vehicles Have Stalled : The New Yorker

 

[skookerasbil]

Yet another example of the zombie thinking of the k00ks that leads to losing >>>

Obama spends 2X more on global warming as compared to border security!!!

Global warming gets twice as much money as border security | The Daily Caller



Top story on DRUDGE right now = losing!

 

[Abraham3]

Yet another example of the zombie thinking of the k00ks that leads to losing >>>

Obama spends 2X more on global warming as compared to border security!!!

Global warming gets twice as much money as border security | The Daily Caller

Top story on DRUDGE right now = losing!

Well... at least he's moving in the right direction.

 

[skookerasbil]

LMAO.......from todays REALCLEARENERGY.......bottom line, "energy needs to be inexpensive........highly touted renewable energy sources such as wind and solar PV are not cheap."

Rising Energy Costs Lead to Recession; Eventually Collapse

Posted on October 23, 2013

Rising Energy Costs Lead to Recession; Eventually Collapse | Our Finite World





L

O

S

E

Because fringe markets are gay s0ns!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Scoreboard update certainly needed after the last week of domination >>>>




[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/3394114_2-3.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[flacaltenn]

LMAO.......from todays REALCLEARENERGY.......bottom line, "energy needs to be inexpensive........highly touted renewable energy sources such as wind and solar PV are not cheap."

Rising Energy Costs Lead to Recession; Eventually Collapse

Posted on October 23, 2013

Rising Energy Costs Lead to Recession; Eventually Collapse | Our Finite World




L

O

S

E

Because fringe markets are gay s0ns!!!

That's what ole flacaltenn has been tellin ya..

The eco-left wants energy to be RARE and EXPENSIVE.
Rational folks want energy to be PLENTIFUL and CHEAP.​

 

[polarbear]

More proof, the goofs are loosing


Protests over French 'ecotax' turn violent - FRANCE - FRANCE 24

Protests over French 'ecotax' turn violent

‘A powder keg ready to explode’
First introduced by the former French government under Nicolas Sarkozy, the ecotax aims to encourage the use of more environmentally friendly transport.
Due to come into effect in January 2014, it will see an additional levy placed on transport over 3.5 tonnes.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbnXv1R6Cf8"]Protests over French 'ecotax' turn violent - YouTube[/ame]


Don`t tell me these guys are part of the "oil lobby"

 

[skookerasbil]

LOL.....yet another prime example of not winning........


Reality Check: Germany's Defective Green Energy Game Plan

Germany pretends to be a pioneer in the green revolution. But its massively expensive Energiewende has done nothing to make the environment cleaner or encourage genuine efficiency. One writer argues: Either do it right, or don't do it at all.

So, perhaps you've heard about Germany's heroic green revolution, about how it's overhauling its entire energy infrastructure to embrace renewable energy sources? Well, in reality, our chimney stacks are spewing out more than ever, and coal consumption jumped 8 percent in the first half of 2013. Germans are pumping more climate-killing CO2 into the air than they have in years. And people are surprised.

Commentary: Why Germany Is Waging Its Green Revolution Wrong - SPIEGEL ONLINE



Like Ive been saying........the "green revolution" has nothing to do with improving the environment. That's the ruse, of course, which is bought by every gullable meathead who has OCD about climate change. Indeed.....there are some very schrewd, clever people out there who are hosing the public with this green energy scam and cruising around the Carribean as we speak in their ultra-yacht, sipping on martini's and laughing at the k00ks!!

 

[polarbear]

I always get a kick out of the pictures the news media can`t resist to use with every article they publish about "greenhouse gasses"

All of the wind turbines, rooftop solar panels, hydroelectric and biogas plants in Germany have not reduced CO2 emissions in Europe by a single gram.

That`s all true, but in this picture as with almost any other scary "global warming" picture we are not looking at CO2 and smoke stacks.
The news media loves to snap pictures of cooling towers that spew spectacular plumes of moist air which contains no additional CO2 whatsoever, but scare the hell out of the dimwits that don`t know the difference between a cooling tower and a smoke stack.
Too bad it`s just a photo instead of a video because then you`d wonder why that power plant in the background is going full bore with all 9 cooling towers while the wind turbines sit idle.
I`m pretty sure that they are not turning. Compare the direction they are facing with the wind direction indicated by the cooling tower exhaust.
These turbines are at ~ 90 degrees in relation to the wind direction in "parked" mode as most of them do most of the time sucking back mega-$$$ without producing any power...

 

[PMZ]

I always get a kick out of the pictures the news media can`t resist to use with every article they publish about "greenhouse gasses"

All of the wind turbines, rooftop solar panels, hydroelectric and biogas plants in Germany have not reduced CO2 emissions in Europe by a single gram.

That`s all true, but in this picture as with almost any other scary "global warming" picture we are not looking at CO2 and smoke stacks.
The news media loves to snap pictures of cooling towers that spew spectacular plumes of moist air which contains no additional CO2 whatsoever, but scare the hell out of the dimwits that don`t know the difference between a cooling tower and a smoke stack.
Too bad it`s just a photo instead of a video because then you`d wonder why that power plant in the background is going full bore with all 9 cooling towers while the wind turbines sit idle.
I`m pretty sure that they are not turning. Compare the direction they are facing with the wind direction indicated by the cooling tower exhaust.
These turbines are at ~ 90 degrees in relation to the wind direction in "parked" mode as most of them do most of the time sucking back mega-$$$ without producing any power...

What's your point?

Did you find a sustainable reserve of fossil fuels?

 

[polarbear]

I always get a kick out of the pictures the news media can`t resist to use with every article they publish about "greenhouse gasses"

All of the wind turbines, rooftop solar panels, hydroelectric and biogas plants in Germany have not reduced CO2 emissions in Europe by a single gram.

That`s all true, but in this picture as with almost any other scary "global warming" picture we are not looking at CO2 and smoke stacks.
The news media loves to snap pictures of cooling towers that spew spectacular plumes of moist air which contains no additional CO2 whatsoever, but scare the hell out of the dimwits that don`t know the difference between a cooling tower and a smoke stack.
Too bad it`s just a photo instead of a video because then you`d wonder why that power plant in the background is going full bore with all 9 cooling towers while the wind turbines sit idle.
I`m pretty sure that they are not turning. Compare the direction they are facing with the wind direction indicated by the cooling tower exhaust.
These turbines are at ~ 90 degrees in relation to the wind direction in "parked" mode as most of them do most of the time sucking back mega-$$$ without producing any power...

What's your point?

Did you find a sustainable reserve of fossil fuels?

What`s your point ?
You kept claiming you got alternatives and we are still waiting for your disclosure.
All we get is crappy liberal buzzwords like "sustainable".
Idiots like you will be long dead, buried and forgotten when & if the time comes when fossil fuels are no longer "sustainable".
If there are alternatives that have not been developed yet but are as easy as you figure to implement then what`s the difference if we burn some more fossil fuel in the interim ?
If you would really worry about the needs of future generations then yu should worry what the huge cost & the debt is that future generations have to pay for the kind of crap you are trying to peddle...not how much fossil fuel they`ll have when as you say these "sustainable alternatives" will have been implemented.
If mankind runs out of fossil fuel then that can be made synthetically the same way it`s been done with project "Blechhammer" in Germany during WW2 and again after the war by Union Carbide, using the same process in South Africa when they were under an embargo.
All it takes is limestone, water and electrical energy + copper as a catalyst. It`s nice to have coal for this process, but it`s not an essential component as long as you got limestone..and we got lots of that everywhere.
I know how that process works on an industrial scale, because I`m a chemical engineer and have worked on that process and every detail involved myself..while you know shit except how to mouth off about things you know absolutely nothing beyond the crap I keep seeing here.
So if you are as well informed and as smart as you keep boasting then you should have no problem telling us how to make hydrocarbons from coal the way Union Carbide and the "Nazis" who invented that process did.

 

[PMZ]

I always get a kick out of the pictures the news media can`t resist to use with every article they publish about "greenhouse gasses"

That`s all true, but in this picture as with almost any other scary "global warming" picture we are not looking at CO2 and smoke stacks.
The news media loves to snap pictures of cooling towers that spew spectacular plumes of moist air which contains no additional CO2 whatsoever, but scare the hell out of the dimwits that don`t know the difference between a cooling tower and a smoke stack.
Too bad it`s just a photo instead of a video because then you`d wonder why that power plant in the background is going full bore with all 9 cooling towers while the wind turbines sit idle.
I`m pretty sure that they are not turning. Compare the direction they are facing with the wind direction indicated by the cooling tower exhaust.
These turbines are at ~ 90 degrees in relation to the wind direction in "parked" mode as most of them do most of the time sucking back mega-$$$ without producing any power...

What's your point?

Did you find a sustainable reserve of fossil fuels?

What`s your point ?
You kept claiming you got alternatives and we are still waiting for your disclosure.
All we get is crappy liberal buzzwords like "sustainable".
Idiots like you will be long dead, buried and forgotten when & if the time comes when fossil fuels are no longer "sustainable".
If there are alternatives that have not been developed yet but are as easy as you figure to implement then what`s the difference if we burn some more fossil fuel in the interim ?
If you would really worry about the needs of future generations then yu should worry what the huge cost & the debt is that future generations have to pay for the kind of crap you are trying to peddle...not how much fossil fuel they`ll have when as you say these "sustainable alternatives" will have been implemented.
If mankind runs out of fossil fuel then that can be made synthetically the same way it`s been done with project "Blechhammer" in Germany during WW2 and again after the war by Union Carbide, using the same process in South Africa when they were under an embargo.
All it takes is limestone, water and electrical energy + copper as a catalyst. It`s nice to have coal for this process, but it`s not an essential component as long as you got limestone..and we got lots of that everywhere.
I know how that process works on an industrial scale, because I`m a chemical engineer and have worked on that process and every detail involved myself..while you know shit except how to mouth off about things you know absolutely nothing beyond the crap I keep seeing here.
So if you are as well informed and as smart as you keep boasting then you should have no problem telling us how to make hydrocarbons from coal the way Union Carbide and the "Nazis" who invented that process did.

You do realize that fossil fuels were always known to be a temporary source of energy, right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What's your point?

Did you find a sustainable reserve of fossil fuels?

What`s your point ?
You kept claiming you got alternatives and we are still waiting for your disclosure.
All we get is crappy liberal buzzwords like "sustainable".
Idiots like you will be long dead, buried and forgotten when & if the time comes when fossil fuels are no longer "sustainable".
If there are alternatives that have not been developed yet but are as easy as you figure to implement then what`s the difference if we burn some more fossil fuel in the interim ?
If you would really worry about the needs of future generations then yu should worry what the huge cost & the debt is that future generations have to pay for the kind of crap you are trying to peddle...not how much fossil fuel they`ll have when as you say these "sustainable alternatives" will have been implemented.
If mankind runs out of fossil fuel then that can be made synthetically the same way it`s been done with project "Blechhammer" in Germany during WW2 and again after the war by Union Carbide, using the same process in South Africa when they were under an embargo.
All it takes is limestone, water and electrical energy + copper as a catalyst. It`s nice to have coal for this process, but it`s not an essential component as long as you got limestone..and we got lots of that everywhere.
I know how that process works on an industrial scale, because I`m a chemical engineer and have worked on that process and every detail involved myself..while you know shit except how to mouth off about things you know absolutely nothing beyond the crap I keep seeing here.
So if you are as well informed and as smart as you keep boasting then you should have no problem telling us how to make hydrocarbons from coal the way Union Carbide and the "Nazis" who invented that process did.

You do realize that fossil fuels were always known to be a temporary source of energy, right?

You know that fossil fuels are actually an economical source of reliable energy, right?

 

[PMZ]

What`s your point ?
You kept claiming you got alternatives and we are still waiting for your disclosure.
All we get is crappy liberal buzzwords like "sustainable".
Idiots like you will be long dead, buried and forgotten when & if the time comes when fossil fuels are no longer "sustainable".
If there are alternatives that have not been developed yet but are as easy as you figure to implement then what`s the difference if we burn some more fossil fuel in the interim ?
If you would really worry about the needs of future generations then yu should worry what the huge cost & the debt is that future generations have to pay for the kind of crap you are trying to peddle...not how much fossil fuel they`ll have when as you say these "sustainable alternatives" will have been implemented.
If mankind runs out of fossil fuel then that can be made synthetically the same way it`s been done with project "Blechhammer" in Germany during WW2 and again after the war by Union Carbide, using the same process in South Africa when they were under an embargo.
All it takes is limestone, water and electrical energy + copper as a catalyst. It`s nice to have coal for this process, but it`s not an essential component as long as you got limestone..and we got lots of that everywhere.
I know how that process works on an industrial scale, because I`m a chemical engineer and have worked on that process and every detail involved myself..while you know shit except how to mouth off about things you know absolutely nothing beyond the crap I keep seeing here.
So if you are as well informed and as smart as you keep boasting then you should have no problem telling us how to make hydrocarbons from coal the way Union Carbide and the "Nazis" who invented that process did.

You do realize that fossil fuels were always known to be a temporary source of energy, right?

You know that fossil fuels are actually an economical source of reliable energy, right?

Have you found a sustainable source that will keep them that way?

Have you found economical CO2 sequestration?

Why do you think hard to get fuel and expensive waste disposal will be cheaper than fuel-less and waste-less energy?

So many problems. Zero solutions.

That's what conservatism is for.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You do realize that fossil fuels were always known to be a temporary source of energy, right?

You know that fossil fuels are actually an economical source of reliable energy, right?

Have you found a sustainable source that will keep them that way?

Have you found economical CO2 sequestration?

Why do you think hard to get fuel and expensive waste disposal will be cheaper than fuel-less and waste-less energy?

So many problems. Zero solutions.

That's what conservatism is for.

Have you found a sustainable source that will keep them that way?

Over what time frame? They're reliable now, "green energy", not so much.

Have you found economical CO2 sequestration?

Dumbest waste of money ever. Want to store CO2, plant more tress.

Why do you think hard to get fuel and expensive waste disposal will be cheaper than fuel-less and waste-less energy?

Experience.

So many problems.

Economical, reliable energy is not a problem.

Zero solutions.

I agree, "green energy" is not a solution.

 

[PMZ]

You know that fossil fuels are actually an economical source of reliable energy, right?

Have you found a sustainable source that will keep them that way?

Have you found economical CO2 sequestration?

Why do you think hard to get fuel and expensive waste disposal will be cheaper than fuel-less and waste-less energy?

So many problems. Zero solutions.

That's what conservatism is for.

Have you found a sustainable source that will keep them that way?

Over what time frame? They're reliable now, "green energy", not so much.

Have you found economical CO2 sequestration?

Dumbest waste of money ever. Want to store CO2, plant more tress.

Why do you think hard to get fuel and expensive waste disposal will be cheaper than fuel-less and waste-less energy?

Experience.

So many problems.

Economical, reliable energy is not a problem.

Zero solutions.

I agree, "green energy" is not a solution.

Exactly my point. Conservatives don't solve problems.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Have you found a sustainable source that will keep them that way?

Have you found economical CO2 sequestration?

Why do you think hard to get fuel and expensive waste disposal will be cheaper than fuel-less and waste-less energy?

So many problems. Zero solutions.

That's what conservatism is for.

Have you found a sustainable source that will keep them that way?

Over what time frame? They're reliable now, "green energy", not so much.

Have you found economical CO2 sequestration?

Dumbest waste of money ever. Want to store CO2, plant more tress.

Why do you think hard to get fuel and expensive waste disposal will be cheaper than fuel-less and waste-less energy?

Experience.

So many problems.

Economical, reliable energy is not a problem.

Zero solutions.

I agree, "green energy" is not a solution.

Exactly my point. Conservatives don't solve problems.

Right, conservatives don't waste trillions to store CO2 underground.
We leave the expensive idiocy to liberals.