What caused this Climate skepticism uptick ?

[mamooth]

And for skook .... 3Q 2016 solar installations set yet another new record.

Q3 US Solar Installations Set New Record

Home installations were down, due to early adopters starting to get exhausted. However, large business and utility installations made up for it.

In that same quarter, 70% of new capacity in the USA was carbon-free. 30% was natgas. 0% was coal. Let's have skook tell us how 0% was a glorious victory for his coal-cult.

To be fair, I should note how that 70% included the first new nuke plant in the USA in like forever. However, like so many deniers, skook hates nuclear power, so it makes him an even bigger loser.

 

[skookerasbil]

100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

PS....story out today and waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay on the top of the page on DRUDGE right now. Just another straw on the camels back that is the dying concept of AGW........and next year is going to be a fucking hoot!!

 

[skookerasbil]

And for skook .... 3Q 2016 solar installations set yet another new record.

Q3 US Solar Installations Set New Record

Home installations were down, due to early adopters starting to get exhausted. However, large business and utility installations made up for it.

In that same quarter, 70% of new capacity in the USA was carbon-free. 30% was natgas. 0% was coal. Let's have skook tell us how 0% was a glorious victory for his coal-cult.

To be fair, I should note how that 70% included the first new nuke plant in the USA in like forever. However, like so many deniers, skook hates nuclear power, so it makes him an even bigger loser.

OK s0n........sure looks impressive as shit!! Whoaaaaaaaaaa

..........now......can we see it compared to all other forms of energy used to provide electricity??

 

[skookerasbil]

So......let see how prolific solar energy is...............

[URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/solarfail.png.html'][/URL]

The "solar" sliver is slightly bigger now.....about 1% by 2016! The Obama administrations EIA graph displays the same thing!!

Seems the flat earth guys are still winning.............hUgE!!!





Oh......and the Obama EIA projection graph to 2040? Total renewables still only at......ready for this...........10%, most of it hydro. Solar will still be laughable 25 years from now s0ns!!

 

[mamooth]

So skook _is_ claiming that 0% is a glorious victory for the coal cult. Fascinating. Bing-drinking over losing seems to have pickled his brain.

Oh, coal is already down to 33%, and plummeting. Skook, try to update your obsolete sources. And then tell us how a decline of 6% over a year isn't losing.

What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

That is,
2014 Coal 39% Other Renewables 3% (skook's image)
2015 Coal 33% Other Renewables 7% (my source)

Skook, do you think that's a winning trend?

 

[ding]

So skook _is_ claiming that 0% is a glorious victory for the coal cult. Fascinating. Bing-drinking over losing seems to have pickled his brain.

Oh, coal is already down to 33%, and plummeting. Skook, try to update your obsolete sources. And then tell us how a decline of 6% over a year isn't losing.

What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

That is,
2014 Coal 39% Other Renewables 3% (skook's image)
2015 Coal 33% Other Renewables 7% (my source)

Skook, do you think that's a winning trend?

binge drinking

 

[polarbear]

100% Of US Warming Is Due To NOAA Data Tampering | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

PS....story out today and waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay on the top of the page on DRUDGE right now. Just another straw on the camels back that is the dying concept of AGW........and next year is going to be a fucking hoot!!

Market Watch:
Solar stocks hammered as sector expected to lose out in Trump administration
Solar-panel makers and solar-power developers fared no better. SunPower SPWR, -4.97% skidded 14% and First Solar Inc. FSLR, -3.50% lost 4.2%. The American depositary receipts of China-based solar-panel manufacturer JA Solar Holdings Co. Ltd. JASO, -1.81% fell 8.4%; Trina Solar Ltd. TSL, +0.54% ADRs closed 2.3% down for the day.The Guggenhim Solar ETF TAN, -1.30% was off 5.6%.

And what about all these "climatologists" who will have to start looking for a real job
Who would hire somebody who spent years and years staring at a thermometer to see if it came up a fraction of a degree. I doubt Donald Trump will call Ban Ki Moon to keep these "jobs" in the USA. Even Ban Ki might wind up looking for a job in that bamboo bike shop:

Seen here with Christiana Figueres the UN climate boss and high priestess of the jaguar goddess Ixchel she invoked at the Cancun climate summit
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/...-cancun-global-hysteria-wealth-redistribution
“Excellencies, the goddess Ixchel would probably tell you that a tapestry is the result of the skillful interlacing of many threads.... I am convinced that 20 years from now, we will admire the policy tapestry that you have woven together and think back fondly to Cancun and the inspiration of Ixchel.”

 

[Pete7469]

Every State deserves representation. The wants and needs of one area are not the same for every area. Oppression of the majority is a real danger, high population centres are prone to fads and paradigms, similar to disease outbreaks.

Liberals are a disease.

 

[Dr Grump]

If one would subtract the votes H.Clinton got in California she would not have won the popular vote.

But she did. Fact.

 

[Billy_Bob]

If one would subtract the votes H.Clinton got in California she would not have won the popular vote.

But she did. Fact.

If we took out the non-US populace (which voted illegally) from the California count she would not have won the popular vote.. FACT...

 

[Dr Grump]

If one would subtract the votes H.Clinton got in California she would not have won the popular vote.

But she did. Fact.

If we took out the non-US populace (which voted illegally) from the California count she would not have won the popular vote.. FACT...

If we took out all the people who voted with an IQ of less than 100, Trump would have lost. Fact.

 

[Billy_Bob]

If one would subtract the votes H.Clinton got in California she would not have won the popular vote.

But she did. Fact.

If we took out the non-US populace (which voted illegally) from the California count she would not have won the popular vote.. FACT...

If we took out all the people who voted with an IQ of less than 100, Trump would have lost. Fact.

Your a legend in your own mind....

But that is the only place....

Most of the fly-over states have people who can survive on their own without government telling them everything they should do and when they should do it.. I'd say their IQ's exceed 100 unlike your voters who are huddling in class rooms with aroma therapy and crying little snowflakes too afraid to move... Throwing their tantrums..

 

[Dr Grump]

[

Your a legend in your own mind....

But that is the only place....

Most of the fly-over states have people who can survive on their own without government telling them everything they should do and when they should do it.. I'd say their IQ's exceed 100 unlike your voters who are huddling in class rooms with aroma therapy and crying little snowflakes to afraid to move...

At least I don't believe fake news (about illegals voting)...

I don't need the govt telling me a damn thing...

 

[Billy_Bob]

[

Your a legend in your own mind....

But that is the only place....

Most of the fly-over states have people who can survive on their own without government telling them everything they should do and when they should do it.. I'd say their IQ's exceed 100 unlike your voters who are huddling in class rooms with aroma therapy and crying little snowflakes to afraid to move...

At least I don't believe fake news (about illegals voting)...

I don't need the govt telling me a damn thing...

Tell me again how many drivers licenses were issued to illegals in California?

2.3 million

And Obama was encouraging them to vote as were your libtard friends in Cali... Show me your drivers license (which makes no distinction to nationality) but you cant ask them if they are US citizens..

 

[ding]

If one would subtract the votes H.Clinton got in California she would not have won the popular vote.

But she did. Fact.

If we took out the non-US populace (which voted illegally) from the California count she would not have won the popular vote.. FACT...

If we took out all the people who voted with an IQ of less than 100, Trump would have lost. Fact.

He won because Democratic strongholds voted for him.

 

[Dr Grump]

[
Tell me again how many drivers licenses were issued to illegals in California?

2.3 million

And Obama was encouraging them to vote as were your libtard friends in Cali... Show me your drivers license (which makes no distinction to nationality) but you cant ask them if they are US citizens..

This is becoming Fake News central..links please (and please, not those ones I've already debunked. This is getting tiresome)

 

[Dr Grump]

He won because Democratic strongholds voted for him.

no, he won because Democratic strongholds didn't vote for her. Remember, he received LESS votes than Romney AND McCain during their losses to Obama. She also received 2.8 million more votes than him.

 

[ding]

He won because Democratic strongholds voted for him.

no, he won because Democratic strongholds didn't vote for her. Remember, he received LESS votes than Romney AND McCain during their losses to Obama. She also received 2.8 million more votes than him.

The data says otherwise.

The total number of registered voters who cast a ballot was up slightly from 2012, with 4.9 million Michigan voters participating in the 2016 presidential election compared to 4.8 million in 2012

In Pennsylvania, more people voted in 2016 than in 2012.

In liberal Dane County, home of UW-Madison, turnout was nearly unchanged from 2012 to 2016.

 

[Dr Grump]

The data says otherwise.

The total number of registered voters who cast a ballot was up slightly from 2012, with 4.9 million Michigan voters participating in the 2016 presidential election compared to 4.8 million in 2012

In Pennsylvania, more people voted in 2016 than in 2012.

In liberal Dane County, home of UW-Madison, turnout was nearly unchanged from 2012 to 2016.

Which has what to do with my assertion that he received less votes than McCain and Romney?

 

[ding]

The data says otherwise.

The total number of registered voters who cast a ballot was up slightly from 2012, with 4.9 million Michigan voters participating in the 2016 presidential election compared to 4.8 million in 2012

In Pennsylvania, more people voted in 2016 than in 2012.

In liberal Dane County, home of UW-Madison, turnout was nearly unchanged from 2012 to 2016.

Which has what to do with my assertion that he received less votes than McCain and Romney?

Do you means besides the fact that it proves Democrats crossed over and voted for Trump?