Jump to content

Climate Hoax


Husker_Du

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Plasmodium said:

They are irrationally afraid of losing their creature comforts.

I've already addressed this.  The logical conclusion is to go back to how life was lived 200+ years ago.   A world that is not recognizable today.   Creature comforts such as medical magic to keep people alive, the end of small pox, near end to polio, leprosy, etc etc.   Those will be gone because there won't be the infrastructure to make those important life saving medicines.   This with the inevitable catastrophic loss of life due to lack of basic needful things.  

Yes, I suppose we could call those creature comforts. 

mspart

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mspart said:

I've already addressed this.  The logical conclusion is to go back to how life was lived 200+ years ago.   A world that is not recognizable today.   Creature comforts such as medical magic to keep people alive, the end of small pox, near end to polio, leprosy, etc etc.   Those will be gone because there won't be the infrastructure to make those important life saving medicines.   This with the inevitable catastrophic loss of life due to lack of basic needful things.  

Yes, I suppose we could call those creature comforts. 

mspart

You are irrationally afraid of losing those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

You are irrationally afraid of losing those.

So you are rationally afraid of losing those?   Or are you rationally optimistic to losing those?   I'm not sure what else to interpret from your statement. 

mspart

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, mspart said:

So you are rationally afraid of losing those?   Or are you rationally optimistic to losing those?   I'm not sure what else to interpret from your statement. 

mspart

I'm telling you life will move forward, energy sources will change AND you will not lose heat to your house.

Anyway, is this most definitely not a reason to deny climate change.

  • Fire 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is if we do this in a smart way.   Axing petrol before a viable solution is available is not a solution.  

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/01/why-the-ev-boom-could-put-a-major-strain-on-our-power-grid.html

 

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3

image.png.c3d5097640a6b4f4f20d068c55bb10e1.png

We are going to get rid of 60.4% of energy production from Fossil fuels.   Around here hydropower is what we rely on mostly but they want to tear the dams down for the salmon.   Puget Sound Orcas only eat salmon you know.   Yeah right. 

But again, to appease the CO2 alarmists, going back 250 years ago is the only thing that will do it. 

mspart

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

Orcas or not, climate change is reality.

The climate has always been changing.   So yes it is a reality.   But at what point would you draw the line at risking what I have already laid out (irrationally I might add) including people's lives?

It's not just conveniences that would go away.   It would take us back to an agrarian lifestyle where the majority grows food.   It's the logical conclusion to the hysteria that I'm talking about.   If there is another conclusion, please share.   Right now there is no solution for fossil fuel right now.   Solar and wind won't do it.   Nuclear will, but that will be a sea parting to get that done.   And with EVs becoming the way of the future, there will not be enough electricity to run everything.   I'm not seeing any other logical conclusion than going back to 1700's.  Or, start getting more efficient with the energy that we already have.   Like hybrids and LED lights. 

mspart

  • Fire 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

I'm literally not coming out of the house until the climate crisis is solved. i'm paralyzed with fear over the future of this planet.

 

also this:

 

Do what makes you make comfortable, including posting the equivalent of "Global warming is a hoax, FFS it is cold outside".

Bet you wouldn't be so smug if you lived in Kiribati.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

Do what makes you make comfortable, including posting the equivalent of "Global warming is a hoax, FFS it is cold outside".

Bet you wouldn't be so smug if you lived in Kiribati.

Obama doesn’t believe you.  He’s spent millions on two oceanfront properties since leaving the White House.  He doesn’t believe you and neither do I. 

  • Fire 2
  • Clown 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plasi makes a good point.   He is saying climate change is real, man is making the difference, and just wait, it will all get better.   Things will work out.   Not to worry.   

Plasi is not paralyzed by the rhetoric.   He is optimistic that a solution will be found.   I tend to agree with him on that.   But if you listen to the climate alarmists, we must go back to the 1500's to come out of this mess. 

mspart

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Offthemat said:

A solution to what?

I believe he is optimistic that a solution will be found to fossil fuel driven energy use from cars to power plants to home heating and farm machinery.  Some other "thing" will provide the energy needed.  Perhaps fusion or small fission reactors, or more efficient solar and wind (terrible idea really), or something out of the blue that we haven't considered yet.  

For instance a power cell that converts H2 to H2O would be the most obvious CO2 friendly thing to do but there is not much push for that.   Fusion that converts H2 to He would be really good too, but proof of that pudding is decades and decades away.   We have the former, why not use it?   They use them to power huge tractors and such. 

mspart

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mspart said:

I believe he is optimistic that a solution will be found to fossil fuel driven energy use from cars to power plants to home heating and farm machinery.  Some other "thing" will provide the energy needed.  Perhaps fusion or small fission reactors, or more efficient solar and wind (terrible idea really), or something out of the blue that we haven't considered yet.  

For instance a power cell that converts H2 to H2O would be the most obvious CO2 friendly thing to do but there is not much push for that.   Fusion that converts H2 to He would be really good too, but proof of that pudding is decades and decades away.   We have the former, why not use it?   They use them to power huge tractors and such. 

mspart

 

The Force, why don't we just use The Force?  

Screenshot_20231128-175349_Chrome.jpg.9402e9d4a22f549bc111542653668405.jpg

  • Clown 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, ionel said:

but I thought it was, hence why they agreed to switch to climate change.  🤷‍♀️

That’s right, turns out it was maybe even cooling a little.  But still, I want to be the first on the block to get a nuclear super-duty dually.  Or is it duelly?

  • Fire 1
  • Clown 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...