[Kid Strangelove]

If global warming turns out to be a sham, then what do we have to show for it? Oh I know, a better environment that we try to take care of

[Sonsowey]

It's amazing how much Republican Party dogma is swallowed hook line and sinker as "Red Pill" awakening.

Global Warming is real. Your favorite Republican author is not smarter than the consensus of climatologists worldwide.

You guys really need to unplug from all the cranks.

Acting like you see the world for what it really is by ignoring the very people who dedicated their lives to the discovery of objective truth through rigorous investigation.

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_...ate_change

[Sawyer]

Ignoring the world for what it is?

Like there aren't vested interests slobbering at the power and money the global warming regulatory scheme will create? Let it burn if it has to. Red Pill means not relinquishing a single iota more of sovereignty to these academic fuckwads and their money and power hungry overlords.

[Flavius Aetius]

Global warming is real? Don't you mean climate change--yeah Al Gore and the communist liberals (along with Obama) replaced the term global warming with climate change because global warming is a fraud--the Climate gate memos (have you even seen those where the scientists admit to making up data) and recent independent studies confirm this.

So the new scam is to blame everything on climate change ( which is natural--the climate never remains static) to get their much wanted global carbon tax

Oh and what does Al gore do with all of his global warming money?

He buys mansions on the california coastline for 20-30 million a pop. Yeah, he is sure worried about global warming and those rising water levels. LMAO.

He also buys more evil carbon polluting private jets. Then he buys carbon off-sets from companies he owns. Yeah, he takes this real seriously.

The goal of the commie/liberals who push this climate change agenda is a worldwide tax on human life itself (aka a carbon tax). It is like the Catholic church selling indulgences to the idiot populace to fund the building of the Vatican.

A tax on carbon--what plants breathe and humans exhale--priceless.

Always beware of idiots screaming the alarm bell--then telling you the solution is to give them all of your money.

[K Galt]

(12-17-2013 02:56 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

It's amazing how much Republican Party dogma is swallowed hook line and sinker as "Red Pill" awakening.

Global Warming is real. Your favorite Republican author is not smarter than the consensus of climatologists worldwide.

You guys really need to unplug from all the cranks.

Sure thing.

Quote:

Acting like you see the world for what it really is by ignoring the very people who dedicated their lives to the discovery of objective truth through rigorous investigation.

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_...ate_change

Acting like whatever wikipedia and government funded organizations like NASA are dedicated to "objective truth through rigorous investigation" is as blue pill as it gets.

Just because people actually research a particular topic and come to their own conclusions about a topic doesn't automatically make them "Republicans." Opposition to the propaganda and lies behind "Global Warming" does not make one a default "Republican" anymore than opposing Feminism make one a Republican either.

The "Red pill" is simply a metaphor for seeing the truth, instead of accepting the mainstream, conventional wisdom promoted by "The Cathedral" which includes the Government, mass media and academic institutions that all promote ideological platforms as "facts" proven by "science."

Note that feminism's chief proponent in the West has been the same place all of the scientists come from - the University system.

Republicans are no more "red pill" than Democrats. Both are two sides of the same damned coin.

As for "Global Warming" let's have a look at the latest "facts" shall we?

I'll even quote a pro-Warming site here, the National Geographic:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...e-science/

Quote:

Enjoy our stormy sun while it lasts. When our star drops out of its latest sunspot activity cycle, the sun is most likely going into hibernation, scientists announced today.

Three independent studies of the sun's insides, surface, and upper atmosphere all predict that the next solar cycle will be significantly delayed—if it happens at all. Normally, the next cycle would be expected to start roughly around 2020.

The combined data indicate that we may soon be headed into what's known as a grand minimum, a period of unusually low solar activity.

The predicted solar "sleep" is being compared to the last grand minimum on record, which occurred between 1645 and 1715.

Known as the Maunder Minimum, the roughly 70-year period coincided with the coldest spell of the Little Ice Age, when European canals regularly froze solid and Alpine glaciers encroached on mountain villages.

(See "Sun Oddly Quiet—Hints at Next 'Little Ice Age?'")

"We have some interesting hints that solar activity is associated with climate, but we don't understand the association," said Dean Pesnell, project scientist for NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO).

Wow, who'dve thunk it? The Sun's activity may have the biggest effect on the Earth's climate?



Note the National Geo's immediate disclaimer after reporting on the sun's reduced activity leading to 2013's recrd low temperatures all over the planet...

Quote:

Also, even if there is a climate link, Pesnell doesn't think another grand minimum is likely to trigger a cold snap.

"With what's happening in current times—we've added considerable amounts of carbon dioxide and methane and other greenhouse gases to the atmosphere," said Pesnell, who wasn't involved in the suite of new sun studies.

"I don't think you'd see the same cooling effects today if the sun went into another Maunder Minimum-type behavior."

In other words, some scientists who study the sun and it's effect on climate report a new period of low activity is leading to global cooling...and the National Geo must then immediately quote a Warmist who THINKS that man made causes may somehow affect the cycle of ice ages.

When the next glacial epoch begins (which may be what we are actually seeing RIGHT NOW) we're gonna WISH we could actually warm the climate by burning carbon fuels.....

[scotian]

^^^ I wasn't aware that 2013 had record lows all over the world, but I know it did in Alberta recently. About two weeks ago a small hamlet south of Edmonton was coldest place on Earth, as cold as Mars. I kind of feel sorry for all those poor bastards I convinced to move there haha.

[K Galt]

Check this link out... its from author Robert Felix, who in fact has put forth the idea that ice ages are a dependable, predictable cycle, and that the next one is overdue.

Anyhow, he's been compiling links from all over the world regarding record low temps all over the planet.

http://iceagenow.info/?s=record+low+temperatures

[DVY]

Just another day in the life- turning air into money. A total cash-grab by politicians

[DjembaDjemba]

Global warming, if it were to ever occur in our lifetimes, would possibly be cyclical. We've had global warming and coolings throughout history. The last 8000 years of human civilization has been nothing but a blip in the 4 billion year existence of earth.

We're nothing more than animals with a sentience. We're totally insignificant [for now] in the greater scheme of things. On cosmic scale, we're even more insignificant than microbes.

[Starke]

(12-17-2013 02:56 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

It's amazing how much Republican Party dogma is swallowed hook line and sinker as "Red Pill" awakening.

Global Warming is real. Your favorite Republican author is not smarter than the consensus of climatologists worldwide.

You guys really need to unplug from all the cranks.

We don't trust scientific consensus here....except when it demonstrates that women/fatties/coloreds have diminished brain function, then it's 100% true. Always.

Looking after your own environment is beta anyway, just lift more and drink more Apple Cider Vinegar (real science!). Everything will be fine, brah...

[LowerCaseG]

I had a roommate in college. He was an environmentalist. He drove a jeep cherokee, never turned his lights off, and took 45 minute showers.

[The Lizard of Oz]

(12-18-2013 10:46 PM)Starke Wrote:  

We don't trust scientific consensus here....except when it demonstrates that women/fatties/coloreds have diminished brain function, then it's 100% true. Always.

Looking after your own environment is beta anyway, just lift more and drink more Apple Cider Vinegar (real science!). Everything will be fine, brah...

[heavy]

This relates to the thread. I'm no conservationist animal loving guy, but I suppose animal cruelty is ok as long as it's in the name of saving our planet.

New Solar Power Plants are Incinerating Birds

Quote:

Thousands of birds are flying into a new solar "mega-trap" in the middle of California's Mojave Desert, killing the avian lot at a rate of up to one bird every two minutes, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

The state-of-the-art Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System (ISEGS), which opened in February, is the world's largest solar plant to utilize "power towers," skyscraping structures that receive beams of focused solar rays to generate electricity.

At Ivanpah, the sun's ray's are redirected from a sea of more than 300,000 mirrors on the desert surface below to hit water filled boilers atop three 459-foot "power towers." Temperatures near the towers can climb to 800 degrees, which causes the water to produce steam that turns turbines which generate energy.

All told, the facility at Ivanpah generates enough electricity to power 140,000 homes and eliminates carbon dioxide emissions equivalent to 72,000 vehicles a year, according to a press release from Bright Source Energy, one of the trio of investors behind the solar plant.

That sort of renewable energy source might seem like a triumph for the environment, but the same super-heated skyscrapers that generate renewable electricity are also taking a toll on wildlife in the area.

According to the Associated Press, up to 28,000 birds per year might be meeting an early death after burning up in the focused beams of sunlight, with birds dying at a rate of one bird every two minutes. The burned-up birds are being dubbed "streamers," after the poof of smoke produced by the igniting birds.

A report by the USFWS states that most of the birds are dying from various levels of exposure to "solar flux" which causes "singeing of feathers."

"Severe singeing of flight feathers caused catastrophic loss of flying ability, leading to death by impact with the ground or other objects," the report states. "Less severe singeing led to impairment of flight capability, reducing ability to forage and evade predators, leading to starvation or predation."

A quasi-food chain is being established around the solar plant, with predators eating birds and bats that burn up in the plant's solar rays chasing after insects which are attracted to the bright light from the sun's reflected rays. That prompted wildlife officials to refer to Ivanpah as a "mega-trap" for wildlife.

Unfortunately, the USFWS doesn't yet know the full extent of the solar facility's impact on bird populations, and is calling for a full year study of the death toll at the site before the plant's operators are allowed to construct an even bigger "power tower" solar plant between Joshua Tree National Park and the California-Arizona border, the Associated Press reports.

The proposed facility would have a power tower nearly twice the size of the ones found at Ivanpah and is located in an area with more than 100 species of birds, including protected species like golden eagles and peregrine falcons. Officials estimate that if the plant were built it would be nearly four times deadly to avian species than the solar plant at Ivanpah.

A spokesperson for NRG Solar, another one of the companies behind Ivanpah told the Associated Press that "we take this issue very seriously." So far, the only remedy appears to be cash. BrightSource has anted up $1.8 million to compensate for bird deaths and the trio of companies behind the project is looking into potential solutions to stop wildlife from colliding with the solar plant.

Edit: What's disconcerting is that this isn't just some private endeavour...our federal government is at the very least giving uber tax credits to these projects, at worst subsidizing (I didn't research to find out where on the spectrum it lies).

[Foolsgo1d]

Those type of projects are interesting from an engineering point of view. However they're never cost effective. Those mirrors are not cheap and the maintenance must be huge.

[Carlos100]

(08-19-2014 02:22 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

Those type of projects are interesting from an engineering point of view. However they're never cost effective. Those mirrors are not cheap and the maintenance must be huge.

Solar power appears to be one of the costliest per kilowatt hours of all alternative energy solutions and there doesn't appear to be a forseeable economy-of-scale solution to it.

Burning up the birds is a very serious problem. Bird populations are already threatened by the overpopulation of feral and outdoor domesticated felines.

[The Reactionary Tree]

Environmentalism is just a scam to impose worldwide socialism upon us.

Bjorn Lomborg proposed an idea that would cost the entire planet around $50B to prevent any type of catastrophe... what happened to him? He is called out as a hack even though he truly believes in global warming. It's just that his idea doesnt involve enslaving everyone under a global bureaucracy.

They have no real solutions. They can't produce an energy efficient alternative energy. The solutions they have proposed don't work i.e. cap & trade.

They're just a bunch of fucking pinko Commies.

[Engineer]

If the new solar power tower technology is disruptive (higher acceleration in the cost performance curve over time vs the established mature tech), I'd be OK with a little extra expense now in the form of government subsidy in the hope of seeing future price advantage over fossil fuels. It's a useless desert, why not try something there? I doubt it's pushing us into bankruptcy any faster given our existing massive social welfare payment system.

Back to global warming, I know a really sharp guy who works at NOAA. Over beers I asked his frank opinion about the issue and he told me he wouldn't be buying any oceanfront property for his retirement, given likely sea level rise in the out years. I've reviewed a bunch of warming data on both sides and in general the climate change deniers seem to use a lot of BS tactics like cherry picking, while the other side appeals more to reason. I'm not talking about the extremists on either side, but the balanced ones. So I'd be OK with some form of carbon initiative. Not sure and don't care exactly how, but something along the lines of a 5 cent per gallon gasoline tax for climate change research and mitigation. I don't say that lightly, I hate the tax and spenders.

[Wadsworth]

(08-19-2014 06:34 PM)objectivist tree Wrote:  

Environmentalism is just a scam to impose worldwide socialism upon us.

Bjorn Lomborg proposed an idea that would cost the entire planet around $50B to prevent any type of catastrophe... what happened to him? He is called out as a hack even though he truly believes in global warming. It's just that his idea doesnt involve enslaving everyone under a global bureaucracy.

They have no real solutions. They can't produce an energy efficient alternative energy. The solutions they have proposed don't work i.e. cap & trade.

They're just a bunch of fucking pinko Commies.

Don't be ridiculous. Yes, some left wingers are using environmentalism as a pretext to expand the scope and powers of the state, but there's a difference between describing problems and proposing solutions. An environmentalist is merely someone who acknowledges the problem(s), such as they are, and suggests strategies for alleviating them. For example, Murray Rothbard has convincingly argued for privatization of our oceans as a solution to some of the environmental problems therein. If he's taking interest in environmental problems and proposing solutions to said problems, then I'd say he qualifies as an environmentalist at least to some degree.

If you're a right winger and you're honestly setting about arguing that environmental concern is strictly a left wing phenomenon, then you're misrepresenting your own side.

[Sonsowey]

Too many people let their distaste for liberals cloud their judgement.

Global Warming is as real as evolution. You can trick yourself into thinking otherwise if you want to, but you are thinking yourself too clever by half to believe this denialist scam.




These figures and facts are so well established and well known you must be really fooling yourself or completely unaware to not know what is going on. To argue against this you could get into "How do we know anything is real?" type logic...

I am sure many strong intelligent alpha males will not let some beta charts tell them what is real when they have the unshakeable frame of a climate denialist. I must admit, climate change denialists have very good frame control.

[Veloce]

Well many of us acknowledge that global warming is very real.

We're just skeptical when it comes to MAN MADE global warming.

[Chaos]

The most worrying thing with humans is that we keep shitting were we are eating.

[El Chinito loco]

(08-20-2014 12:20 AM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

These figures and facts are so well established and well known you must be really fooling yourself or completely unaware to not know what is going on. To argue against this you could get into "How do we know anything is real?" type logic...

I am sure many strong intelligent alpha males will not let some beta charts tell them what is real when they have the unshakeable frame of a climate denialist. I must admit, climate change denialists have very good frame control.

The problem is that it doesn't matter in the long run. You, I, and everyone else on this forum will be long dead in our various coffins/urns when the worst case scenario finally comes to pass. This means the whole argument can't be won in this generation.

The data i've seen seems to indicate it's irreversible anyways. Things are already too far gone and the ice shelves are melting at an astonishing rate.

Coastal cities and our favorite island nations are fucked for sure. If you have kids you should keep all this in mind.

[la_mode]

When winter stops being cold (besides tropical regions), I'll believe in "global warming".

[Sonsowey]

[Chaos]

Global warming this and global warning that.
What humans should focus on is stop fucking trashing this planet down.
It's not so damn hard to pick up your own rubbish.

Here in SEA it's unreal how they throw their trash around. It's completly meaningless to do so.
They almost eat,sleep and walk in their own trash.

Coming from a "clean" country where we take care of the rubbish in the most possible good way it feels like it makes no sense anymore when you see how most people on this planet are doing.

One thing I've always wondered about is why not more countries introduce the same returning system with bottles and cans like in the Nordics. I bet all the fucking glass bottles and cans would disappear from the streets in Russia and other countries if they would get 0,20€ back when they return it to a shop. Poor,greedy people would be more than happy to pick up the beer bottles after you.