Climategate--The Final Chapter
12-13-2012, 02:50 PM
#441
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
And again, real scientists would not affirm what they can not prove (unless they have a financial incentive). Real scientists would not deny what they can not unprove (hence the real scientists dont deny the possibility). Which side of the debate is on the side of science; the ones that say the science is settled or the ones that say we dont know? I know which side I would side with.
12-14-2012, 04:58 AM
#442
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,026
Given a political bias, a driving goal to obtain ever present grant money (from Uncle Sam), a desire to obtain notoriety, blind ignorance, and the overriding desire to shove an opinion down the throat of everyone, any organization, group, or scientific body will ascribe to anything!
Scientific proof? We don’t need no stinking scientific proof!
Scientific proof? We don’t need no stinking scientific proof!
12-26-2012, 09:25 PM
#443
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Why we are doomed:
Phil Gramm: The Multiple Distortions of Wind Subsidies - WSJ.com
"The costs of wind subsidies are extraordinarily high—$52.48 per one million watt hours generated, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. By contrast, the subsidies for generating the same amount of electricity from nuclear power are $3.10, from hydropower 84 cents, from coal 64 cents, and from natural gas 63 cents."
"But the cost to taxpayers is only part of the problem. Subsidized, wind-generated electricity is displacing other, much cheaper sources of power. The subsidies are so high that wind-power producers can pay utilities to take the electricity they produce and still make a profit. Such "negative pricing" has occurred for some time in the Midwest, the Pacific Northwest and in Texas—and, according to the Energy Information Administration, it will likely grow."
"When electricity demand peaked in Chicago on July 6, 2012, wind energy, which comprised 2,700 megawatts of capacity, was able to supply only four megawatts of electricity, a stunning 99.8% failure rate. In Europe, one day this February wind power produced almost a third of Germany's electricity—but four days later it produced none (it was a still day)."
Phil Gramm: The Multiple Distortions of Wind Subsidies - WSJ.com
"The costs of wind subsidies are extraordinarily high—$52.48 per one million watt hours generated, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. By contrast, the subsidies for generating the same amount of electricity from nuclear power are $3.10, from hydropower 84 cents, from coal 64 cents, and from natural gas 63 cents."
"But the cost to taxpayers is only part of the problem. Subsidized, wind-generated electricity is displacing other, much cheaper sources of power. The subsidies are so high that wind-power producers can pay utilities to take the electricity they produce and still make a profit. Such "negative pricing" has occurred for some time in the Midwest, the Pacific Northwest and in Texas—and, according to the Energy Information Administration, it will likely grow."
"When electricity demand peaked in Chicago on July 6, 2012, wind energy, which comprised 2,700 megawatts of capacity, was able to supply only four megawatts of electricity, a stunning 99.8% failure rate. In Europe, one day this February wind power produced almost a third of Germany's electricity—but four days later it produced none (it was a still day)."
12-27-2012, 05:30 AM
#444
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,026
If it is a flop, a scam, or a pipe dream, never fear; Uncle Sam will subsidize it and call it a success story!
Which reminds me. I better get my personal “Enteric Fermentation” recycling system subsidized by Uncle Sam so I can become rich and suck off of the Uncle Sam spigot.
Which reminds me. I better get my personal “Enteric Fermentation” recycling system subsidized by Uncle Sam so I can become rich and suck off of the Uncle Sam spigot.
01-06-2013, 10:19 PM
#446
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,105
Hmmmm ... Antarctica's ice shelf is growing and Russian's are freezing to death with record cold.
Russians Freezing to Death in Freakish Cold Snap | Winter in Russia Kills 45 | LiveScience
Russians Freezing to Death in Freakish Cold Snap | Winter in Russia Kills 45 | LiveScience
01-09-2013, 01:51 PM
#448
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
State of the Climate | Global Analysis | January 2012
Your US centric view is not the big picture. In the big picture we have gained about sixth tenths of a degree F in the last century, which confirms the 15,000 year old warming trend. No news here.
Last edited by jungle; 01-09-2013 at 02:06 PM.
01-10-2013, 04:45 AM
#450
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
If I was concerned, I very much doubt my concern would have had any influence at all on those events, nor would any action I might have taken prevented them from happening.
What are your concerns?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
