Author Topic: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?  (Read 401 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31324
  • Gender: Male
   Well, how often does somebody have to lie, before we decide thay are justpolitical/pathological LIARS ?

       Below, see predicted flooding by 2050..  Of course, the PBS map, published some years ago, was not so sure whether the coasts of
   the USA would be flooded for many miles inland, by  2020 or 2050..

    Still, Obama, Gore and many other climate change boosters, have bought ocean front properties. 

    In fact Guru John Kerry recently bought a beautiful beachj front home on Martha's Vineyard...why?  Take a look..

     https://vineyardgazette.com/news/2017/03/09/john-kerry-buys-historic-marthas-vineyard-property#:~:text=Acting%20through%20a%20private%20realty,a%20house%20o

    Below; how many of these sins is this leftist crowd guilty of?
   
         " There are six things that the LORD hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers."(proverbs 6:16-19)
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Online darkgael

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1656
  • The readiness is all. 4049 posts from the “old” gb
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2024, 02:07:44 AM »
IG: what is the source of that question? Who asked it?

Online ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31324
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2024, 02:28:58 AM »
IG: what is the source of that question? Who asked it?

   Uhh..I just asked the question....see above post..
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Online darkgael

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1656
  • The readiness is all. 4049 posts from the “old” gb
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2024, 02:45:26 AM »
IG: Let me get this straight. You asked a question, ostensibly for discussion. Then you answered your own question.
What was the point of that?

Online Land_Owner

  • Global Moderator
  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (31)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4541
    • Permission Granted - Land Owner
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2024, 03:18:58 AM »
Climate change deniers (a poor descriptor), such as myself absolutely believe that climate on planet Earth changes on a daily, monthly, seasonal, annual, and (say) quarter Millinea Epoc as this Planet orbits its Sun in that celestrial body's relaive position in the universe.  Antarctica was at one time a warm tropical "Paradise" inhabited by warm and cold blooded plants and animals. Don't tell me that Liberal Democrats and Climate Control Freeks had ANYTHING to do with that. Alaska used to be ALL lush green forest not too long ago too.

Online ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31324
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2024, 05:32:53 AM »
  Al Gore, John Kerry, Obama and many others predicted catastrophic coastal flooding and many other dire happenings which would have afflicted
  the nations and their shorelines by now.

  ...Yet many of them have bought ocean front homes since they made these coastal flooding predictions.

  They all claim that unnecessary carbon production should all be halted..yet they fly around in private jets, and own several mansions each, and
    some even cruise around in large, luxurious yachts !

   Are they ignoring their own dier warnings..or just plain, old lying?
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline Dixie-Dude

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #6 on: November 08, 2024, 06:30:46 AM »
Elon Musk sells electric cars.  Even he realizes we need oil.  Gasoline and Diesel vehicles, trucks, trains, airlines are not going away by 2035.  He said it would take at least 50 years to totally convert to an all electric society that is renewable.  Trains diesel locomotives last at least 50 years.  Then you have to make drugs and medicines, synthetic materials, plastics, that all require oil based or coal based products. 

Also, the electric grid has to be upgraded to take on the power needed to recharge electric vehicles. More power will be needed.  This means solar and wind alone can't do it, it will have to be nuclear if they want 24/7 power.  Musk said a 100 mile by 100 mile array of solar panels in the Nevada desert could power the whole country.  However, you have to have the grid to push it.  Newer carbon composite wires to replace the power grid wires can push twice the amount of power over them, but they cost more than steel and aluminum.  This would take time to replace the power grid, like the 50 years he mentioned. 

Governments forcing this transition in Europe has almost doubled the cost of electricity for the consumers.  Too much change too fast and it will styfle the economy.  Europe's economy is stagnant and not growing.  China and India's economies are growing fast, but they still use coal, oil, and nuclear power as well as a lot of hydro.  Yes, they are trying to use solar and wind, but not at the expense of their growing economies.  India is growing faster than China and may pass China by 2050.  They do have capitalism and a multi-party political system and more freedoms. 

We have oil, gas, and an 800 year supply of coal.  Nothing is mentioned anymore about growing more trees and crops that absorb more carbon dioxide. 

We can also grow our food in commercial greenhouses that can take up less land than farming, and give as much as 4 crop yields a year vs 1 per year farming.  Then a lot of farmland could convert back to forests or grazing land for cattle.  There are a lot more ideas out there than just forcing electric cars on people.  People in big cities can't see the countryside like people who don't live in cities.  Heck, the government pays farmers not to grow stuff to keep farm prices up.  They could instead use this money to subsidize building greenhouses to grow food, and to plant trees.  We could even grow tropical foods in greenhouses instead of importing them. 

Another thing that urks me.  A local power company bought some farmland and put in several hundred acres of solar panels.  A nearby town could have had these panels put on top of commercial buildings and schools, over parking lots, etc, and did the same thing and left the farmland alone.  Living in the south solar panels covering parking lots could provide a lot of shade and weather cover for shoppers at malls, strip malls, and grocery stores.  Why isn't this being tried in more places? 

I still think smaller modular nukes would be better.  New smaller ones can't melt down and last for at least 20 years without refueling.  They can be clustered for more power out put.  This could easily replace coal fired plants.  Why isn't it being done?  The grid needs upgrading and newer nuke power plants built before electric cars take over and also AI is going to need 20% more power to operate these giant computer systems.  In the meantime electric cars can evolve to faster charging times, lower cost, and longer range. 
Opelika Portal

Online GTS225

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 339
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #7 on: November 08, 2024, 04:39:12 PM »
In the meantime electric cars can evolve to faster charging times, lower cost, and longer range.

(Dixie-Dude......just using your words to make a point.)

Can they......or have we reached a pinnacle in the electric movement?  Might it be that the lithium-iron poly battery is the pinnacle of energy storage and production?  Just how many elements are there on this planet that can be used in such a manner?
We can build a myriad of electric ways to motivate an auto, bus, truck, train or airplane, but can we build a self-contained, semi-renewable, portable power supply capable of supplying the needed wattage, without a fundamental change to use of a micro-sized nuclear power plant?  And would it even be possible to reduce a nuke plant that much?

Many questions worth considering, of which I have no answers.  In my view, the most important has to be the question asking about available elements to build a battery from, and whether the risk would be acceptable.

Just a few thoughts.....Roger

Offline Casull

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4695
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #8 on: November 09, 2024, 09:10:04 AM »
IG: Let me get this straight. You asked a question, ostensibly for discussion. Then you answered your own question.
What was the point of that?


To get the conversation going?  Seems quite obvious to me.  Why do you find that objectionable?
Aim small, miss small!!!

Offline Lloyd Smale

  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (32)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18267
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #9 on: November 09, 2024, 11:07:43 PM »
nah pal, those delusional leftys think the can get it from the electrical fairy that lives in the field under their pot crop
Elon Musk sells electric cars.  Even he realizes we need oil.  Gasoline and Diesel vehicles, trucks, trains, airlines are not going away by 2035.  He said it would take at least 50 years to totally convert to an all electric society that is renewable.  Trains diesel locomotives last at least 50 years.  Then you have to make drugs and medicines, synthetic materials, plastics, that all require oil based or coal based products. 

Also, the electric grid has to be upgraded to take on the power needed to recharge electric vehicles. More power will be needed.  This means solar and wind alone can't do it, it will have to be nuclear if they want 24/7 power.  Musk said a 100 mile by 100 mile array of solar panels in the Nevada desert could power the whole country.  However, you have to have the grid to push it.  Newer carbon composite wires to replace the power grid wires can push twice the amount of power over them, but they cost more than steel and aluminum.  This would take time to replace the power grid, like the 50 years he mentioned. 

Governments forcing this transition in Europe has almost doubled the cost of electricity for the consumers.  Too much change too fast and it will styfle the economy.  Europe's economy is stagnant and not growing.  China and India's economies are growing fast, but they still use coal, oil, and nuclear power as well as a lot of hydro.  Yes, they are trying to use solar and wind, but not at the expense of their growing economies.  India is growing faster than China and may pass China by 2050.  They do have capitalism and a multi-party political system and more freedoms. 

We have oil, gas, and an 800 year supply of coal.  Nothing is mentioned anymore about growing more trees and crops that absorb more carbon dioxide. 

We can also grow our food in commercial greenhouses that can take up less land than farming, and give as much as 4 crop yields a year vs 1 per year farming.  Then a lot of farmland could convert back to forests or grazing land for cattle.  There are a lot more ideas out there than just forcing electric cars on people.  People in big cities can't see the countryside like people who don't live in cities.  Heck, the government pays farmers not to grow stuff to keep farm prices up.  They could instead use this money to subsidize building greenhouses to grow food, and to plant trees.  We could even grow tropical foods in greenhouses instead of importing them. 

Another thing that urks me.  A local power company bought some farmland and put in several hundred acres of solar panels.  A nearby town could have had these panels put on top of commercial buildings and schools, over parking lots, etc, and did the same thing and left the farmland alone.  Living in the south solar panels covering parking lots could provide a lot of shade and weather cover for shoppers at malls, strip malls, and grocery stores.  Why isn't this being tried in more places? 

I still think smaller modular nukes would be better.  New smaller ones can't melt down and last for at least 20 years without refueling.  They can be clustered for more power out put.  This could easily replace coal fired plants.  Why isn't it being done?  The grid needs upgrading and newer nuke power plants built before electric cars take over and also AI is going to need 20% more power to operate these giant computer systems.  In the meantime electric cars can evolve to faster charging times, lower cost, and longer range.
blue lives matter

Online ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31324
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2024, 03:21:26 AM »
IG: Let me get this straight. You asked a question, ostensibly for discussion. Then you answered your own question.
What was the point of that?

  I only answered PART of the question, the subterfuge is gigantic and worldwide...so extended discussion of myraid natures are called for.
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Offline Dixie-Dude

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2024, 01:45:54 PM »
The reason I say "in the meantime" about electric vehicles.  I think we have maxed out what lithium iron batteries can do.  However, I am reading science articles about salt batteries which are way cheaper.  Don't know about range or charging times.  The Tesla superchargers charge a car with 440 volts in about 45 minutes.  This is the fastest yet.  220 volts take about 3-4 hours, while 110 volts takes a minimum of 8 hours.  They are also trying to develop carbon fiber capacitors that can charge in about 5 minutes and release their power slower while driving a few hours.  Musk said it would take about 50 years to switch to electric cars due to the 3 problems, faster charging, longer range, and lower cost of vehicles.  This will probably be done in about 50 years.  Like I said, in the meantime we have to drill and obtain oil and gas until the 3 problems are solved.  Development is not finite or has reached a limit.  Look at airplanes or any other product.  They cost more to begin with but price comes down like flat screen TV's.  They came out in the 1980s for several thousand dollars.  Today you can get an 85 inch one for less than $1000. 

Getting back on subject, why did a bunch of liberals like Obama and Kerry buy beach front property if it was going to be under water in 10 years.  Why are we buying Chinese and Indian products and they burn far more coal than the US does making them?  Why not plant more trees or high CO2 absorbing plants?  Why not grow more food in greenhouses and let farmland grow trees or cows at the very least?  These ideas are cheaper than forcing electric cars that are still in their infancy. Or forcing power plants to build windmills and put in solar panels before the grid is ready for them. 
Opelika Portal

Online ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31324
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why don't thinking people take the climate change gurus seriously ?
« Reply #12 on: November 11, 2024, 02:35:00 AM »
The reason I say "in the meantime" about electric vehicles.  I think we have maxed out what lithium iron batteries can do.  However, I am reading science articles about salt batteries which are way cheaper.  Don't know about range or charging times.  The Tesla superchargers charge a car with 440 volts in about 45 minutes.  This is the fastest yet.  220 volts take about 3-4 hours, while 110 volts takes a minimum of 8 hours.  They are also trying to develop carbon fiber capacitors that can charge in about 5 minutes and release their power slower while driving a few hours.  Musk said it would take about 50 years to switch to electric cars due to the 3 problems, faster charging, longer range, and lower cost of vehicles.  This will probably be done in about 50 years.  Like I said, in the meantime we have to drill and obtain oil and gas until the 3 problems are solved.  Development is not finite or has reached a limit.  Look at airplanes or any other product.  They cost more to begin with but price comes down like flat screen TV's.  They came out in the 1980s for several thousand dollars.  Today you can get an 85 inch one for less than $1000. 

Getting back on subject, why did a bunch of liberals like Obama and Kerry buy beach front property if it was going to be under water in 10 years.  Why are we buying Chinese and Indian products and they burn far more coal than the US does making them?  Why not plant more trees or high CO2 absorbing plants?  Why not grow more food in greenhouses and let farmland grow trees or cows at the very least?  These ideas are cheaper than forcing electric cars that are still in their infancy. Or forcing power plants to build windmills and put in solar panels before the grid is ready for them.

   All good, viable points DD.. Check this out..   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIbgauhV2Js
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)