Is this forum dying as public interest in climate change wanes!

[skookerasbil]

Dang.....look around this forum since the announcement of Justice Kennedy leaving the SCOTUS. . Obviously, liberals in support of climate change action took a real kick to the nutsack yesterday. Place is a graveyard.....but let's face it, the chances of climate change action now well.....lol. But the truth is, in recent years, more and more of the public gives climate change a low priority >> Polls show most Americans believe in climate change, but give it low priority

Now after the gonad kick by Kennedy,
OMG....this forum is gonna be morgue-like. Sucks for skeptics.....might have to find a new place to make fun of the mental cases!

Anyway.....go Trump. Happy justice picking!!

 

[Pogo]

Yanno what, I've been here -- what, five and a half years, and in that entire time, and who knows how long before, you've been sitting here desperately trying to sell this song and dance that "nobody cares" along with your endless junkyard of stupid emoticons and the word "s0n".

That's --- let's see --- twenty nine thousand six hundred and fifty instances of "nobody caring". For nine years.

I get the impression you didn't really think this through.

But I look forward to another five, nine, however many more years of "s0n"s and their not caring about a 'dying' issue you've been pronouncing dead for nine years. Why stop now, it's going so well.


/thread

 

[Flash]

The joke of the AGW scam is only so funny for awhile.

 

[skookerasbil]

What can I say....beating up on progressives in public I guess has become somewhat of an obsession. But it's a hoot so i can't stop.

And a quick gander through page 1 and 2 of this forum tells one all they need to know: climate crusaders are in the distinct minority and skeptics.....ummm....are not!

 

[Sunsettommy]

There has been a sudden drop in warmist nonsense in the forum, maybe they are on the floor in a fetal ball crying in misery, that the world isn't ending soon enough.

 

[skookerasbil]

There has been a sudden drop in warmist nonsense in the forum, maybe they are on the floor in a fetal ball crying in misery, that the world isn't ending soon enough.

These people gotta be depressed as hell......think of the bubble some of the regulars on this forum. They have to be in stunned disbelief with the way the landscape is now.......I know Id be train wrecked. Even the k00kiest of activists occasionally get the wind totally taken out of their sails.....which of course, is a laughable moment for us. But Tom....we better get a little action in this place soon......need my daily dose of comic relief.

 

[Moonglow]

I want climate change, it's too hot..

 

[skookerasbil]

Damn place is a morgue

 

[abu afak]

Contrary to what you'll here from most here, incl half skookerAssbil's posts, people DO care.
It's cost-effective, creating jobs, AND a better planet.
**** the Throwback and Trumpov... Coal IS Dead
THIS is why China put Solar on Priority and put alot of Western mfg out of Biz.
Wall Street Journal:

Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels
In 2016, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—compared with $143 billion on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel-oil power plants,
By Russell Gold - Wall Street Journal
June 11, 2018
Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels

Global spending on renewable energy is outpacing investment in electricity from coal, natural gas and nuclear power plants, driven by Falling costs of producing wind/solar power.

More than Half of the power-generating capacity added around the world in recent years has been in renewable sources such as wind/solar, according to the Int'l Energy Agency.

In 2016, the latest year for which data is available, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—more than twice the $143 billion spent on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel oil power plants, according to the IEA. The Paris-based organization projects renewables will make up 56% of net generating capacity added through 2025.
Once supported overwhelmingly by cash-back incentives, tax credits and other government incentives, wind/solar-generation costs have fallen consistently for a decade, making renewable-power investment more competitive.

Renewable costs have fallen so far in the past few years that “Wind and Solar now represent the Lowest-cost option for generating electricity,” said Francis O’Sullivan, research director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative.

This is beginning to disrupt the business of making electricity and manufacturing generating equipment. Both General Electric Co. and Siemens AG are grappling with diminished demand for large gas-burning turbines and have announced layoffs. Meanwhile, mostly Asian-based manufacturers of solar panels are flourishing....

 

[IsaacNewton]

I rarely post on this website about climate because once you recognize the level of intelligence, or lack there of, of people that might have a discussion about it there is no point. Just as I don't participate on any website in 'discussions' about a Flat Earth. No point.

When a person or group of people show that they have accepted delusion, not as a 'possible' alternate but as concrete fact it's time to let them go wander out there in the wilderness. I feel sorry for such people but even discussing the topic with them lends their insane beliefs credence. And I just don't waste my time on such nonsense anymore.

 

[skookerasbil]

Contrary to what you'll here from most here, incl half skookerAssbil's posts, people DO care.
It's cost-effective, creating jobs, AND a better planet.
**** the Throwback and Trumpov... Coal IS Dead
THIS is why China put Solar on Priority and put alot of Western mfg out of Biz.
Wall Street Journal:

Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels
In 2016, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—compared with $143 billion on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel-oil power plants,
By Russell Gold - Wall Street Journal
June 11, 2018
Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels

Global spending on renewable energy is outpacing investment in electricity from coal, natural gas and nuclear power plants, driven by Falling costs of producing wind/solar power.

More than Half of the power-generating capacity added around the world in recent years has been in renewable sources such as wind/solar, according to the Int'l Energy Agency.

In 2016, the latest year for which data is available, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—more than twice the $143 billion spent on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel oil power plants, according to the IEA. The Paris-based organization projects renewables will make up 56% of net generating capacity added through 2025.
Once supported overwhelmingly by cash-back incentives, tax credits and other government incentives, wind/solar-generation costs have fallen consistently for a decade, making renewable-power investment more competitive.

Renewable costs have fallen so far in the past few years that “Wind and Solar now represent the Lowest-cost option for generating electricity,” said Francis O’Sullivan, research director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative.

This is beginning to disrupt the business of making electricity and manufacturing generating equipment. Both General Electric Co. and Siemens AG are grappling with diminished demand for large gas-burning turbines and have announced layoffs. Meanwhile, mostly Asian-based manufacturers of solar panels are flourishing....

Lol.....note the words "fallen", "diminished", "outpaced", "more than twice", "increasing".....terms used in the article! One will notice there are many loose association / vague terms used in such articles. They create a perception of some metric rise in renewable use. But only progressive bubble dwellers are fooled....because thinking on the margin is a decidedly difficult task for them.

Ahhh.....but when such lofty looking terms are put to the comparison test, the argument gets train wrecked. An instructive analogy is necessary here.....

A guy going on a blind date who likes big boobs can be told by a woman that she just got breast augmentation and "increased" ( the operative term ) her breasts by 100%. Only the progressive guy is immediately giddy. Most men are going to want to know what her breast size was to begin with.... but the progressive guy shows up for the date and realizes she was flat chested before her boob job. Suckers are always left holding the bad tab.....and in this case a crash and burn date. Progressives always fall for the loose association verbiage! ( that's why they watch CNN )

There are two questions when posed to a progressive, scuttles their argument?

1. At what cost?
2. As compared to what?

Progressives have been telling us for 10 years of the meteoric rise of renewable energy, yet wind and solar combined provide us with just 5% of our electrity. 5%.....25 years from now will be, ready for this....10%. ( go check the most recent Obama EIA Report ). Fossil fuels will be dominating for decades and decades, but skeptics are the "ignorant, deluded" people!!!


@www.whosnotwinning.com

 

[IsaacNewton]

Contrary to what you'll here from most here, incl half skookerAssbil's posts, people DO care.
It's cost-effective, creating jobs, AND a better planet.
**** the Throwback and Trumpov... Coal IS Dead
THIS is why China put Solar on Priority and put alot of Western mfg out of Biz.
Wall Street Journal:

Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels
In 2016, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—compared with $143 billion on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel-oil power plants,
By Russell Gold - Wall Street Journal
June 11, 2018
Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels

Global spending on renewable energy is outpacing investment in electricity from coal, natural gas and nuclear power plants, driven by Falling costs of producing wind/solar power.

More than Half of the power-generating capacity added around the world in recent years has been in renewable sources such as wind/solar, according to the Int'l Energy Agency.

In 2016, the latest year for which data is available, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—more than twice the $143 billion spent on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel oil power plants, according to the IEA. The Paris-based organization projects renewables will make up 56% of net generating capacity added through 2025.
Once supported overwhelmingly by cash-back incentives, tax credits and other government incentives, wind/solar-generation costs have fallen consistently for a decade, making renewable-power investment more competitive.

Renewable costs have fallen so far in the past few years that “Wind and Solar now represent the Lowest-cost option for generating electricity,” said Francis O’Sullivan, research director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative.

This is beginning to disrupt the business of making electricity and manufacturing generating equipment. Both General Electric Co. and Siemens AG are grappling with diminished demand for large gas-burning turbines and have announced layoffs. Meanwhile, mostly Asian-based manufacturers of solar panels are flourishing....

Lol.....note the words "fallen", "diminished", "outpaced", "more than twice", "increasing".....terms used in the article! One will notice there are many loose association / vague terms used in such articles. They create a perception of some metric rise in renewable use. But only progressive bubble dwellers are fooled....because thinking on the margin is a decidedly difficult task for them.

Ahhh.....but when such lofty looking terms are put to the comparison test, the argument gets train wrecked. An instructive analogy is necessary here.....

A guy going on a blind date who likes big boobs can be told by a woman that she just got breast augmentation and "increased" ( the operative term ) her breasts by 100%. Only the progressive guy is immediately giddy. Most men are going to want to know what her breast size was to begin with.... but the progressive guy shows up for the date and realizes she was flat chested before her boob job. Suckers are always left holding the bad tab.....and in this case a crash and burn date. Progressives always fall for the loose association verbiage! ( that's why they watch CNN )

There are two questions when posed to a progressive, scuttles their argument?

1. At what cost?
2. As compared to what?

Progressives have been telling us for 10 years of the meteoric rise of renewable energy, yet wind and solar combined provide us with just 5% of our electrity. 5%.....25 years from now will be, ready for this....10%. ( go check the most recent Obama EIA Report ). Fossil fuels will be dominating for decades and decades, but skeptics are the "ignorant, deluded" people!!!


@www.whosnotwinning.com

 

[skookerasbil]

Contrary to what you'll here from most here, incl half skookerAssbil's posts, people DO care.
It's cost-effective, creating jobs, AND a better planet.
**** the Throwback and Trumpov... Coal IS Dead
THIS is why China put Solar on Priority and put alot of Western mfg out of Biz.
Wall Street Journal:

Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels
In 2016, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—compared with $143 billion on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel-oil power plants,
By Russell Gold - Wall Street Journal
June 11, 2018
Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels

Global spending on renewable energy is outpacing investment in electricity from coal, natural gas and nuclear power plants, driven by Falling costs of producing wind/solar power.

More than Half of the power-generating capacity added around the world in recent years has been in renewable sources such as wind/solar, according to the Int'l Energy Agency.

In 2016, the latest year for which data is available, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—more than twice the $143 billion spent on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel oil power plants, according to the IEA. The Paris-based organization projects renewables will make up 56% of net generating capacity added through 2025.
Once supported overwhelmingly by cash-back incentives, tax credits and other government incentives, wind/solar-generation costs have fallen consistently for a decade, making renewable-power investment more competitive.

Renewable costs have fallen so far in the past few years that “Wind and Solar now represent the Lowest-cost option for generating electricity,” said Francis O’Sullivan, research director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative.

This is beginning to disrupt the business of making electricity and manufacturing generating equipment. Both General Electric Co. and Siemens AG are grappling with diminished demand for large gas-burning turbines and have announced layoffs. Meanwhile, mostly Asian-based manufacturers of solar panels are flourishing....

Lol.....note the words "fallen", "diminished", "outpaced", "more than twice", "increasing".....terms used in the article! One will notice there are many loose association / vague terms used in such articles. They create a perception of some metric rise in renewable use. But only progressive bubble dwellers are fooled....because thinking on the margin is a decidedly difficult task for them.

Ahhh.....but when such lofty looking terms are put to the comparison test, the argument gets train wrecked. An instructive analogy is necessary here.....

A guy going on a blind date who likes big boobs can be told by a woman that she just got breast augmentation and "increased" ( the operative term ) her breasts by 100%. Only the progressive guy is immediately giddy. Most men are going to want to know what her breast size was to begin with.... but the progressive guy shows up for the date and realizes she was flat chested before her boob job. Suckers are always left holding the bad tab.....and in this case a crash and burn date. Progressives always fall for the loose association verbiage! ( that's why they watch CNN )

There are two questions when posed to a progressive, scuttles their argument?

1. At what cost?
2. As compared to what?

Progressives have been telling us for 10 years of the meteoric rise of renewable energy, yet wind and solar combined provide us with just 5% of our electrity. 5%.....25 years from now will be, ready for this....10%. ( go check the most recent Obama EIA Report ). Fossil fuels will be dominating for decades and decades, but skeptics are the "ignorant, deluded" people!!!


@www.whosnotwinning.com

Impressive response!

Only matters who's winning in the real world s0n! Taking a bow in front of billboard is ghey. Renewable energy is real romantic to to dreamers among us....but in the real world, its fringe. Know what that means? The consensus science has impressed nobody making public policy for climate action. That makes the science little more than an internet hobby for people who have no real responsibilities.

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[IsaacNewton]

Contrary to what you'll here from most here, incl half skookerAssbil's posts, people DO care.
It's cost-effective, creating jobs, AND a better planet.
**** the Throwback and Trumpov... Coal IS Dead
THIS is why China put Solar on Priority and put alot of Western mfg out of Biz.
Wall Street Journal:

Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels
In 2016, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—compared with $143 billion on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel-oil power plants,
By Russell Gold - Wall Street Journal
June 11, 2018
Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels

Global spending on renewable energy is outpacing investment in electricity from coal, natural gas and nuclear power plants, driven by Falling costs of producing wind/solar power.

More than Half of the power-generating capacity added around the world in recent years has been in renewable sources such as wind/solar, according to the Int'l Energy Agency.

In 2016, the latest year for which data is available, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—more than twice the $143 billion spent on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel oil power plants, according to the IEA. The Paris-based organization projects renewables will make up 56% of net generating capacity added through 2025.
Once supported overwhelmingly by cash-back incentives, tax credits and other government incentives, wind/solar-generation costs have fallen consistently for a decade, making renewable-power investment more competitive.

Renewable costs have fallen so far in the past few years that “Wind and Solar now represent the Lowest-cost option for generating electricity,” said Francis O’Sullivan, research director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative.

This is beginning to disrupt the business of making electricity and manufacturing generating equipment. Both General Electric Co. and Siemens AG are grappling with diminished demand for large gas-burning turbines and have announced layoffs. Meanwhile, mostly Asian-based manufacturers of solar panels are flourishing....

Lol.....note the words "fallen", "diminished", "outpaced", "more than twice", "increasing".....terms used in the article! One will notice there are many loose association / vague terms used in such articles. They create a perception of some metric rise in renewable use. But only progressive bubble dwellers are fooled....because thinking on the margin is a decidedly difficult task for them.

Ahhh.....but when such lofty looking terms are put to the comparison test, the argument gets train wrecked. An instructive analogy is necessary here.....

A guy going on a blind date who likes big boobs can be told by a woman that she just got breast augmentation and "increased" ( the operative term ) her breasts by 100%. Only the progressive guy is immediately giddy. Most men are going to want to know what her breast size was to begin with.... but the progressive guy shows up for the date and realizes she was flat chested before her boob job. Suckers are always left holding the bad tab.....and in this case a crash and burn date. Progressives always fall for the loose association verbiage! ( that's why they watch CNN )

There are two questions when posed to a progressive, scuttles their argument?

1. At what cost?
2. As compared to what?

Progressives have been telling us for 10 years of the meteoric rise of renewable energy, yet wind and solar combined provide us with just 5% of our electrity. 5%.....25 years from now will be, ready for this....10%. ( go check the most recent Obama EIA Report ). Fossil fuels will be dominating for decades and decades, but skeptics are the "ignorant, deluded" people!!!


@www.whosnotwinning.com

Impressive response!

Only matters who's winning in the real world s0n! Taking a bow in front of billboard is ghey. Renewable energy is real romantic to to dreamers among us....but in the real world, its fringe. Know what that means? The consensus science has impressed nobody making public policy for climate action. That makes the science little more than an internet hobby for people who have no real responsibilities.

Yes we know your delusions are unshakeable. Global Warming is just too scary for you so you hide in your basement. Good for you cupcake.

 

[skookerasbil]

Contrary to what you'll here from most here, incl half skookerAssbil's posts, people DO care.
It's cost-effective, creating jobs, AND a better planet.
**** the Throwback and Trumpov... Coal IS Dead
THIS is why China put Solar on Priority and put alot of Western mfg out of Biz.
Wall Street Journal:

Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels
In 2016, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—compared with $143 billion on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel-oil power plants,
By Russell Gold - Wall Street Journal
June 11, 2018
Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels

Global spending on renewable energy is outpacing investment in electricity from coal, natural gas and nuclear power plants, driven by Falling costs of producing wind/solar power.

More than Half of the power-generating capacity added around the world in recent years has been in renewable sources such as wind/solar, according to the Int'l Energy Agency.

In 2016, the latest year for which data is available, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—more than twice the $143 billion spent on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel oil power plants, according to the IEA. The Paris-based organization projects renewables will make up 56% of net generating capacity added through 2025.
Once supported overwhelmingly by cash-back incentives, tax credits and other government incentives, wind/solar-generation costs have fallen consistently for a decade, making renewable-power investment more competitive.

Renewable costs have fallen so far in the past few years that “Wind and Solar now represent the Lowest-cost option for generating electricity,” said Francis O’Sullivan, research director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative.

This is beginning to disrupt the business of making electricity and manufacturing generating equipment. Both General Electric Co. and Siemens AG are grappling with diminished demand for large gas-burning turbines and have announced layoffs. Meanwhile, mostly Asian-based manufacturers of solar panels are flourishing....

Lol.....note the words "fallen", "diminished", "outpaced", "more than twice", "increasing".....terms used in the article! One will notice there are many loose association / vague terms used in such articles. They create a perception of some metric rise in renewable use. But only progressive bubble dwellers are fooled....because thinking on the margin is a decidedly difficult task for them.

Ahhh.....but when such lofty looking terms are put to the comparison test, the argument gets train wrecked. An instructive analogy is necessary here.....

A guy going on a blind date who likes big boobs can be told by a woman that she just got breast augmentation and "increased" ( the operative term ) her breasts by 100%. Only the progressive guy is immediately giddy. Most men are going to want to know what her breast size was to begin with.... but the progressive guy shows up for the date and realizes she was flat chested before her boob job. Suckers are always left holding the bad tab.....and in this case a crash and burn date. Progressives always fall for the loose association verbiage! ( that's why they watch CNN )

There are two questions when posed to a progressive, scuttles their argument?

1. At what cost?
2. As compared to what?

Progressives have been telling us for 10 years of the meteoric rise of renewable energy, yet wind and solar combined provide us with just 5% of our electrity. 5%.....25 years from now will be, ready for this....10%. ( go check the most recent Obama EIA Report ). Fossil fuels will be dominating for decades and decades, but skeptics are the "ignorant, deluded" people!!!


@www.whosnotwinning.com

Impressive response!

Only matters who's winning in the real world s0n! Taking a bow in front of billboard is ghey. Renewable energy is real romantic to to dreamers among us....but in the real world, its fringe. Know what that means? The consensus science has impressed nobody making public policy for climate action. That makes the science little more than an internet hobby for people who have no real responsibilities.

Yes we know your delusions are unshakeable. Global Warming is just too scary for you so you hide in your basement. Good for you cupcake.

Hmmmm.....actually, nobody is caring about global warming. If you can show otherwise ( beyond peoples "feelings" ) we'd love to see it. Oh....links please!

 

[Sunsettommy]

Contrary to what you'll here from most here, incl half skookerAssbil's posts, people DO care.
It's cost-effective, creating jobs, AND a better planet.
**** the Throwback and Trumpov... Coal IS Dead
THIS is why China put Solar on Priority and put alot of Western mfg out of Biz.
Wall Street Journal:

Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels
In 2016, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—compared with $143 billion on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel-oil power plants,
By Russell Gold - Wall Street Journal
June 11, 2018
Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels

Global spending on renewable energy is outpacing investment in electricity from coal, natural gas and nuclear power plants, driven by Falling costs of producing wind/solar power.

More than Half of the power-generating capacity added around the world in recent years has been in renewable sources such as wind/solar, according to the Int'l Energy Agency.

In 2016, the latest year for which data is available, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—more than twice the $143 billion spent on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel oil power plants, according to the IEA. The Paris-based organization projects renewables will make up 56% of net generating capacity added through 2025.
Once supported overwhelmingly by cash-back incentives, tax credits and other government incentives, wind/solar-generation costs have fallen consistently for a decade, making renewable-power investment more competitive.

Renewable costs have fallen so far in the past few years that “Wind and Solar now represent the Lowest-cost option for generating electricity,” said Francis O’Sullivan, research director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative.

This is beginning to disrupt the business of making electricity and manufacturing generating equipment. Both General Electric Co. and Siemens AG are grappling with diminished demand for large gas-burning turbines and have announced layoffs. Meanwhile, mostly Asian-based manufacturers of solar panels are flourishing....

Lol.....note the words "fallen", "diminished", "outpaced", "more than twice", "increasing".....terms used in the article! One will notice there are many loose association / vague terms used in such articles. They create a perception of some metric rise in renewable use. But only progressive bubble dwellers are fooled....because thinking on the margin is a decidedly difficult task for them.

Ahhh.....but when such lofty looking terms are put to the comparison test, the argument gets train wrecked. An instructive analogy is necessary here.....

A guy going on a blind date who likes big boobs can be told by a woman that she just got breast augmentation and "increased" ( the operative term ) her breasts by 100%. Only the progressive guy is immediately giddy. Most men are going to want to know what her breast size was to begin with.... but the progressive guy shows up for the date and realizes she was flat chested before her boob job. Suckers are always left holding the bad tab.....and in this case a crash and burn date. Progressives always fall for the loose association verbiage! ( that's why they watch CNN )

There are two questions when posed to a progressive, scuttles their argument?

1. At what cost?
2. As compared to what?

Progressives have been telling us for 10 years of the meteoric rise of renewable energy, yet wind and solar combined provide us with just 5% of our electrity. 5%.....25 years from now will be, ready for this....10%. ( go check the most recent Obama EIA Report ). Fossil fuels will be dominating for decades and decades, but skeptics are the "ignorant, deluded" people!!!


@www.whosnotwinning.com

Impressive response!

Only matters who's winning in the real world s0n! Taking a bow in front of billboard is ghey. Renewable energy is real romantic to to dreamers among us....but in the real world, its fringe. Know what that means? The consensus science has impressed nobody making public policy for climate action. That makes the science little more than an internet hobby for people who have no real responsibilities.

Yes we know your delusions are unshakeable. Global Warming is just too scary for you so you hide in your basement. Good for you cupcake.

You are welcome to hide in your basement weeping over a non existent fear.

 

[Pogo]

Contrary to what you'll here from most here, incl half skookerAssbil's posts, people DO care.
It's cost-effective, creating jobs, AND a better planet.
**** the Throwback and Trumpov... Coal IS Dead
THIS is why China put Solar on Priority and put alot of Western mfg out of Biz.
Wall Street Journal:

Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels
In 2016, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—compared with $143 billion on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel-oil power plants,
By Russell Gold - Wall Street Journal
June 11, 2018
Global Investment in Wind and Solar Energy Is Outshining Fossil Fuels

Global spending on renewable energy is outpacing investment in electricity from coal, natural gas and nuclear power plants, driven by Falling costs of producing wind/solar power.

More than Half of the power-generating capacity added around the world in recent years has been in renewable sources such as wind/solar, according to the Int'l Energy Agency.

In 2016, the latest year for which data is available, about $297 billion was spent on renewables—more than twice the $143 billion spent on new nuclear, coal, gas and fuel oil power plants, according to the IEA. The Paris-based organization projects renewables will make up 56% of net generating capacity added through 2025.
Once supported overwhelmingly by cash-back incentives, tax credits and other government incentives, wind/solar-generation costs have fallen consistently for a decade, making renewable-power investment more competitive.

Renewable costs have fallen so far in the past few years that “Wind and Solar now represent the Lowest-cost option for generating electricity,” said Francis O’Sullivan, research director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative.

This is beginning to disrupt the business of making electricity and manufacturing generating equipment. Both General Electric Co. and Siemens AG are grappling with diminished demand for large gas-burning turbines and have announced layoffs. Meanwhile, mostly Asian-based manufacturers of solar panels are flourishing....

Lol.....note the words "fallen", "diminished", "outpaced", "more than twice", "increasing".....terms used in the article! One will notice there are many loose association / vague terms used in such articles. They create a perception of some metric rise in renewable use. But only progressive bubble dwellers are fooled....because thinking on the margin is a decidedly difficult task for them.

Ahhh.....but when such lofty looking terms are put to the comparison test, the argument gets train wrecked. An instructive analogy is necessary here.....

A guy going on a blind date who likes big boobs can be told by a woman that she just got breast augmentation and "increased" ( the operative term ) her breasts by 100%. Only the progressive guy is immediately giddy. Most men are going to want to know what her breast size was to begin with.... but the progressive guy shows up for the date and realizes she was flat chested before her boob job. Suckers are always left holding the bad tab.....and in this case a crash and burn date. Progressives always fall for the loose association verbiage! ( that's why they watch CNN )

There are two questions when posed to a progressive, scuttles their argument?

1. At what cost?
2. As compared to what?

Progressives have been telling us for 10 years of the meteoric rise of renewable energy, yet wind and solar combined provide us with just 5% of our electrity. 5%.....25 years from now will be, ready for this....10%. ( go check the most recent Obama EIA Report ). Fossil fuels will be dominating for decades and decades, but skeptics are the "ignorant, deluded" people!!!


@www.whosnotwinning.com

Impressive response!

Only matters who's winning in the real world s0n! Taking a bow in front of billboard is ghey. Renewable energy is real romantic to to dreamers among us....but in the real world, its fringe. Know what that means? The consensus science has impressed nobody making public policy for climate action. That makes the science little more than an internet hobby for people who have no real responsibilities.

Yes we know your delusions are unshakeable. Global Warming is just too scary for you so you hide in your basement. Good for you cupcake.

Hmmmm.....actually, nobody is caring about global warming. If you can show otherwise ( beyond peoples "feelings" ) we'd love to see it. Oh....links please!

Day 2 of the latest thread, and number 29,696 overall, of "s0n" continuing his nine-year-long desperation pleading that "nobody cares".

Can't imagine how many posts we'd have if people actually did care....

 

[skookerasbil]

What can I say? Evidently one my missions in life is to enlighten the confused about what we call The Big Picture. That I make the heads of progressives explode in the process tells me I am doing so in exceedingly astute fasion!

@www.bannergazingisghey.com

 

[MarathonMike]

The Warmers have only a limited amount of energy (see what I did there?). By the time they get through Trump's morning tweets, they need a nap and then the day's about gone.