US Climate Debate

In the real world
Monroe
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 5837
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:17 am

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Monroe »

Tsukiyumi wrote:Plain ol' fission is fine as a stopgap before fusion.
Good luck getting public support for that though :P
How many Minbari does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
None. They always surrender right before they finish the job and never tell you why.

-Remain Star Trek-
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Tsukiyumi »

Just tell them its a biofuel plant. Or a toy factory; whatever. Most people wouldn't know the difference. :lol:
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Aaron
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10988
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: Timepire Mobile Command Centre
Contact:

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Aaron »

If only we could harness the apathy and general ignorance of the voting public, we'd never want for energy again. :lol:
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Tsukiyumi »

:lol:
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Vic
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1185
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 12:20 pm
Location: Springfield MO

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Vic »

What gets me about such arguments is the all or nothing aspects, why does it have to be that way? So, when does Peak Power Usage occur, daytime, as in when the Sun shines? Whoa, no way, can't use Solar then :? ! Oh, but what about night, well I guess we use fossil fuels at night.

All it takes is actual use of that thing we generally use for a hat rack.

And then there is the infrastructure argument, "we don't have one in place, therefore we can't do it." Utter drivel, did the original oil barons give up because of no infrastructure? No, they built the necessary infrastructure, created a whole hell of a lot of jobs doing it too.
God is great, beer is good, and people are crazy.
.................................................Billy Currington
Aaron
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10988
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: Timepire Mobile Command Centre
Contact:

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Aaron »

Vic wrote:What gets me about such arguments is the all or nothing aspects, why does it have to be that way? So, when does Peak Power Usage occur, daytime, as in when the Sun shines? Whoa, no way, can't use Solar then :? ! Oh, but what about night, well I guess we use fossil fuels at night.

All it takes is actual use of that thing we generally use for a hat rack.

And then there is the infrastructure argument, "we don't have one in place, therefore we can't do it." Utter drivel, did the original oil barons give up because of no infrastructure? No, they built the necessary infrastructure, created a whole hell of a lot of jobs doing it too.
I guess folks never heard of batteries? :?
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Tyyr »

Vic wrote:What gets me about such arguments is the all or nothing aspects, why does it have to be that way? So, when does Peak Power Usage occur, daytime, as in when the Sun shines? Whoa, no way, can't use Solar then :? ! Oh, but what about night, well I guess we use fossil fuels at night.
Actually you're just wrong. Power usage peaks from approximately 6 to 10 am and 4 to 8 pm. Solar produces its peak output between about 10 am and 4 pm. Early morning and evening as the sun starts to set power production from solar panels drops off sharply. That's part of that 15% CF.
And then there is the infrastructure argument, "we don't have one in place, therefore we can't do it." Utter drivel, did the original oil barons give up because of no infrastructure? No, they built the necessary infrastructure, created a whole hell of a lot of jobs doing it too.
It's not an argument. Its information. It's an example of how underestimated the true cost of "going green" is. Try and keep up.
Cpl Kendall wrote:I guess folks never heard of batteries? :?
:laughroll:
Aaron
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10988
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: Timepire Mobile Command Centre
Contact:

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Aaron »

We should just totally put a bigass solar station in Sol's orbit and run an extension cord to Earth. Don't bother with any transformers, batteries or anything else, just plug the sucker right into the household grid.

We'll all be firefighters within the month, instant employment!
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Graham Kennedy »

Tyyr wrote:
GrahamKennedy wrote:I'm sorry, but you have no idea what you are talking about. There is no such thing as a "proven theory" in science.
Yes, I mis-stated. However it doesn't change the spirit of what I've said. That even if the planet is heating up there's insufficient evidence that humans are the cause to start putting massive sweeping legislation into effect.
A rather large majority of those who are experts working in the field say you are flat wrong.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Tyyr »

GrahamKennedy wrote:A rather large majority of those who are experts working in the field say you are flat wrong.
And I've seen quite a few who wouldn't.
Sionnach Glic
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 26014
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: Poblacht na hÉireann, Baile Átha Cliath

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Sionnach Glic »

Okay, since I think I'm the only mod/admin who hasn't weighed in on this subject yet, I'll keep out of it in favour of moderating it without bias.

So, how about both sides present sources from credible, peer-reviewed scientists to back their cases?
"You've all been selected for this mission because you each have a special skill. Professor Hawking, John Leslie, Phil Neville, the Wu-Tang Clan, Usher, the Sugar Puffs Monster and Daniel Day-Lewis! Welcome to Operation MindFuck!"
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Graham Kennedy »

Tyyr wrote:
GrahamKennedy wrote:A rather large majority of those who are experts working in the field say you are flat wrong.
And I've seen quite a few who wouldn't.
Depends on what you mean by "quite a few".

This source says that a survey showed 97% of climatologists believe the evidence points to global warming, and 82% believe the evidence shows that it's caused by humans. Since 2007 there hasn't been one single scientific body of national or international standing in the whole world which rejects these conclusions.

In February 2007, the IPCC released a summary of the forthcoming Fourth Assessment Report. According to this summary, the Fourth Assessment Report finds that human actions are "very likely" the cause of global warming, meaning a 90% or greater probability.

Frankly, at this point I think anybody who claims global warming isn't happening is in a place where they are ignoring the evidence because they don't want to believe it.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
IanKennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 6232
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by IanKennedy »

Tyyr wrote:Most scientists were also once in agreement that the world was flat,
No you are wrong that has never been a scientific theory. Even the ancient Greeks knew that the earth was round. For example Around 330 BC, Aristotle provided observational evidence for the spherical Earth.
email, ergo spam
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by Captain Seafort »

Plus, IIRC, calculated it's diameter to within a few hundred km.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
IanKennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 6232
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: US Climate Debate

Post by IanKennedy »

I wasn't sure it was him, but yes one of them did. Damn accurate for a man with a well and a compass. :)
email, ergo spam
Post Reply