Green Energy Red In The Face

[Skull Pilot]

God forbid we ever lead global research in something as useful as abundant emission free power huh?

"Electricity from nuclear power will be too cheap to meter!" --- the USA, the 1950s.

We're researching fusion power too. However, the realistic people aren't declaring that we'll all be running on fusion power in the near future, and how all those fusion-naysayers just hate clean energy.

It would have been if the government didn't shut own our nuclear research program

and in case you didn't notice fission is not fusion and it already exists in fact France gets almost 80% of its electricity from nuclear power plants

You are telling me? I'm the one who just posted that yesterday also there is no need to lecture me about fusion or fission I worked in a nuclear research center (lol ^3 !!!)

was I replying to you?

no I wasn't

And if your ability to pay attention to posts on a message board is so bad it's probably a good thing you don't work with nuclear power anymore

Yes you were:
Green Energy Red In The Face
When I called you out on your "China's prototype is slated to be up and running in less than 3 years" BS in your #78 post. After that every one of your posts were "polarbear said"
China has no intention to call for US $$ and slated a TMSR-LF for 2024 which is only 10 MW + another one in 2035.
Wtf would you know about nuclear reactors anyway?
About as much as Al Gore without a teleprompter or in your case a windbag without a WiFi

and where in that post did I mention fission or fusion?

I have posted links confirming the US involvement in China's rector program and links that mention the 2020 start up up their MSR

If you really knew anything about nuclear research you'd know we had both an MSR and an integral fast reactor up and running and that both of those designs are safer than the LWRs our government chose to approve.

Homer Simpson worked at a nuclear rector too after all

 

[polarbear]

"Electricity from nuclear power will be too cheap to meter!" --- the USA, the 1950s.

We're researching fusion power too. However, the realistic people aren't declaring that we'll all be running on fusion power in the near future, and how all those fusion-naysayers just hate clean energy.

It would have been if the government didn't shut own our nuclear research program

and in case you didn't notice fission is not fusion and it already exists in fact France gets almost 80% of its electricity from nuclear power plants

You are telling me? I'm the one who just posted that yesterday also there is no need to lecture me about fusion or fission I worked in a nuclear research center (lol ^3 !!!)

was I replying to you?

no I wasn't

And if your ability to pay attention to posts on a message board is so bad it's probably a good thing you don't work with nuclear power anymore

Yes you were:
Green Energy Red In The Face
When I called you out on your "China's prototype is slated to be up and running in less than 3 years" BS in your #78 post. After that every one of your posts were "polarbear said"
China has no intention to call for US $$ and slated a TMSR-LF for 2024 which is only 10 MW + another one in 2035.
Wtf would you know about nuclear reactors anyway?
About as much as Al Gore without a teleprompter or in your case a windbag without a WiFi

and where in that post did I mention fission or fusion?

I have posted links confirming the US involvement in China's rector program and links that mention the 2020 start up up their MSR

If you really knew anything about nuclear research you'd know we had both an MSR and an integral fast reactor up and running and that both of those designs are safer than the LWRs our government chose to approve.

Homer Simpson worked at a nuclear rector too after all

Aside from your wise crack in your post #95 "and in case you didn't notice fission is not fusion" nobody else mentioned fusion The only other time "fusion" came up when the cold fusion scam was used as an example what kind of pipe dreams have been hyped by so called experts and the media.
The rest of your statement you just made is more of the same crap using what you "know" which is not based on education or actual work experience. In your case it was Google + the autocomplete
There is zero evidence that MSRs are safer than pressurized water (light of heavy) reactors.
And it was not just the US that opted for PWR systems; everybody else did so, still does and very likely will continue to do so.
If you would have spent more time studying Physics and less time watching Homer Simpson episodes on TV you would know why

 

[Skull Pilot]

It would have been if the government didn't shut own our nuclear research program

and in case you didn't notice fission is not fusion and it already exists in fact France gets almost 80% of its electricity from nuclear power plants

You are telling me? I'm the one who just posted that yesterday also there is no need to lecture me about fusion or fission I worked in a nuclear research center (lol ^3 !!!)

was I replying to you?

no I wasn't

And if your ability to pay attention to posts on a message board is so bad it's probably a good thing you don't work with nuclear power anymore

Yes you were:
Green Energy Red In The Face
When I called you out on your "China's prototype is slated to be up and running in less than 3 years" BS in your #78 post. After that every one of your posts were "polarbear said"
China has no intention to call for US $$ and slated a TMSR-LF for 2024 which is only 10 MW + another one in 2035.
Wtf would you know about nuclear reactors anyway?
About as much as Al Gore without a teleprompter or in your case a windbag without a WiFi

and where in that post did I mention fission or fusion?

I have posted links confirming the US involvement in China's rector program and links that mention the 2020 start up up their MSR

If you really knew anything about nuclear research you'd know we had both an MSR and an integral fast reactor up and running and that both of those designs are safer than the LWRs our government chose to approve.

Homer Simpson worked at a nuclear rector too after all

Aside from your wise crack in your post #95 "and in case you didn't notice fission is not fusion" nobody else mentioned fusion The only other time "fusion" came up when the cold fusion scam was used as an example what kind of pipe dreams have been hyped by so called experts and the media.
The rest of your statement you just made is more of the same crap using what you "know" which is not based on education or actual work experience. In your case it was Google + the autocomplete
There is zero evidence that MSRs are safer than pressurized water (light of heavy) reactors.
And it was not just the US that opted for PWR systems; everybody else did so, still does and very likely will continue to do so.
If you would have spent more time studying Physics and less time watching Homer Simpson episodes on TV you would know why

In the post to which I replied to MAmooth where you mistakenly thought I was replying to you he did indeed mention fusion

So not only can you not realize I wasn't responding to you, you also have no idea to what I was responding to

Can you understand that Homer?

 

[mamooth]

By the way, it was the Republicans that voted to kill the experimental reactors. Another good conspiracy bites the dust.

Integral fast reactor - Wikipedia
---
By this time Senator Kerry and the majority of democrats had switched to supporting the continuation of the program. The final count was to 52 to 46 to terminate the program, with 36 republicans and 16 democrats voting for its termination, while just 8 republicans and 38 democrats voted for its continuation
---

 

[Skull Pilot]

By the way, it was the Republicans that voted to kill the experimental reactors. Another good conspiracy bites the dust.

Integral fast reactor - Wikipedia
---
By this time Senator Kerry and the majority of democrats had switched to supporting the continuation of the program. The final count was to 52 to 46 to terminate the program, with 36 republicans and 16 democrats voting for its termination, while just 8 republicans and 38 democrats voted for its continuation
---

Where did I mention any particular party being responsible?

Again unlike you IDGAF about which party the ass hats in DC belong to

 

[polarbear]

You are telling me? I'm the one who just posted that yesterday also there is no need to lecture me about fusion or fission I worked in a nuclear research center (lol ^3 !!!)

was I replying to you?

no I wasn't

And if your ability to pay attention to posts on a message board is so bad it's probably a good thing you don't work with nuclear power anymore

Yes you were:
Green Energy Red In The Face
When I called you out on your "China's prototype is slated to be up and running in less than 3 years" BS in your #78 post. After that every one of your posts were "polarbear said"
China has no intention to call for US $$ and slated a TMSR-LF for 2024 which is only 10 MW + another one in 2035.
Wtf would you know about nuclear reactors anyway?
About as much as Al Gore without a teleprompter or in your case a windbag without a WiFi

and where in that post did I mention fission or fusion?

I have posted links confirming the US involvement in China's rector program and links that mention the 2020 start up up their MSR

If you really knew anything about nuclear research you'd know we had both an MSR and an integral fast reactor up and running and that both of those designs are safer than the LWRs our government chose to approve.

Homer Simpson worked at a nuclear rector too after all

Aside from your wise crack in your post #95 "and in case you didn't notice fission is not fusion" nobody else mentioned fusion The only other time "fusion" came up when the cold fusion scam was used as an example what kind of pipe dreams have been hyped by so called experts and the media.
The rest of your statement you just made is more of the same crap using what you "know" which is not based on education or actual work experience. In your case it was Google + the autocomplete
There is zero evidence that MSRs are safer than pressurized water (light of heavy) reactors.
And it was not just the US that opted for PWR systems; everybody else did so, still does and very likely will continue to do so.
If you would have spent more time studying Physics and less time watching Homer Simpson episodes on TV you would know why

In the post to which I replied to MAmooth where you mistakenly thought I was replying to you he did indeed mention fusion

So not only can you not realize I wasn't responding to you, you also have no idea to what I was responding to

Can you understand that Homer?

That bozo has been on my ignore list for quite some time. Post after post you had "polarbear said" and then you posted the one you keep harping on without saying who you replied to..and now you tell me :
I replied to MAmooth where you mistakenly thought I was replying to you....and therefore I am the stupid one?
I wonder now what I have been missing since you and this "nuclear engineer" who claimed to be in charge of the reactor in a sub were discussing reactors . A couple of years ago the entire environment thread forum laughed their heads off when he posted a Wikipedia picture of a mock control room in the Smithsonian Museum telling us it's a photo of the reactor he was in charge of. If anybody got sucked in here it was you; the only thing I might have to regret is missing out on a good laugh watching 2 "nuclear experts" discussing nuclear physics

 

[Skull Pilot]

was I replying to you?

no I wasn't

And if your ability to pay attention to posts on a message board is so bad it's probably a good thing you don't work with nuclear power anymore

Yes you were:
Green Energy Red In The Face
When I called you out on your "China's prototype is slated to be up and running in less than 3 years" BS in your #78 post. After that every one of your posts were "polarbear said"
China has no intention to call for US $$ and slated a TMSR-LF for 2024 which is only 10 MW + another one in 2035.
Wtf would you know about nuclear reactors anyway?
About as much as Al Gore without a teleprompter or in your case a windbag without a WiFi

and where in that post did I mention fission or fusion?

I have posted links confirming the US involvement in China's rector program and links that mention the 2020 start up up their MSR

If you really knew anything about nuclear research you'd know we had both an MSR and an integral fast reactor up and running and that both of those designs are safer than the LWRs our government chose to approve.

Homer Simpson worked at a nuclear rector too after all

Aside from your wise crack in your post #95 "and in case you didn't notice fission is not fusion" nobody else mentioned fusion The only other time "fusion" came up when the cold fusion scam was used as an example what kind of pipe dreams have been hyped by so called experts and the media.
The rest of your statement you just made is more of the same crap using what you "know" which is not based on education or actual work experience. In your case it was Google + the autocomplete
There is zero evidence that MSRs are safer than pressurized water (light of heavy) reactors.
And it was not just the US that opted for PWR systems; everybody else did so, still does and very likely will continue to do so.
If you would have spent more time studying Physics and less time watching Homer Simpson episodes on TV you would know why

In the post to which I replied to MAmooth where you mistakenly thought I was replying to you he did indeed mention fusion

So not only can you not realize I wasn't responding to you, you also have no idea to what I was responding to

Can you understand that Homer?

That bozo has been on my ignore list for quite some time. Post after post you had "polarbear said" and then you posted the one you keep harping on without saying who you replied to..and now you tell me :
I replied to MAmooth where you mistakenly thought I was replying to you....and therefore I am the stupid one?
I wonder now what I have been missing since you and this "nuclear engineer" who claimed to be in charge of the reactor in a sub were discussing reactors . A couple of years ago the entire environment thread forum laughed their heads off when he posted a Wikipedia picture of a mock control room in the Smithsonian Museum telling us it's a photo of the reactor he was in charge of. If anybody got sucked in here it was you; the only thing I might have to regret is missing out on a good laugh watching 2 "nuclear experts" discussing nuclear physics

I never claimed to be an expert but you did, Homer.
And I don't recall ever conversing with a person claiming to be a nuclear engineer so maybe you want to provide proof of that with a link.

And just because you are included in a quote tree does not mean I was responding directly to one of your posts

 

[Billy_Bob]

We had a molten salt reactor built and running at Oakridge in the 60's and you think it's impossible to do it again 50 years later with better technology?

Nobody said that. I'm saying how that tiny prototype is nothing like the new miracle reactors you're describing. They are totally different animals.

The MSR was proven to be self limiting and would never melt down

No. That's totally wrong. A self-limiting reactor will still melt down from decay heat after shutdown, if the decay heat isn't actively removed by external cooling.

there are 2 types one that is a breeder reactor which recycles its own fuel and one that is a burner type reactor that will use the waste from all of our more expensive, much more dangerous and outdated light water reactors.

And both types are still vaporware.

The non breeder version of am MSR can be built off site and shipped by rail to its destination. These smaller reactors are plug and play into our existing grid and can provide people with locally produced power and add redundancy to our grid

These reactors can be buried underground which increases security,

Because terrorists can't dig when they take over the site of one of these thousands of reactors with minimal security around it. Oh wait, they can. But they don't even have to, because breaking the cooling connection with the outside would will work just as well. Decay heat is a bitch who will not be denied, as Fukushima showed.

they don't need copious amounts of water for cooling

They need copious amounts of something. You're describing something that sits in a hole in the ground and gets really, really hot. That's all it does. Some sort of substance has to transfer the heat away and do something useful with it. That something is almost always water.

and only need be refueled every 20 years or so

Just like any other reactor, if you run it at low power. One ship I was on went 20 years before it refueled the reactors.

We have spent money helping China build a prototype so I guess the plan is we let China produce them with our help and we borrow more money from China to buy them even though we could if we had any balls at all be the world leader in this technology that would provide abundant power at zero emission an it would work at 90% of capacity 24/7/365

No need for any other technology! Just drop it all and wait for the vaporware reactors to save us!

The Appalling Delusion of 100 Percent Renewables, Exposed

"The idea that the U.S. economy can be run solely with renewable energy — a claim that leftist politicians, environmentalists, and climate activists have endlessly promoted — has always been a fool’s errand. And on Monday, the National Academy of Sciences published a blockbuster paper by an all-star group of American scientists that says exactly that. The paper, by Chris Clack, formerly with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Colorado Boulder, and 20 other top scientists, appeared in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. It decimates the work of Mark Jacobson, the Stanford engineering professor whose wildly exaggerated claims about the economic and technical viability of a 100 percent renewable-energy system has made him a celebrity (he appeared on David Letterman’s show in 2013) and the hero of Sierra Clubbers, Bernie Sanders, and Hollywood movie stars, including Leonardo DiCaprio."

WHEN YOU DO THE MATH IT CALLS YOUR DREAM A FANTASY!

 

[polarbear]

Yes you were:
Green Energy Red In The Face
When I called you out on your "China's prototype is slated to be up and running in less than 3 years" BS in your #78 post. After that every one of your posts were "polarbear said"
China has no intention to call for US $$ and slated a TMSR-LF for 2024 which is only 10 MW + another one in 2035.
Wtf would you know about nuclear reactors anyway?
About as much as Al Gore without a teleprompter or in your case a windbag without a WiFi

and where in that post did I mention fission or fusion?

I have posted links confirming the US involvement in China's rector program and links that mention the 2020 start up up their MSR

If you really knew anything about nuclear research you'd know we had both an MSR and an integral fast reactor up and running and that both of those designs are safer than the LWRs our government chose to approve.

Homer Simpson worked at a nuclear rector too after all

Aside from your wise crack in your post #95 "and in case you didn't notice fission is not fusion" nobody else mentioned fusion The only other time "fusion" came up when the cold fusion scam was used as an example what kind of pipe dreams have been hyped by so called experts and the media.
The rest of your statement you just made is more of the same crap using what you "know" which is not based on education or actual work experience. In your case it was Google + the autocomplete
There is zero evidence that MSRs are safer than pressurized water (light of heavy) reactors.
And it was not just the US that opted for PWR systems; everybody else did so, still does and very likely will continue to do so.
If you would have spent more time studying Physics and less time watching Homer Simpson episodes on TV you would know why

In the post to which I replied to MAmooth where you mistakenly thought I was replying to you he did indeed mention fusion

So not only can you not realize I wasn't responding to you, you also have no idea to what I was responding to

Can you understand that Homer?

That bozo has been on my ignore list for quite some time. Post after post you had "polarbear said" and then you posted the one you keep harping on without saying who you replied to..and now you tell me :
I replied to MAmooth where you mistakenly thought I was replying to you....and therefore I am the stupid one?
I wonder now what I have been missing since you and this "nuclear engineer" who claimed to be in charge of the reactor in a sub were discussing reactors . A couple of years ago the entire environment thread forum laughed their heads off when he posted a Wikipedia picture of a mock control room in the Smithsonian Museum telling us it's a photo of the reactor he was in charge of. If anybody got sucked in here it was you; the only thing I might have to regret is missing out on a good laugh watching 2 "nuclear experts" discussing nuclear physics

I never claimed to be an expert but you did, Homer.
And I don't recall ever conversing with a person claiming to be a nuclear engineer so maybe you want to provide proof of that with a link.

And just because you are included in a quote tree does not mean I was responding directly to one of your posts

Hahaha you just posted a little while ago that this post you keep using to fault me was a debate you were having with that mamooth Siamese cat Why don't you ask "it" (since none of us are sure if it's a he a she or a sher) about hisher "Nuclear officer" service in the Navy. Could be you have a lot in common

 

[mamooth]

I wonder now what I have been missing since you and this "nuclear engineer" who claimed to be in charge of the reactor in a sub were discussing reactors

My sweet little cocksuck, would you want to bring this discussion of my credentials to the military forum and present it to the other vets? I'm game.

No? You mean you don't want your cowardly bitch ass getting reamed out by all the vets? After all, no vet likes a vet-spitter, and that's your specialty.

 

[SSDD]

I wonder now what I have been missing since you and this "nuclear engineer" who claimed to be in charge of the reactor in a sub were discussing reactors

My sweet little cocksuck, would you want to bring this discussion of my credentials to the military forum and present it to the other vets? I'm game.

No? You mean you don't want your cowardly bitch ass getting reamed out by all the vets? After all, no vet likes a vet-spitter, and that's your specialty.

Hairball, if you ever were in the military, you have turned out to be a disgrace...an embarrassment to whatever service was unfortunate enough to let you in. Benedcict Arnold, unfortunately started a long legacy of American soldiers who turned out to be completely lacking in any sort of honor...you merely carry on that tradition as evidenced by your unending bitterness, marxist ideals, and tendency to attempt to excuse the inexcusable and lie your ass of if it serves some purpose in that rats nest of a brain of yours.

 

[mamooth]

So, Polarbear gave you a "winner", but was too chicken to address my post. I need say no more about that.

It's not a surprise that you're a vet-spitter as well. Obviously, given your politics, you no doubt think very highly of Russian vets. It's only encountering American vets that sends your salivary glands into overdrive.

 

[Skull Pilot]

and where in that post did I mention fission or fusion?

I have posted links confirming the US involvement in China's rector program and links that mention the 2020 start up up their MSR

If you really knew anything about nuclear research you'd know we had both an MSR and an integral fast reactor up and running and that both of those designs are safer than the LWRs our government chose to approve.

Homer Simpson worked at a nuclear rector too after all

Aside from your wise crack in your post #95 "and in case you didn't notice fission is not fusion" nobody else mentioned fusion The only other time "fusion" came up when the cold fusion scam was used as an example what kind of pipe dreams have been hyped by so called experts and the media.
The rest of your statement you just made is more of the same crap using what you "know" which is not based on education or actual work experience. In your case it was Google + the autocomplete
There is zero evidence that MSRs are safer than pressurized water (light of heavy) reactors.
And it was not just the US that opted for PWR systems; everybody else did so, still does and very likely will continue to do so.
If you would have spent more time studying Physics and less time watching Homer Simpson episodes on TV you would know why

In the post to which I replied to MAmooth where you mistakenly thought I was replying to you he did indeed mention fusion

So not only can you not realize I wasn't responding to you, you also have no idea to what I was responding to

Can you understand that Homer?

That bozo has been on my ignore list for quite some time. Post after post you had "polarbear said" and then you posted the one you keep harping on without saying who you replied to..and now you tell me :
I replied to MAmooth where you mistakenly thought I was replying to you....and therefore I am the stupid one?
I wonder now what I have been missing since you and this "nuclear engineer" who claimed to be in charge of the reactor in a sub were discussing reactors . A couple of years ago the entire environment thread forum laughed their heads off when he posted a Wikipedia picture of a mock control room in the Smithsonian Museum telling us it's a photo of the reactor he was in charge of. If anybody got sucked in here it was you; the only thing I might have to regret is missing out on a good laugh watching 2 "nuclear experts" discussing nuclear physics

I never claimed to be an expert but you did, Homer.
And I don't recall ever conversing with a person claiming to be a nuclear engineer so maybe you want to provide proof of that with a link.

And just because you are included in a quote tree does not mean I was responding directly to one of your posts

Hahaha you just posted a little while ago that this post you keep using to fault me was a debate you were having with that mamooth Siamese cat Why don't you ask "it" (since none of us are sure if it's a he a she or a sher) about hisher "Nuclear officer" service in the Navy. Could be you have a lot in common

Wow you really are thick

In case you didn't notice Mamooth and I do not agree on nuclear power as an option. In fact Mamooth calls molten salt reactors vaporware even though we actually had one up and running

So once again it seems you don't understand the words being typed on this board

 

[flacaltenn]

"A leader on the California State Assembly told us “This is the issue of our time. We will not stop until there are solar panels on every home and windmills in every corner of the state. We are going to save this planet whether they want to be saved or not.” California Requires Solar Panels on All Homes and Windmills on All Farms

Oh they'll stop about the time that over 12% of electricity is entrusted to Solar/Wind. THey'll be enough dead bodies to FORCE them to wise up...

 

[SSDD]

It's not a surprise that you're a vet-spitter as well. Obviously, given your politics, you no doubt think very highly of Russian vets. It's only encountering American vets that sends your salivary glands into overdrive.

You don't have a clue hairball...I was in the service and left with the ideals they tried to teach me...I come from a long line of people who were in the military, and both my kids are also in the military...In typical fashion, you just can't manage to be right about anything. You are the one who spits, every day, on the ideals that the military stands for you worthless, marxist piece of drek.

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[Crick]

This post is not for the warmist crowd.....their minds a either closed or wiped clean.

But....for normal folks, we have yet another tiny misstep....
...and by tiny, I mean immense, and by misstep, I mean rip-roaring blunder.....
...by the Global Warming/Green Energy Cult.


1. "The justification for eliminating coal and mandating 50% wind and solar is heavily rooted in fears of catastrophic manmade climate change. But the alleged crisis has no basis in observed evidence.

2. If alarmists have evidence to the contrary, they must present it for review – including original temperature data, not the revised, homogenized data that American, Australian and other scientists have been presenting to support cataclysm claims and justify demands that we eliminate fossil fuels and switch to renewable energy, regardless of the unprecedented energy and economic risks that would pose.



3. The Wall Street Journal called it the energy shortage “no one saw coming.” Actually, a lot of people did see it coming. But intent on pursuing their “dangerous manmade climate change” and “renewable energy will save the planet” agendas, the political classes ignored them. So the stage was set.

4. As an Australia-wide heat wave sent temperatures soaring above 105 degrees F (40.6 C) in early 2017, air conditioning demand skyrocketed. But Adelaide, South Australia is heavily dependent on wind turbines for electricity generation – and there was no wind.

5. Regulators told the local natural gas-fired power plant to ramp up its output, but it couldn’t get enough gas to do so. ...regulators shut off power to 90,000 homes, leaving angry families sweltering in the dark.


6. ....Aussie politicians and the wind industry, the primary problem was businesses that exported 62% of Australia’s natural gas production in 2016, leaving insufficient supplies to run gas backup power plants that are supposed to step in when wind and solar power fail.




7. ....“didn’t ensure enough gas would remain at home” and couldn’t foresee temperatures soaring with no wind.
We should have had “a national interest test” in place to ensure domestic gas needs, said another.


8. ....fish, meat and produce rotted when freezers and refrigerators shut down. Business operations were interrupted or shut down. Rising electricity prices and unreliable power impacted smelters, factories and other businesses, causing many to lay off workers.


9. The blackouts and energy crisis “offer lessons for America, as it prepares to vastly increase natural gas shipments abroad,”
Insanity and Hypocrisy Down Under


10.

Political Chic claims there is no valid evidence for anthropogenic global warming - the reason why non-emitting energy technologies are a GOOD idea. For anyone out there with the slightest temptation to believe her lies, visit www.ipcc.ch. This is the website of the UN's International Panel on Climate Change. It has been reviewing the science of global warming since 1988 and has produced six "Assessment Reports" in that time. These are lengthy documents of varying technical level reviewing the conclusions of scientists around the world studying global warming, its causes and its effects. The lightest version is the Summary for Policy Makers. The heaviest version is The Physical Science Basis. If you have any interest in finding out for yourself whether or not there is any evidence to support man-made global warming and whether or not Political Chic is lying straight to your face, have a look.

I'll give you a hint, she's lying. She does it a LOT. Sadly, she's quite good at it.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Political Chic claims there is no valid evidence for anthropogenic global warming - the reason why non-emitting energy technologies are a GOOD idea. For anyone out there with the slightest temptation to believe her lies, visit www.ipcc.ch. This is the website of the UN's International Panel on Climate Change. It has been reviewing the science of global warming since 1988 and has produced six "Assessment Reports" in that time. These are lengthy documents of varying technical level reviewing the conclusions of scientists around the world studying global warming, its causes and its effects. The lightest version is the Summary for Policy Makers. The heaviest version is The Physical Science Basis. If you have any interest in finding out for yourself whether or not there is any evidence to support man-made global warming and whether or not Political Chic is lying straight to your face, have a look.

I'll give you a hint, she's lying. She does it a LOT. Sadly, she's quite good at it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Political Chic claims there is no valid evidence for anthropogenic global warming - the reason why non-emitting energy technologies are a GOOD idea. For anyone out there with the slightest temptation to believe her lies, visit www.ipcc.ch. This is the website of the UN's International Panel on Climate Change. It has been reviewing the science of global warming since 1988 and has produced six "Assessment Reports" in that time. These are lengthy documents of varying technical level reviewing the conclusions of scientists around the world studying global warming, its causes and its effects. The lightest version is the Summary for Policy Makers. The heaviest version is The Physical Science Basis. If you have any interest in finding out for yourself whether or not there is any evidence to support man-made global warming and whether or not Political Chic is lying straight to your face, have a look.

I'll give you a hint, she's lying. She does it a LOT. Sadly, she's quite good at it.

How about you simply quote what I say.



In the meantime, let me generalize your sort of stupidity, you hand-wringing, pearl-clutching simpleton.


How does that old saw go, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”
Is there a saying for ‘fool me a dozen times’?

1. Heterosexual Aids “A quarter of a century after the outbreak of Aids, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has accepted that the threat of a global heterosexual pandemic has disappeared.” Threat of world Aids pandemic among heterosexuals is over, report admits - Health News, Health & Families - The Independent

2. Killer African Bees “Killer bees” are nothing more than a hyped-up scam foisted on the public to milk federal research dollars, a group of southern Arizona” Beesource Beekeeping » Some Beekeepers Believe “Killer Bees” are Fraud

3. Swine Flu? “Richard Schabas, Ontario's former chief medical officer of health, said in an interview yesterday that the first wave of the virus this spring was not as dire as expected, and the number of people infected in the Southern Hemisphere, now in the middle of its regular flu season, is nowhere as bad as feared.” H5N1: Canadian health expert: Swine flu panic overblown

4. Mad Cow Disease [Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)] “However, a fair review of the evidence from Britain and France indicates that the threat to human health from BSE in the United States is minimal.” “Mad Cowâ€: Is the Media Milking an Overblown Threat? | CEI

5. Bird Flu was about to ‘jump’ from chickens to humans. “Doomsday predictions about bird flu seem to be spreading faster than the virus itself. But a small group of skeptics say the bird flu hype is overblown and ultimately harmful to the public’s health. There’s no guarantee bird flu will become a pandemic, and if it does there’s no guarantee it will kill millions of people.” Skeptics warn bird flu fears are overblown - Bird Flu- msnbc.com

6. "SARS is a media circus more than a medical crisis." Letter From Hong Kong - SARS Threat Overblown - NAM

7. “Silicone gel implants were taken off the market in 1992 amidst fears that they could be linked to cancer, autoimmune and connective tissue disorders (such as lupus). But since the FDA approved their use again in 2006 many women and their surgeons have opted to use them rather than the implants filled with saline (salt water)." Silicone breast implants: Are they safe? - Your Health

8. “Y2K taught us lessons that will always be applicable: Dont believe everything the experts tell you, and be especially skeptical of worst-case predictions for technology” . Some Perspective 5 Years After Y2K - Security from eWeek

9. “… during the early 1990s a massive cholera outbreak in Latin America caused 10,000 deaths as a result of countries refusing to use chlorine to disinfect water supplies because of the labeling of chlorine as a carcinogen by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)” Milloy SJ. Junk Science Judo - Self-Defense Against Health Scares and Scams. The Cato Institute, Washington, DC, 2001, p. 1.

10.”… in 1975 research showed a cancer-causing effect of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in rats. The ensuing panic led to the 1976 federal law banning their production. In 1999, the same researcher found no association with human cancer. But the federal law remains in force.” Junk Science Judo by Steven J. Milloy

11. “According to Marjorie Mazel Hecht and [San Jose State University] professor J. Gordon Edwards at 21st Century Home Page, DDT is safe and indeed saved and can save human lives, and Rachel Carson's Silent Spring is full of lies. According to them, the banning of DDT was politically motivated and went against the majority of scientific opinion…. No one has conclusively proved that DDT can give you cancer.” The Straight Dope: Was Rachel Carson a fraud and is DDT actually safe for humans?

12. Global Warming…"the sky is falling" with a political twist.

As H. L. Menken said,
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.



John T. Flynn wrote in “As We Go Marching,” that the change, a seismic change, was from classically liberal to statist governing in all three governments, featuring the welfare state and government planning and direction of society. In 1944, Flynn predicted that the policies of the New Deal would lead to ever increasing federal deficits. Thus, he stated, the New Deal had put itself in a position of needing a state of permanent crisis, or one of permanent war, to justify its social interventions: “It is born in crisis, lives on crisis, and cannot survive the era of crisis. By the very law of its nature it must create for itself, if it is to continue, fresh crises from year to year. Mussolini came to power in the postwar crisis and became himself a crisis in Italian life…Hitler’s story is the same. And our future is charted out upon the same turbulent road of permanent crisis.” John T. Flynn, “As We Go Marching,” p. 255, 256.

 

[Crick]

How about you simply quote what I say.



In the meantime, let me generalize your sort of stupidity, you hand-wringing, pearl-clutching simpleton.


How does that old saw go, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”
Is there a saying for ‘fool me a dozen times’?

1. Heterosexual Aids “A quarter of a century after the outbreak of Aids, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has accepted that the threat of a global heterosexual pandemic has disappeared.” Threat of world Aids pandemic among heterosexuals is over, report admits - Health News, Health & Families - The Independent

2. Killer African Bees “Killer bees” are nothing more than a hyped-up scam foisted on the public to milk federal research dollars, a group of southern Arizona” Beesource Beekeeping » Some Beekeepers Believe “Killer Bees” are Fraud

3. Swine Flu? “Richard Schabas, Ontario's former chief medical officer of health, said in an interview yesterday that the first wave of the virus this spring was not as dire as expected, and the number of people infected in the Southern Hemisphere, now in the middle of its regular flu season, is nowhere as bad as feared.” H5N1: Canadian health expert: Swine flu panic overblown

4. Mad Cow Disease [Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)] “However, a fair review of the evidence from Britain and France indicates that the threat to human health from BSE in the United States is minimal.” “Mad Cowâ€: Is the Media Milking an Overblown Threat? | CEI

5. Bird Flu was about to ‘jump’ from chickens to humans. “Doomsday predictions about bird flu seem to be spreading faster than the virus itself. But a small group of skeptics say the bird flu hype is overblown and ultimately harmful to the public’s health. There’s no guarantee bird flu will become a pandemic, and if it does there’s no guarantee it will kill millions of people.” Skeptics warn bird flu fears are overblown - Bird Flu- msnbc.com

6. "SARS is a media circus more than a medical crisis." Letter From Hong Kong - SARS Threat Overblown - NAM

7. “Silicone gel implants were taken off the market in 1992 amidst fears that they could be linked to cancer, autoimmune and connective tissue disorders (such as lupus). But since the FDA approved their use again in 2006 many women and their surgeons have opted to use them rather than the implants filled with saline (salt water)." Silicone breast implants: Are they safe? - Your Health

8. “Y2K taught us lessons that will always be applicable: Dont believe everything the experts tell you, and be especially skeptical of worst-case predictions for technology” . Some Perspective 5 Years After Y2K - Security from eWeek

9. “… during the early 1990s a massive cholera outbreak in Latin America caused 10,000 deaths as a result of countries refusing to use chlorine to disinfect water supplies because of the labeling of chlorine as a carcinogen by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)” Milloy SJ. Junk Science Judo - Self-Defense Against Health Scares and Scams. The Cato Institute, Washington, DC, 2001, p. 1.

10.”… in 1975 research showed a cancer-causing effect of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in rats. The ensuing panic led to the 1976 federal law banning their production. In 1999, the same researcher found no association with human cancer. But the federal law remains in force.” Junk Science Judo by Steven J. Milloy

11. “According to Marjorie Mazel Hecht and [San Jose State University] professor J. Gordon Edwards at 21st Century Home Page, DDT is safe and indeed saved and can save human lives, and Rachel Carson's Silent Spring is full of lies. According to them, the banning of DDT was politically motivated and went against the majority of scientific opinion…. No one has conclusively proved that DDT can give you cancer.” The Straight Dope: Was Rachel Carson a fraud and is DDT actually safe for humans?

12. Global Warming…"the sky is falling" with a political twist.

As H. L. Menken said,
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.



John T. Flynn wrote in “As We Go Marching,” that the change, a seismic change, was from classically liberal to statist governing in all three governments, featuring the welfare state and government planning and direction of society. In 1944, Flynn predicted that the policies of the New Deal would lead to ever increasing federal deficits. Thus, he stated, the New Deal had put itself in a position of needing a state of permanent crisis, or one of permanent war, to justify its social interventions: “It is born in crisis, lives on crisis, and cannot survive the era of crisis. By the very law of its nature it must create for itself, if it is to continue, fresh crises from year to year. Mussolini came to power in the postwar crisis and became himself a crisis in Italian life…Hitler’s story is the same. And our future is charted out upon the same turbulent road of permanent crisis.” John T. Flynn, “As We Go Marching,” p. 255, 256.

You're a piece of work. I bet you'd like to be the next Tucker Carlson. You know, the fellow routinely identified as "one of the scummiest humans on the planet". That fella.

Explain to us how the increased CO2 in the atmosphere could have FAILED to warm the planet.