Pay no attention to man made climate change folks

[Dale Smith]

Of course most on the right who are more interested in making money would love to deregulate nuclear energy and trust companies to do it the right way but oh snap they are in it for the money

You don't think wind and solar isn't NOW driven by greedy people who want those subsidies? There IS a "big Wind and Big Solar" industry... You just think they are cute and cuddly...

LOTS of folks bilking money out of subsidized wind and solar.. BIG BUCKS.....

Oil and coal is subsidized like wind and solar as most energy industries so big deal I just pointed out how right wing like deregulation.

Oil and coal is subsidized like wind and solar

You're lying.

So you claim there are no oil & gas subsidies like the ones Republicans fought to save a few years back.

STFU, little davey. You, like all your little leftard pals can never explain as to how the earth could be "saved" by paying a carbon tax to the very banking oligarchs that own big oil and this petroleum based world wide economy. You are one of THE dumbest fuckwads here. Climate change? Blame geo-engineering and THAT is a fact regardless whether it pisses off a leftard moderator or not. The truth is what it is.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's just shy of a nothing burger.. There IS an effect.. The problem is that GW is not just ONE question.. It's many questions and theories.. Some are better than others.. And it's the CATASTROPHIC theories that have lit the flames of social/political confrontation.. Most of those are NOT "settled science"... But there is an effect assuming the CO2 doubling by (say) 2050 is "somewhat" attributable to man..

Catastrophic results in areas of the globe are predicted & possible.

The worst predictions have the premise that we do nothing to curb emissions & made prior to any action being done.

For example, if we do what Trump & you assfuck deniers want, bad shit will certainly happen.

If we opt to act to reduce emission, these catastrophic results can be lessened.

The settled science is that increasing CO2 levels will cause warming & if we do not act, results could be catastrophic.

But hey, sit on your fast ass & send your children & grandchildsren to a more difficult life because you're a fucking idiot.

Why are you assfuck warmers against nuclear power?

Homophobia aside, waste disposal issues.

Our reactors have managed to store all their spent fuel on site for decades.
Not very much volume....why is it an issue?

What plant are you referencing?

All of them.

 

[22lcidw]

Other than hydro and geothermal which both have drastic effects on the environment, that list of ALTERNATIVES, HAS NO alternatives right now to fossil fuels.. Wind and solar are flaky unreliable supplements. NOT alternatives..

You COULD solve the CO2 emission issue completely with a build-out of nuclear power.. In fact the "Father of Global Warming Panic himself -- James Hansen fielded a petition of leading enviros and climate scientists stating ----

Is nuclear power the answer on climate change?


Hansen departs from environmental orthodoxy, however, in arguing that there is no way to cut greenhouse gas emissions sufficiently by relying solely on green alternatives like solar and wind power.

“Suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole” Hansen writes in an essay, “is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.”

There ya go... Solution is right in front of you.. But the scary thing is -- leftists are MORE AFRAID of nuclear power than they are of Global Warming... And THAT --- should tell you why NONE OF THIS "alternative horseshit" is getting traction or serious attention....

Have fun waiting up for the "Tooth Fairy".....

leftists are MORE AFRAID of nuclear power than they are of Global Warming... And THAT --- should tell you why NONE OF THIS "alternative horseshit" is getting traction or serious attention....

^
This.

More afraid of Climate Change & consider other options. Nuclear power is not the only solution.

Nuclear power is not the only solution.

No, but it's the only large scale, 24 hour power source if you want to reduce CO2.

You have to remember that to these idiot Moon Bats almost ten billion people can get all their energy needs from solar and wind. they have been told that and they believe it. You can't reason with stupidity like that.

The sun rains down enough energy during the noontime hour to power the planet for a year.

But hey, fuck that. Lets instead build all these plants where an accident or earthquake could contaminate the area for decades & kill thousands.

I guarantee you if someone invented a device to garner the most out of the sun's rays it would be public by now. Of the government I do not know. Most likely though it would not be someone who is"qualified" by PC, quotas and affirmative action. But the reduced numbers of those who still can dream and have ideas.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of course most on the right who are more interested in making money would love to deregulate nuclear energy and trust companies to do it the right way but oh snap they are in it for the money

You don't think wind and solar isn't NOW driven by greedy people who want those subsidies? There IS a "big Wind and Big Solar" industry... You just think they are cute and cuddly...

LOTS of folks bilking money out of subsidized wind and solar.. BIG BUCKS.....

Oil and coal is subsidized like wind and solar as most energy industries so big deal I just pointed out how right wing like deregulation.

Oil and coal is subsidized like wind and solar

You're lying.

So you claim there are no oil & gas subsidies like the ones Republicans fought to save a few years back.

Post them, I'll point out your errors.

 

[Kilroy2]

I don't have to "think like a scientist"

So you admit your a dupe and will remain a dupe... Bravo! Admitting you have a problem is the first step...

Deflect....say do you have a scientific organization willing to destroy it's repetition to support your denial position or not.

"do you have a scientific organization willing to destroy it's repetition to support you...."

LOL

deflection: Appeal to authority. Logical Fallacy argument.



Why do you take what the political arm of any organization, which do not ask their members if they agree with it, as gospel? They spew political crap and their members call them on it .. yet you believe...

deflection: Appeal to authority. Logical Fallacy argument.

be careful because you seem to have fallen into the thing that you seem to detest.

You are looking for vindication and the only ones who can give that to you are those with the authority

otherwise there is no need to publish your papers or submit
them to anyone

Unless you are afraid of criticism or people rejecting your ideas

You say raw data is your difference but it can be said that by your own admissions that data can be skewed for any advantages.

aren't u doing the same thing

Hey no guts no glory you may be right about the methodology for collecting data but I hear no conclusion drawn from you except everybody else is wrong

well you are in good company, history has always had the one person who went against the flow and they have been right

but don't jump for joy yet cause it may be just as easily for it to go the other direction

 

[Markle]

What is really stupid to to put this dangerous materials on a train & take it cross country.through hundreds of communities.

Why? Tens of thousands of railroad cars, containing extremely hazardous materials are transported every day with no problems.

 

[Markle]

Power generation from aging nuclear plants is costing its customers more money than renewable energy sources.


Just see the bill in Ohio of reference.

You seem to have forgotten your reliable source and working link supporting your allegation. Please correct that oversight.

 

[Markle]

So learn to read and do research

I do, please provide us with your reliable source and working links proving your allegations. If they're safe, what is wrong with extending the licenses of older nuclear power plants?

 

[Flash]

It's just shy of a nothing burger.. There IS an effect.. The problem is that GW is not just ONE question.. It's many questions and theories.. Some are better than others.. And it's the CATASTROPHIC theories that have lit the flames of social/political confrontation.. Most of those are NOT "settled science"... But there is an effect assuming the CO2 doubling by (say) 2050 is "somewhat" attributable to man..

Catastrophic results in areas of the globe are predicted & possible.

The worst predictions have the premise that we do nothing to curb emissions & made prior to any action being done.

For example, if we do what Trump & you assfuck deniers want, bad shit will certainly happen.

If we opt to act to reduce emission, these catastrophic results can be lessened.

The settled science is that increasing CO2 levels will cause warming & if we do not act, results could be catastrophic.

But hey, sit on your fast ass & send your children & grandchildsren to a more difficult life because you're a fucking idiot.

Why are you assfuck warmers against nuclear power?

Homophobia aside, waste disposal issues.

There is a great place to store the waste at Yucca Mountain. I have been there. However, the stupid Environmental Wackos are fighting it tooth and nail because they know not having a disposal site can help to curtail nuclear power production. Really stupid, isn't it?

What is really stupid to to put this dangerous materials on a train & take it cross country.through hundreds of communities.

You are confused Moon Bat.

As an Environmental Engineer working under a consulting DOE contract I have reviewed the plan for storage at Yucca Mountain, including the transportation. I also worked on the contract for the management of the site. Very familiar. Transportation is perfectly safe, including accident scenarios. A lot more safer than most hazardous material that are shipped across the country every day.

The stupid Environmental Wackos are using that as an excuse to limit the production of nuclear power and that is despicable, not to mention downright moronic. Environmental Wackos never get anything right. They are idiots.

 

[Flash]

Catastrophic results in areas of the globe are predicted & possible.

The worst predictions have the premise that we do nothing to curb emissions & made prior to any action being done.

For example, if we do what Trump & you assfuck deniers want, bad shit will certainly happen.

If we opt to act to reduce emission, these catastrophic results can be lessened.

The settled science is that increasing CO2 levels will cause warming & if we do not act, results could be catastrophic.

But hey, sit on your fast ass & send your children & grandchildsren to a more difficult life because you're a fucking idiot.

Why are you assfuck warmers against nuclear power?

Homophobia aside, waste disposal issues.

There is a great place to store the waste at Yucca Mountain. I have been there. However, the stupid Environmental Wackos are fighting it tooth and nail because they know not having a disposal site can help to curtail nuclear power production. Really stupid, isn't it?

What is really stupid to to put this dangerous materials on a train & take it cross country.through hundreds of communities.

Power generation from aging nuclear plants is costing its customers more money than renewable energy sources.


Just see the bill in Ohio of reference.

Nuclear power generation is costly but for an entirely different reason than most people think.

Because of the stupid NRC approval regiment it cost almost two billion dollars to permit a nuclear power plant. That is in addition to the construction and operating cost and has to be amortized over the life of the plant. That is a tremendous additional burden to the annual cost of a nuclear power plant.

That doesn't even include the tremendous regulatory oversight burden that the plants have to fund each operating year.

Nuclear power production could be a lot less expensive and perfectly safe if we didn't have the stupid Environmental Wackos adding significant unnecessary burdens on to the construction and operating cost.

 

[otto105]

Why are you assfuck warmers against nuclear power?

Homophobia aside, waste disposal issues.

There is a great place to store the waste at Yucca Mountain. I have been there. However, the stupid Environmental Wackos are fighting it tooth and nail because they know not having a disposal site can help to curtail nuclear power production. Really stupid, isn't it?

What is really stupid to to put this dangerous materials on a train & take it cross country.through hundreds of communities.

Power generation from aging nuclear plants is costing its customers more money than renewable energy sources.

One of the plants was built in 1978 and the other in in 1987

Why are you assfuck warmers against nuclear power?

Homophobia aside, waste disposal issues.

There is a great place to store the waste at Yucca Mountain. I have been there. However, the stupid Environmental Wackos are fighting it tooth and nail because they know not having a disposal site can help to curtail nuclear power production. Really stupid, isn't it?

What is really stupid to to put this dangerous materials on a train & take it cross country.through hundreds of communities.

Power generation from aging nuclear plants is costing its customers more money than renewable energy sources.


Just see the bill in Ohio of reference.

Nuclear power generation is costly but for an entirely different reason than most people think.

Because of the stupid NRC approval regiment it cost almost two billion dollars to permit a nuclear power plant. That is in addition to the construction and operating cost and has to be amortized over the life of the plant. That is a tremendous additional burden to the annual cost of a nuclear power plant.

That doesn't even include the tremendous regulatory oversight burden that the plants have to fund each operating year.

Nuclear power production could be a lot less expensive and perfectly safe if we didn't have the stupid Environmental Wackos adding significant unnecessary burdens on to the construction and operating cost.

The Ohio Nuclear plants were built in 1978 and 1987, so your present day costing estimate is irrelevant. The problem with the plants is that the power they generate cost more than other sources.

How (un)profitable are Ohio’s two nuclear plants? FirstEnergy Solutions says it can’t tell the public


An here I thought that republic pols didn't pick winners and losers, but rather let the market determine.

 

[flacaltenn]

Renewable energy is the source of light that will keep it lit.

Other than hydro and geothermal which both have drastic effects on the environment, that list of ALTERNATIVES, HAS NO alternatives right now to fossil fuels.. Wind and solar are flaky unreliable supplements. NOT alternatives..

You COULD solve the CO2 emission issue completely with a build-out of nuclear power.. In fact the "Father of Global Warming Panic himself -- James Hansen fielded a petition of leading enviros and climate scientists stating ----

Is nuclear power the answer on climate change?


Hansen departs from environmental orthodoxy, however, in arguing that there is no way to cut greenhouse gas emissions sufficiently by relying solely on green alternatives like solar and wind power.

“Suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole” Hansen writes in an essay, “is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.”

There ya go... Solution is right in front of you.. But the scary thing is -- leftists are MORE AFRAID of nuclear power than they are of Global Warming... And THAT --- should tell you why NONE OF THIS "alternative horseshit" is getting traction or serious attention....

Have fun waiting up for the "Tooth Fairy".....

leftists are MORE AFRAID of nuclear power than they are of Global Warming... And THAT --- should tell you why NONE OF THIS "alternative horseshit" is getting traction or serious attention....

^
This.

More afraid of Climate Change & consider other options. Nuclear power is not the only solution.

Nuclear Power for electrical grid generation is the ONLY RELIABLE and VIABLE alternative.. Any other things on the list of "alternatives" are NOT alternatives. They are supplements at best and NOT reliable. They all require an equal amount of 24/7/365 generation to cover for them when they are not operating....

 

[flacaltenn]

Impressive.. You've done some work.. "man" recently is about 5% of that entire "carbon cycle" Nature outweighs it by 20 to 1... And so far, OF that 5%, nature absorbs in excess sink capability.. Furthermore, what's CHARGED to "man" is highly debatable.. Since we get charged with livestock emissions that simply replaced the endless herds of buffalo and other big grazers that got displaced by domestic farming..

A doubling of CO2 in the atmos causes about a 1DegC change in surface temperature.. THis is the RAW warming power of CO2 as gas in the atmos.. WITHOUT the more hysterical GW adjunct theories about "runaway feedbacks, accelerations (not in evidence) and trigger temps from which the planet just trashes itself to death...

The 415 ppm today IS NOT EVEN a doubling since we started the Industrial Revolution at about 280 ppm.. Will be 2050 or so til we get there... That's 1degC for a 280ppm increase... Then to get the NEXT 1degC, we'd have to load the atmos with TWICE AS MUCH CO2 to get the same effect.. Because CO2 warming power is quite saturated and does not LINEARLY increase temp... So we'd need 560 additional ppm to get to 2 deg..

THIS is the basic science without the exaggeration, speculation, phony modeling and hype. And this is what I believe is true.. By 2050 the temp anomaly due to anthro CO2 will be about 1degC... Anything above or below that is natural variance... And it will probably be WAY past 2100 until the anthropomorphic part of climate change accounts for 2DegC...

While the hyped SUPERPOWERS of CO2 that SOME climate scientists believe in are creating models that predict 2100 temp anomalies anywhere between 4 and 8 DegC.. That's not likely IMO....

...and that my friends is a great summary of why the Environmental Wackos have to fabricate data and why none of their predictions ever come true. Because AGW is a nothing burger.

It's just shy of a nothing burger.. There IS an effect.. The problem is that GW is not just ONE question.. It's many questions and theories.. Some are better than others.. And it's the CATASTROPHIC theories that have lit the flames of social/political confrontation.. Most of those are NOT "settled science"... But there is an effect assuming the CO2 doubling by (say) 2050 is "somewhat" attributable to man..

Catastrophic results in areas of the globe are predicted & possible.

The worst predictions have the premise that we do nothing to curb emissions & made prior to any action being done.

For example, if we do what Trump & you assfuck deniers want, bad shit will certainly happen.

If we opt to act to reduce emission, these catastrophic results can be lessened.

The settled science is that increasing CO2 levels will cause warming & if we do not act, results could be catastrophic.

But hey, sit on your fast ass & send your children & grandchildsren to a more difficult life because you're a fucking idiot.

Why are you assfuck warmers against nuclear power?

The 15 nuclear reactors of the same design as Fukushima along the New Madrid fault line comes to mind.

Or the shut down of Three Mile Island taking 60 years.

Or the leaking reactors in Illinois upwind from Chicago.

Chernobyl

Fukushima

Expensive

A threat to millions of Americans

Any COAL plant is a continuing source of nuclear radiation MUCH larger than even the 60 year reactors.. If you're unfamiliar with this FACT -- look it up... You COULD close many of them with a nuclear push.. AND tear down the dams, free the salmon and BEAT all other countries to Paris/Kyoto "compliance"... Tho it STILL wont "save the planet" from CO2 emissions from China...

ANYTIME you insist on pushing along aged technology -- you are endangering people.. Doesn't matter if it's communications, computers, or medicine... So -- there's no reason why the NEW TECHNOLOGY shouldn't get an expedited approval, so that America can lead the world in that important technology...

 

[flacaltenn]

Impressive.. You've done some work.. "man" recently is about 5% of that entire "carbon cycle" Nature outweighs it by 20 to 1... And so far, OF that 5%, nature absorbs in excess sink capability.. Furthermore, what's CHARGED to "man" is highly debatable.. Since we get charged with livestock emissions that simply replaced the endless herds of buffalo and other big grazers that got displaced by domestic farming..

A doubling of CO2 in the atmos causes about a 1DegC change in surface temperature.. THis is the RAW warming power of CO2 as gas in the atmos.. WITHOUT the more hysterical GW adjunct theories about "runaway feedbacks, accelerations (not in evidence) and trigger temps from which the planet just trashes itself to death...

The 415 ppm today IS NOT EVEN a doubling since we started the Industrial Revolution at about 280 ppm.. Will be 2050 or so til we get there... That's 1degC for a 280ppm increase... Then to get the NEXT 1degC, we'd have to load the atmos with TWICE AS MUCH CO2 to get the same effect.. Because CO2 warming power is quite saturated and does not LINEARLY increase temp... So we'd need 560 additional ppm to get to 2 deg..

THIS is the basic science without the exaggeration, speculation, phony modeling and hype. And this is what I believe is true.. By 2050 the temp anomaly due to anthro CO2 will be about 1degC... Anything above or below that is natural variance... And it will probably be WAY past 2100 until the anthropomorphic part of climate change accounts for 2DegC...

While the hyped SUPERPOWERS of CO2 that SOME climate scientists believe in are creating models that predict 2100 temp anomalies anywhere between 4 and 8 DegC.. That's not likely IMO....

...and that my friends is a great summary of why the Environmental Wackos have to fabricate data and why none of their predictions ever come true. Because AGW is a nothing burger.

It's just shy of a nothing burger.. There IS an effect.. The problem is that GW is not just ONE question.. It's many questions and theories.. Some are better than others.. And it's the CATASTROPHIC theories that have lit the flames of social/political confrontation.. Most of those are NOT "settled science"... But there is an effect assuming the CO2 doubling by (say) 2050 is "somewhat" attributable to man..

Catastrophic results in areas of the globe are predicted & possible.

The worst predictions have the premise that we do nothing to curb emissions & made prior to any action being done.

For example, if we do what Trump & you assfuck deniers want, bad shit will certainly happen.

If we opt to act to reduce emission, these catastrophic results can be lessened.

The settled science is that increasing CO2 levels will cause warming & if we do not act, results could be catastrophic.

But hey, sit on your fast ass & send your children & grandchildsren to a more difficult life because you're a fucking idiot.

Why are you assfuck warmers against nuclear power?

The 15 nuclear reactors of the same design as Fukushima along the New Madrid fault line comes to mind.

Or the shut down of Three Mile Island taking 60 years.

Or the leaking reactors in Illinois upwind from Chicago.

Chernobyl

Fukushima

Expensive

A threat to millions of Americans

Also you failed to mention the hands down largest nuclear polluter in this country.. That would be the US nuclear weapons factories and waste dumps.. THESE have THOUSANDS of rotting barrels of nuclear waste just stashed everywhere.. NEVER been an attempt to fix this... SOME of these sites, Savannah River, and Oak Ridge are over major aquifers.. Hanford is such a radioactive nuclear dump that they bury bulldozers in place after a month or two because they glow in the dark...

THAT immoral lack of responsibility FAR EXCEEDS any of the minor maintenance problems on ANY operating reactor.. And you just have to EXPECT "maintenance issues" on any 66 yr old power gen plant...

 

[flacaltenn]

Of course most on the right who are more interested in making money would love to deregulate nuclear energy and trust companies to do it the right way but oh snap they are in it for the money

You don't think wind and solar isn't NOW driven by greedy people who want those subsidies? There IS a "big Wind and Big Solar" industry... You just think they are cute and cuddly...

LOTS of folks bilking money out of subsidized wind and solar.. BIG BUCKS.....

Nuclear energy is te most subsidized.

The hell it is... The govt never even came thru with it's SOLE promise of a nat. nuclear depository in 60 years.. The only REAL subsidy is limits on damages that law has immunized them with...

By far -- by percentage of initial cost and operation -- wind and solar are the highest subsidized generators... But not for much longer...

 

[flacaltenn]

I don't have to "think like a scientist" to come to a realization that GW/CC is real and that it is man made. I can with 100% certainty accept the determination of actual scientists and scientific organizations that GW/CC is real and poses a threat to our way of life.

We agree on that it's at least partially a man-made efffect.. That's NOT ENOUGH to call it a planet ending crisis and THAT's where we separate.. Because there's not near ENOUGH clarity in THOSE questions of "How bad will it get" -- to be spending this kind of energy telling folks they've been misled and abused by politicos and the media as to what the science actually can predict with high confidence or what many of the KEY studies actually said...

There has been a lot of exaggeration and hype stiring up folks (two in this thread) that think they're about to die.. Because of 0.6DegC change during their life in GLOBAL mean temperature that is mostly affecting about 40% of the globe...

 

[flacaltenn]

Impressive.. You've done some work.. "man" recently is about 5% of that entire "carbon cycle" Nature outweighs it by 20 to 1... And so far, OF that 5%, nature absorbs in excess sink capability.. Furthermore, what's CHARGED to "man" is highly debatable.. Since we get charged with livestock emissions that simply replaced the endless herds of buffalo and other big grazers that got displaced by domestic farming..

A doubling of CO2 in the atmos causes about a 1DegC change in surface temperature.. THis is the RAW warming power of CO2 as gas in the atmos.. WITHOUT the more hysterical GW adjunct theories about "runaway feedbacks, accelerations (not in evidence) and trigger temps from which the planet just trashes itself to death...

The 415 ppm today IS NOT EVEN a doubling since we started the Industrial Revolution at about 280 ppm.. Will be 2050 or so til we get there... That's 1degC for a 280ppm increase... Then to get the NEXT 1degC, we'd have to load the atmos with TWICE AS MUCH CO2 to get the same effect.. Because CO2 warming power is quite saturated and does not LINEARLY increase temp... So we'd need 560 additional ppm to get to 2 deg..

THIS is the basic science without the exaggeration, speculation, phony modeling and hype. And this is what I believe is true.. By 2050 the temp anomaly due to anthro CO2 will be about 1degC... Anything above or below that is natural variance... And it will probably be WAY past 2100 until the anthropomorphic part of climate change accounts for 2DegC...

While the hyped SUPERPOWERS of CO2 that SOME climate scientists believe in are creating models that predict 2100 temp anomalies anywhere between 4 and 8 DegC.. That's not likely IMO....

...and that my friends is a great summary of why the Environmental Wackos have to fabricate data and why none of their predictions ever come true. Because AGW is a nothing burger.

It's just shy of a nothing burger.. There IS an effect.. The problem is that GW is not just ONE question.. It's many questions and theories.. Some are better than others.. And it's the CATASTROPHIC theories that have lit the flames of social/political confrontation.. Most of those are NOT "settled science"... But there is an effect assuming the CO2 doubling by (say) 2050 is "somewhat" attributable to man..

Catastrophic results in areas of the globe are predicted & possible.

The worst predictions have the premise that we do nothing to curb emissions & made prior to any action being done.

For example, if we do what Trump & you assfuck deniers want, bad shit will certainly happen.

If we opt to act to reduce emission, these catastrophic results can be lessened.

The settled science is that increasing CO2 levels will cause warming & if we do not act, results could be catastrophic.

But hey, sit on your fast ass & send your children & grandchildsren to a more difficult life because you're a fucking idiot.

Why are you assfuck warmers against nuclear power?

Homophobia aside, waste disposal issues.

There's a lot less waste handling issues with latest gen reactors.. You're no longer dealing with 20 ton rods of the stuff.. More like pingpong ball size pebbles that are easier to store, recycle, move...

The french allow reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel.. We should also.. And the french use a lead glass encapsulation process that makes waste sites more reliable.. The technology is there. It's been thwarted for 50 years by ignorant eco-warriors...

HOWEVER -- more and more of the top brass of the eco crowd have ENDORSED IT in light of their perceived threat of GW/CC... THEY -- have their heads screwed on right...

An Open Letter to Environmentalists on Nuclear Energy

Read the list of endorsements. These folks got it right...

 

[Jitss617]

If you don’t vote democrat the sky is falling lol haha

 

[otto105]

I don't have to "think like a scientist" to come to a realization that GW/CC is real and that it is man made. I can with 100% certainty accept the determination of actual scientists and scientific organizations that GW/CC is real and poses a threat to our way of life.

We agree on that it's at least partially a man-made efffect.. That's NOT ENOUGH to call it a planet ending crisis and THAT's where we separate.. Because there's not near ENOUGH clarity in THOSE questions of "How bad will it get" -- to be spending this kind of energy telling folks they've been misled and abused by politicos and the media as to what the science actually can predict with high confidence or what many of the KEY studies actually said...

There has been a lot of exaggeration and hype stiring up folks (two in this thread) that think they're about to die.. Because of 0.6DegC change during their life in GLOBAL mean temperature that is mostly affecting about 40% of the globe...

Nobody is claiming that the planet will end. They're claiming that the climate mankind prospered under will be negatively altered.

And it's not partially man-made, its completely man-made unless you can point to another catalyst that all of science has missed.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I don't have to "think like a scientist" to come to a realization that GW/CC is real and that it is man made. I can with 100% certainty accept the determination of actual scientists and scientific organizations that GW/CC is real and poses a threat to our way of life.

We agree on that it's at least partially a man-made efffect.. That's NOT ENOUGH to call it a planet ending crisis and THAT's where we separate.. Because there's not near ENOUGH clarity in THOSE questions of "How bad will it get" -- to be spending this kind of energy telling folks they've been misled and abused by politicos and the media as to what the science actually can predict with high confidence or what many of the KEY studies actually said...

There has been a lot of exaggeration and hype stiring up folks (two in this thread) that think they're about to die.. Because of 0.6DegC change during their life in GLOBAL mean temperature that is mostly affecting about 40% of the globe...

Nobody is claiming that the planet will end. They're claiming that the climate mankind prospered under will be negatively altered.

And it's not partially man-made, its completely man-made unless you can point to another catalyst that all of science has missed.

Yes as a matter of fact numerous people have claimed man will end. All by lying about what is happening.