.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
placeholder
-
Posts
24,695 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by placeholder
-
-
Just now, susanlea said:
All the details.
This is your idea of evidence?
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, susanlea said:
That would be wrong still. If I say it warms tomorrow by 5 degrees and it only warms by 1 I'm still wrong. At least learn something about predictions. Fairly basic science.
what would be wrong still? What predictions about glaciers, the severity of hurricanes, etc was wrong?
-
17 minutes ago, susanlea said:
Still making up excuses for the serial scaremonger who is always wrong. Pretty desperate.
Always wrong?
Is Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth accurate?
The majority of the film, covering issues like Himalayan Glaciers, Greenland and Antarctica losing ice, the severity of hurricanes and other weather phenomena, was accurate and represented the science as it stood. Since the release of the film, considerably more evidence has been found in support of the science and projections in the film.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, susanlea said:
Gore quoted other people which means he believed it. So Gore should apologise for it.
Really? Offering someone else's opinion constitutes an endorsement? And as the article which you originally linked to and are now ignoring, Gore did not categorically state that such melting would occur.
-
7 minutes ago, susanlea said:
Gore has a long history of bad climate predictions.
https://capitalresearch.org/article/al-gores-30-years-of-climate-errors-part-2/
Ultimately, so what? Gore is not a scientist. If it's science you want, go to scientific journals. There the consensus is overwhelming.
-
7 minutes ago, susanlea said:
"In addition, in his 2006 global warming documentary "An Inconvenient Truth," Gore predicted that the global sea level could rise as much as 20 feet "in the near future.""
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/al-gore-history-climate-predictions-statements-proven-false
Here is the headline of the article you originally linked to:
Al Gore did not ‘predict’ ice caps melting by 2013 but misrepresented data
It goes into a great deal of detail about why what you are now claiming and that fox news article you linked to is a misrepresentation.
-
9 minutes ago, susanlea said:
Gore was quoting others and passing it off to scare people. Gore is a known scaremonger.
Your comment about some bet is also misguided. At 50-1 that would be worth it.
Your comment makes no sense. Richard Lindzen, one of the leading scientists denying global warming made a bet that global average temperature would fall rather than rise. Maybe the bet would be worth it at those odds, but do you seriously believe that he just made that bet to make a possible killing?
-
1 minute ago, susanlea said:
Everybody said temperatures would go up. Gore said they would go up a lot more and most of the ice would melt so he was wrong. At least learn how science and predictions work. Saying Gore was right is like saying the sun will rise in the east and set in the west.
You clearly didn't read the link you cited. Gore was referring to a prediction made by a climate researcher. He got that prediction somewhat wrong but he never claimed what you said he did.
And you're also wrong about everybody claiming that temperatures would continue to rise. In fact, climate change denialists said just the opposite. They claimed that in the 21st century temperatures would decline. Richard Lindzen, one of the leading denialists, actually publicly offered to bet that in 20 years the average global temperature would actually decline.
"Professor Lindzen had been willing to bet that global temperatures would drop over the next 20 years. No bet was agreed on that; Dr Annan said Prof Lindzen wanted odds of 50-1 against falling temperatures, so would win $10,000 if the Earth cooled but pay out only £200 if it warmed."
And he was far from alone in making that prediction.
-
5 hours ago, Bobthegimp said:
That has nothing to do with climate change.
California has always had wildfires. Always. They've always had the Santa Annas to fan the flames. I remember this from the news footage during my childhood 50 years ago. The places you mentioned on the other coast have always had hurricanes and storm surges. It's well documented and nothing new.
Insurance rates rise in step with housing prices and increased construction costs, so blaming the climate is disingenuous.
The democrats you refer to are the main people ringing the climate change alarm bell. The bloated swine, Al Gore is the worst offender. Plenty of corrupt republicans as well, they're just not at the forefront of the climate scam. Isn't Trump's estate on a waterway in Florida?
Why don't the climate gang ever mention Gore's predictions? Ever? You're welcome to believe whatever you like. I'll pay more heed when these hypocrites downsize and start living the way they are forcing the rest of us to live.
False. It's not the same old same old Major insurance companies are actually refusing to take on new properties and some are even abandoning the California market.
California loses 2 more property insurers in growing crisis
"However, as a rising number of insurers have limited coverage or exited the state, some homeowners are left with only the insurance option of last resort, the government-created FAIR Plan. Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara is trying to stem the exodus with a new “Sustainable Insurance Strategy,” which includes rules that insurers must write at least an average of 85% of their California market share in high wildfire risk communities."
https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/california-loses-two-more-property-insurers-growing-crisis...
-
38 minutes ago, sidneybear said:
You've obviously never heard of Blackrock's use of activist shareholders to enforce Larry Fink's green and ESG beliefs in company boards. It's well known in management circles, so just because you've never heard of it doesn't make it untrue.
No, I've heard and read of the right wing hysteria about Black Rock. But before I get to that, as I noted previously, Larry Fink is CEO of Blackrock. The sources I cited were McKenzie Woods, Lazard, and Ernst & Young.
As for Blackrock, I've got news for you, they aren't boycotting fossil fuels as the loons in states like Texas maintain.
Even BlackRock Funds Buying Oil Stocks Are Banned by Texas ESG Fight
Texas bars its public pensions from investing in 350 funds run by asset-management giants such as BlackRock Inc. and Invesco Ltd. because a key Republican state official says they “boycott” the oil and gas industries.
But a Bloomberg News analysis found that the 72 BlackRock funds on the prohibited list have invested more than $2 billion in the oil industry, while an Invesco fund allocates about 20% to oil and natural gas companies, some of which are also Texas-based.
Or is Bloomberg lying, too?
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, sidneybear said:
The link you posted is behind a paywall, so I was unable to read it. Can you please paraphrase it? I also noted that you've switched this battery technology panacea from iron air to sodium ion. The part of the article I got access to mentioned 600MW, but not for how long, at what cost, and at what environmental and human impact to produce the batteries in the first place (hint: lithium ion).
They weren't behind paywalls for me. I don't subscribe to them. And it's pretty bizarre that you repeatedly made unfounded statements without having actually read the texts. But here are links I created using archive.ph. The first is to the Vox article that explains what it would take for renewables to power 100% of the U.S. grid.
-
Just now, sidneybear said:
Can't you debate anything without jeering at your opponents? It makes you come across as unsure of yourself and overly defensive, which is hardly surprising given that your arguments rely on solutions that are commercially and technically unproven.
It's hard to resist jeering at someone who repeatedly tells the same falsehood: the 2 companies I cited as examples are manufacturing real batteries for real use in the real world. What don't you understand about that?
-
On 5/1/2024 at 2:01 AM, Stargeezr said:
If the Earth is warming itself up, that can be called global warming. Climate change is also happening with El Nino and the
other La Nina. Extra CO2 in the air still can be measured, but it is still a trace gas of less than one half of one percent of the total atmosphere.
Another trace gas is Methane, look up the facts on google before having a climate alarmist try to tell you about the dangers of these trace gases.
I am sorry if coral reefs are in danger of warmer ocean levels, Maybe we should all thank China, Russia and the other nations
that are pumping lots of CO2 into the atmosphere. Volcanoes must be sending lots of CO2 and other gases into the atmosphere as well.
IMO
The potency of CO2 as a greenhouse gas was proved in the 19th century by the eminent Irish Physicist, John Tindall. Have you been sleeping for the past 150 or ss years?
-
3 minutes ago, sidneybear said:
I was surprised that the dictionary you quoted didn't use as an example the most common original usage of the word "denier". Holocaust denier was in popular use way before the word was hijacked by the warmist culture. Why would a dictionary ignore such a thing?
I got news for you. Languages change over time. That includes connotations. Not surprising to find fossilized thinking in a fan of fossil fuel.
-
2 minutes ago, sidneybear said:
No. All you did was put your faith in the past speed of technological advances, extrapolating forward to tell me that iron air batteries will solve the storage problem, just because some boffin at MIT says so. In the real world, lots of research falls by the wayside, and research teams milk funding as much as they can, while they can, by publishing hyped up forecasts.
I'm not rudely jeering at you, but you'll have to put up more than pie in the sky research articles to power the cities of today. Without storage, renewables are useless.
What pie in the sky? They exist. They have batteries in operation at power plants. Their new 765 milllion dollar plant is about to open. Their batteries are being successfully used. It's headed by Mateo Jaramillo, the former head of the battery division of Tesla. And it's not just this company. There are lots more. For example:
Natron Energy starts manufacturing ‘50,000+ cycle-life’ sodium-ion batteries at Michigan factory
Natron Energy has started commercial-scale operations at its sodium-ion battery manufacturing plant in Michigan, US, and elaborated on how its technology compares to lithium-ion in answers provided to Energy-Storage.news.
At full capacity the facility will produce 600MW of Natron’s ‘Prussian Blue’ electrode batteries primarily for the stationary energy storage system (ESS) market annually. At first it will mainly ship products to data centres starting in June, before expanding to industrial mobility, EV fast charging and telecommunications, among others.
-
1 hour ago, sidneybear said:
Aside from your usual childish jeering, you didn't address the point I made about Larry Fink, the Blackrock chief, channelling investment into ESG related businesses and away from fossil fuels, rebutting your assertion that "banks" aren't showing favouritism.
What's Larry Fink got to do with the analyses of 3 other financial firms. And as for channeling investments away from fossil fuels, once again you don't seem to understand how capitalism works. You think that fossil fuel companies should get first dibs on investments?
As for my childish jeering, pretty much all I have to say is that you made a claim, and when I noted that dictionaries universally disagreed with you, you asserted that they were woke. You pretty much made fun of yourself with comments like that.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, sidneybear said:
You’ve just put forward a nonexistent solution to power storage.
MIT research that you posted showcases iron air batteries that doesn't yet exist, might never commercially, and as such won't solve real world problems of today.
Try to focus on the real world, rather than the academic one. Batteries don't exist that will power cities when the wind stops blowing and the sun sets.
Had you bothered to read the articles you would know that Form already has successfully created battery storage for power plants using this technology. Now they're scaling it up with a massive factory.
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, sidneybear said:
Consumers are being driven into poverty because there's not enough investment in fossil fuels. The gigantic price increases at the onset if the Ukraine war, when gas exports from Russia were reduced, shows just how effective these windmills are:
In Australia too, consumer electricity prices have increased substantially, while power shortages loom because of the Nut Zero zealots closing all the coal fired power stations.
You'll dig out this or that link from one or another green industry sympathetic academic, but real people are feeling severe financial pressure because of the green religion.
I have to ask are you familiar with even basic economics? How are renewable responsible for the sharp rise in price of natural gas? If there were more power plants in Germany relying on natural gas and less reliance on renewables, would that have made the situation better or worse? It's not a trick question. I'll even give you a hint: look up the law of supply and demand.
And maybe, do ya think that the high cost of power in Australia might have something to do with the high cost of coal and natural gas? Most of Australia's power still comes from those 2 sources. Do you think building more power plants relying on coal and natural gas would lower or increase the cost of these fossil fuels? What has happened in Australia is that coal power plants are aging out and not enough new renewable plants are being built. That's a result of bad planning. Not inherently a fault of renewables.
-
1
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:
I could be wrong, but from what I gleaned it was Daniels who approached Trump. Her own lawyer said that it wasn't hush money, just "consideration". From the Washington Post;
According to Davidson’s testimony, in the days after the damaging Access Hollywood tape came out, Daniels’s manager reached out to the National Enquirer to start brokering a deal that would pay Daniels in exchange for her staying quiet about her alleged tryst with Donald Trump.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/30/trump-hush-money-trial-live-updates/
This isn't about who approached who. It's about what the purpose of the payment to Stormy Daniels was.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 5/3/2024 at 9:26 AM, herfiehandbag said:
I'll hazard a guess, but if they had stood by Johnson, who was after all elected by the membership, and convincingly won them an election, whilst they could have been facing a challenge, they would still have been very much in the race.
What an abject failure.
As I recall, da previous set of local elections resulted in another rout for the Tories. And Johnson was PM back then.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, sidneybear said:
That's the direction it's heading, yes. Investment funds are divesting fossil fuel assets to satisfy the green creed. Larry Fink was well known for shareholder activism, insisting that ESG was an integral part of board decisions in exchange for shareholder cash.
First you tell us that dictionaries are woke. Now it's that fossil fuel companies are powerless against the onslaught of Big Green. Are you some kind of would-be comedian?
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, sidneybear said:
You didn't answer my question. If renewable energy is so cheap and available, why are consumer energy costs skyrocketing?
And a follow on question, how will batteries provide sufficient base load when there's no wind?
To slightly modify an old proverb, you can lead a horse to evidence but you cannot make it think. I provided evidence with links concerning coal, gas, and nuclear energy. Coal and gas had huge spikes in prices not long ago and nuclear energy has had huge cost overruns. Do I really have to spell out for what that means for power rates? In addition, maybe you should consider that fact that renewables, while dominating as a percentage of new power plants being built, are still a fraction of the world's total installed base.
As for how batteries will provide energy when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine, if you actually are interested in learning something, here's a link to an article that explains an MIT report about getting to 100%.
The report stipulates that the cost of a storage device should be about "$20 per kilowatt hour in energy capacity costs"
The report projected that wouldn't happen until 2030 at the earliest. But, as has consistently been the case, battery technology has consistently outrun predictions:
Form Energy to begin manufacturing iron air batteries in Weirton to stabilize electrical grid
https://www.wesa.fm/environment-energy/2024-02-19/weirton-form-energy-battery-manufacturing
Power when the sun doesn’t shine
https://dmse.mit.edu/news/power-when-the-sun-doesnt-shine/
-
1
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:
Behind a paywall :
WELCOME OFFEREnjoy unlimited access for $1 a month your first 6 months.In the future you should use this:
As for now:
-
Parts of Gaza Are in Famine, World Food Program Chief Says
The director of the World Food Program, Cindy McCain, says that parts of the Gaza Strip are experiencing a “full-blown famine” that is rapidly spreading throughout the territory after almost seven months of war.
Ms. McCain is the second high-profile American leading a U.S. government or U.N. aid effort who has said that there is famine in northern Gaza, although her remarks do not constitute an official declaration, which is a complex bureaucratic process.
“There is famine — full-blown famine in the north, and it’s moving its way south,” Ms. McCain said in excerpts released on Friday of an interview with “Meet the Press.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/04/world/middleeast/cindy-mccain-gaza-famine.html
-
1
-
UN Report Warns Of Asia's Increasing Climate Crisis
in Thailand News
Posted
"The film includes segments intended to refute critics who say that global warming is unproven or that warming will be insignificant. For example, Gore cites the retreat of nearly all glaciers caused by melting over recent decades, showing nine cases, such as the Grinnel and Boulder Glaciers and Patagonia. He discusses the possibility of the collapse and melting of a major ice sheet in Greenland or in West Antarctica, either of which could raise global sea levels by approximately 20 feet (6m), flooding coastal areas and producing 100 million refugees. Melt water from Greenland, because of its lower salinity, could then halt the currents that keep northern Europe warm and quickly trigger dramatic local cooling there. It also contains various short animated projections of what could happen to different animals more vulnerable to global warming."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Inconvenient_Truth#:~:text=The film includes segments intended,and Boulder Glaciers and Patagonia.
None of this is inconsistent with climatological research.