The climate crusaders say coal is dying! LOL!!

[jc456]

But only Disney dwellers think that!!

Coal Soars on Rising Demand from Asia

Gigantic % increases in coal imports the first 5 months of 2018! China alone imported over 100 million tons.........India, 75 million. China imports up over 10% this year....India up over 3%. And that's imports! These countries are opening new coal plants every month!! It's called demand s0ns...
Part of the real world.

Meanwhile you look at renewables, most of what we get is from hydro ( wind and solar a small % in the world of renewables ).

Members of the religion fall all over themselves all the time in here telling us, "Coal is dead!!"

Really s0ns!!

@www.whosnotwinning.com

A battle won, a war lost?

Why China's War on Pollution Affects the Whole World

"China is cracking down on pollution like never before, with new green policies so hard-hitting and extensive they can be felt across the world, transforming everything from electric vehicle demand to commodities markets.

"Four decades of breakneck economic growth turned China into the world’s biggest carbon emitter. But now the government is trying to change that without damaging the economy—and perhaps even use its green policies to become a leader in technological innovation. So, as lawmakers attend the annual National People’s Congress, here’s a look at the impact of the environmental focus, at home and abroad."

Obama was right on, and the polluters and ^$#$%%^**'s like S. Kook. have benefited China's in the race to create profitable green and renewable energy.

Q. Is it greed, or stupidity which motives S. Kook.?

You are such a sucker s0n....consistently fooled by vague semantics like "increasing"...."leader"...."hard hitting green policies" .

You dummy.....by 2040, China's coal production will be 50% higher than it is today. Sure renewables are on the rise but like any progressive argument, it completely falls apart when it has to answer the question, "As compared to what?"

China’s Growing Coal Use Is World’s Growing Problem

Falling for loose association shit is an art form for progressives. Tune into CNN for just 5 minutes, any night, any show, and check out the barrage of loose associations the host tosses out. The suckers fall for the semantic fakery every time!!

Why the hard on for green and renewable energy? Tell us how coal is clean and good for our water, atmosphere and soil? Mills ran on streams built American Cities in the years before steel, and wood provide heat for cooking and warmth.

In the late 19th century blacksmiths feared they would be out of work when oil became king, and they were. They become mechanics and teamsters; we have evolved - at least some of us - to recognize Coal and oil harm the planet and can be replaced.

Hey man...call me a killjoy. I have little idealism left in my soul at my age. Indeed, I am a fatalist. Would highly desire Kim K to come sit on my face tonight, but guess what? It ain't happening.

Nor is renewable energy relative to fossil fuels. Not happening to any degree even close to the dreams of the progressives. I'd sure as shit love less crap going into the air, but nobody is stopping India and China in our lifetimes. 100% certainty..... sucks for all of us but guess what we are just peasants in the real world!! What can you do?!!!

Fire Trump and rejoin the Paris Agreement, Kyoto protocol and stop the denial. Climate Change is not a conspiracy theory, it is real and it is happening.

Join the majority and send the Plutocrats and those Congress Critters out of government for good. And find a job that does not harm our air, water and soil.

yeah cause that position won you the white house right?

And because the people said no, you want to take away everyone elses rights.

you enjoy forcing your position on others.

 

[jc456]

Coal energy plants are expected to increase by 43% over the coming years. Some dying industry.

Fritz Vahrenholts Sonnenkolumne 5/18: Klimaempfindlichkeit gegenüber CO2 und die Kohlekommission | Die kalte Sonne

clip: In China 280,000 MW and in India 174,000 MW are going to be added. By comparison: the entire brown coal fleet in Germany has a capacity of 22,700 MW. 1600 coal-fired power plants will be built in 62 countries across the world, most of them, by the way, will be built by Chinese power plant builders with the help of credits from China. Approximately 15,300 MW in Pakistan, 16,000 in Bangladesh, and even Myanmar with 5100 MW. (Source: South China Morning Post).

they build them because coal is reliable and constant energy. PERIOD. Nuclear is like voodoo energy with ghosts of past experiences.

 

[SSDD]

Got to say Wry Catcher...it is refreshing to see one of you guys fold up and roll over so easily. Usually the denial goes on for pages with you guys giving any number of impotent excuses for not being able to simply post a single solitary piece of observed measured data that supports the man made climate change hypothesis over natural variability. The thundering sound of your silence in response to the challenge speaks volumes.

I can only guess that you agree now that the arctic ice is at a greater extent now than it has been for most of the past 10,000 years and that the inuit, and polar bears, having lived through 9500 years of less ice than present are not in any actual danger but are just being used as tools by dishonest fearmongers.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Wry Catcher....I can't help but notice that you seem to be avoiding my post asking you for a single piece of observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability? You talk as if you have seen evidence that supports the claims of man made climate change over natural variability. One would expect that you would gladly slap me down with such evidence if you had seen it.

The fact is, that no such evidence exists, and you certainly won't be posting it. You will either avoid answering, or give some excuse as to why you can't be bothered like all other warmers who are faced with the fact that their position is one of belief...not evidence.

Antarctica's ice melt 'has accelerated'
Antarctica losing three TRILLION tons of ice in the last 25 years, at an ever-accelerating rate, probably doesn't qualify as 'evidence', according to your tragically blinkered view.
But that's how it goes...

Gosh did you bother to check the math in this fella, they are INSIGNIFICANT!

 

[Sunsettommy]

Here is the ABSTRACT from NATURE journal that pretty much destroyed itself:

"Abstract
The Antarctic Ice Sheet is an important indicator of climate change and driver of sea-level rise. Here we combine satellite observations of its changing volume, flow and gravitational attraction with modelling of its surface mass balance to show that it lost 2,720 ± 1,390 billion tonnes of ice between 1992 and 2017, which corresponds to an increase in mean sea level of 7.6 ± 3.9 millimetres (errors are one standard deviation). Over this period, ocean-driven melting has caused rates of ice loss from West Antarctica to increase from 53 ± 29 billion to 159 ± 26 billion tonnes per year; ice-shelf collapse has increased the rate of ice loss from the Antarctic Peninsula from 7 ± 13 billion to 33 ± 16 billion tonnes per year. We find large variations in and among model estimates of surface mass balance and glacial isostatic adjustment for East Antarctica, with its average rate of mass gain over the period 1992–2017 (5 ± 46 billion tonnes per year) being the least certain."

Can anyone see the big hole in the abstract?

 

[Sunsettommy]

David Middleton (Geologist) made this revealing comment HERE

"A loss of 3 trillion tons out of 27 quadrillion tons is mathematically insignificant. This is only a 0.011% reduction… despite Antarctica comprising something like 90% of the ice on Earth."

 

[Wyatt earp]

Let's all cheer for the coal industry!!!

The Great Smog of 1952

Up to 12,000 killed in London by coal polution/smog combination

Oh Gawd....s0n.....sell that bike!

Without the coal being burned what do you think happens to people during the winter? Yes dummy.... they freeze like a fucking popsicle.

Duh

It is fascinating that the progressive never understands necessary trade-offs in life!!

LOL, such hyperbole, the native American's lived for centuries without coal in Winter climates as harsh as Minn. and other Midwestern States.

Of course we know that, they plugged their electric heaters up to the local tree..

What kind of a dumb ass are you becoming?

 

[westwall]

Let's all cheer for the coal industry!!!

The Great Smog of 1952

Up to 12,000 killed in London by coal polution/smog combination

Oh Gawd....s0n.....sell that bike!

Without the coal being burned what do you think happens to people during the winter? Yes dummy.... they freeze like a fucking popsicle.

Duh

It is fascinating that the progressive never understands necessary trade-offs in life!!

LOL, such hyperbole, the native American's lived for centuries without coal in Winter climates as harsh as Minn. and other Midwestern States.

Yes, they did. So, instead of burning a few pounds of coal to warm their wigwams, they cut down thousands of pounds of trees to do the same job. It's all about efficiency you see. Well, no, you don't. You're a government worker, you guys are great at squandering huge sums of taxpayer monies.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Let's all cheer for the coal industry!!!

The Great Smog of 1952

Up to 12,000 killed in London by coal polution/smog combination

Oh Gawd....s0n.....sell that bike!

Without the coal being burned what do you think happens to people during the winter? Yes dummy.... they freeze like a fucking popsicle.

Duh

It is fascinating that the progressive never understands necessary trade-offs in life!!

LOL, such hyperbole, the native American's lived for centuries without coal in Winter climates as harsh as Minn. and other Midwestern States.

Yes, they did. So, instead of burning a few pounds of coal to warm their wigwams, they cut down thousands of pounds of trees to do the same job. It's all about efficiency you see. Well, no, you don't. You're a government worker, you guys are great at squandering huge sums of taxpayer monies.

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

 

[westwall]

Let's all cheer for the coal industry!!!

The Great Smog of 1952

Up to 12,000 killed in London by coal polution/smog combination

Oh Gawd....s0n.....sell that bike!

Without the coal being burned what do you think happens to people during the winter? Yes dummy.... they freeze like a fucking popsicle.

Duh

It is fascinating that the progressive never understands necessary trade-offs in life!!

LOL, such hyperbole, the native American's lived for centuries without coal in Winter climates as harsh as Minn. and other Midwestern States.

Yes, they did. So, instead of burning a few pounds of coal to warm their wigwams, they cut down thousands of pounds of trees to do the same job. It's all about efficiency you see. Well, no, you don't. You're a government worker, you guys are great at squandering huge sums of taxpayer monies.

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

 

[SSDD]

Let's all cheer for the coal industry!!!

The Great Smog of 1952

Up to 12,000 killed in London by coal polution/smog combination

Oh Gawd....s0n.....sell that bike!

Without the coal being burned what do you think happens to people during the winter? Yes dummy.... they freeze like a fucking popsicle.

Duh

It is fascinating that the progressive never understands necessary trade-offs in life!!

LOL, such hyperbole, the native American's lived for centuries without coal in Winter climates as harsh as Minn. and other Midwestern States.

Yes, they did. So, instead of burning a few pounds of coal to warm their wigwams, they cut down thousands of pounds of trees to do the same job. It's all about efficiency you see. Well, no, you don't. You're a government worker, you guys are great at squandering huge sums of taxpayer monies.

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Oh Gawd....s0n.....sell that bike!

Without the coal being burned what do you think happens to people during the winter? Yes dummy.... they freeze like a fucking popsicle.

Duh

It is fascinating that the progressive never understands necessary trade-offs in life!!

LOL, such hyperbole, the native American's lived for centuries without coal in Winter climates as harsh as Minn. and other Midwestern States.

Yes, they did. So, instead of burning a few pounds of coal to warm their wigwams, they cut down thousands of pounds of trees to do the same job. It's all about efficiency you see. Well, no, you don't. You're a government worker, you guys are great at squandering huge sums of taxpayer monies.

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

I tire of people like you, true believers who use personal attacks ("pseudo educated dupe", for example) and bandy about statistics as if they (you) are an authority.

My BA degrees were in History and Poli Sci, my Master's in the Dept of Education, a special studies program: Human Relations (course work in Psyc. Sociology, Social Psyc. Anthropology, Counseling and IR). And, my education during my 32 year career in Law Enforcement.

Of course I had Math and Science lower division courses (Chem, Physics and Biology). My opinion is based on secondary sources, such as those listed in this link to a number of studies:

Google Scholar

 

[Sunsettommy]

LOL, such hyperbole, the native American's lived for centuries without coal in Winter climates as harsh as Minn. and other Midwestern States.

Yes, they did. So, instead of burning a few pounds of coal to warm their wigwams, they cut down thousands of pounds of trees to do the same job. It's all about efficiency you see. Well, no, you don't. You're a government worker, you guys are great at squandering huge sums of taxpayer monies.

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

I tire of people like you, true believers who use personal attacks ("pseudo educated dupe", for example) and bandy about statistics as if they (you) are an authority.

My BA degrees were in History and Poli Sci, my Master's in the Dept of Education, a special studies program: Human Relations (course work in Psyc. Sociology, Social Psyc. Anthropology, Counseling and IR). And, my education during my 32 year career in Law Enforcement.

Of course I had Math and Science lower division courses (Chem, Physics and Biology). My opinion is based on secondary sources, such as those listed in this link to a number of studies:

Google Scholar

Education Fallacy in full bloom.

I know people who have PHD's still make fools of themselves in debate, I destroyed one last year at WUWT, whom I showed lying like hell and gave him the coupe de grace with a daily file straight from the NOAA. He immediately vanished and has been on the run ever since.

Stick with the debate instead, drop the fallacies that never helps anyone.

 

[westwall]

LOL, such hyperbole, the native American's lived for centuries without coal in Winter climates as harsh as Minn. and other Midwestern States.

Yes, they did. So, instead of burning a few pounds of coal to warm their wigwams, they cut down thousands of pounds of trees to do the same job. It's all about efficiency you see. Well, no, you don't. You're a government worker, you guys are great at squandering huge sums of taxpayer monies.

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

I tire of people like you, true believers who use personal attacks ("pseudo educated dupe", for example) and bandy about statistics as if they (you) are an authority.

My BA degrees were in History and Poli Sci, my Master's in the Dept of Education, a special studies program: Human Relations (course work in Psyc. Sociology, Social Psyc. Anthropology, Counseling and IR). And, my education during my 32 year career in Law Enforcement.

Of course I had Math and Science lower division courses (Chem, Physics and Biology). My opinion is based on secondary sources, such as those listed in this link to a number of studies:

Google Scholar

Hm. Not one of your degrees is in an exact science. All subjective all the time eh. No wonder you don't understand how MEASUREMENT works.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yes, they did. So, instead of burning a few pounds of coal to warm their wigwams, they cut down thousands of pounds of trees to do the same job. It's all about efficiency you see. Well, no, you don't. You're a government worker, you guys are great at squandering huge sums of taxpayer monies.

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

I tire of people like you, true believers who use personal attacks ("pseudo educated dupe", for example) and bandy about statistics as if they (you) are an authority.

My BA degrees were in History and Poli Sci, my Master's in the Dept of Education, a special studies program: Human Relations (course work in Psyc. Sociology, Social Psyc. Anthropology, Counseling and IR). And, my education during my 32 year career in Law Enforcement.

Of course I had Math and Science lower division courses (Chem, Physics and Biology). My opinion is based on secondary sources, such as those listed in this link to a number of studies:

Google Scholar

Education Fallacy in full bloom.

I know people who have PHD's still make fools of themselves in debate, I destroyed one last year at WUWT, whom I showed lying like hell and gave him the coupe de grace with a daily file straight from the NOAA. He immediately vanished and has been on the run ever since.

Stick with the debate instead, drop the fallacies that never helps anyone.

There is no debate, there are liars, damn liars and statistics, confirmation bias and personal attacks. My question never answered is this: What if you are wrong?

The arguments offered by your side on the issue are those who claim this is a natural event, yet have no proof that is so. They build on this hypothesis to defend Coal and Oil, and attack Green and Renewable Energy Sources. Is that a fair observation?

My argument is we need to prepare Green and Renewable Energy sources, not only because they are pollutants, but because one day they will be in short supply. We experienced that when OPEC flexed their muscles.

Bush II was correct when he stated in the SOTU Address, we as a nation are addicted to oil. My other unanswered question is this:

Do you profit from the oil or coal industry?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yes, they did. So, instead of burning a few pounds of coal to warm their wigwams, they cut down thousands of pounds of trees to do the same job. It's all about efficiency you see. Well, no, you don't. You're a government worker, you guys are great at squandering huge sums of taxpayer monies.

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

I tire of people like you, true believers who use personal attacks ("pseudo educated dupe", for example) and bandy about statistics as if they (you) are an authority.

My BA degrees were in History and Poli Sci, my Master's in the Dept of Education, a special studies program: Human Relations (course work in Psyc. Sociology, Social Psyc. Anthropology, Counseling and IR). And, my education during my 32 year career in Law Enforcement.

Of course I had Math and Science lower division courses (Chem, Physics and Biology). My opinion is based on secondary sources, such as those listed in this link to a number of studies:

Google Scholar

Hm. Not one of your degrees is in an exact science. All subjective all the time eh. No wonder you don't understand how MEASUREMENT works.

And you probably believe 2 + 2 always = 4

 

[Sunsettommy]

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

I tire of people like you, true believers who use personal attacks ("pseudo educated dupe", for example) and bandy about statistics as if they (you) are an authority.

My BA degrees were in History and Poli Sci, my Master's in the Dept of Education, a special studies program: Human Relations (course work in Psyc. Sociology, Social Psyc. Anthropology, Counseling and IR). And, my education during my 32 year career in Law Enforcement.

Of course I had Math and Science lower division courses (Chem, Physics and Biology). My opinion is based on secondary sources, such as those listed in this link to a number of studies:

Google Scholar

Education Fallacy in full bloom.

I know people who have PHD's still make fools of themselves in debate, I destroyed one last year at WUWT, whom I showed lying like hell and gave him the coupe de grace with a daily file straight from the NOAA. He immediately vanished and has been on the run ever since.

Stick with the debate instead, drop the fallacies that never helps anyone.

There is no debate, there are liars, damn liars and statistics, confirmation bias and personal attacks. My question never answered is this: What if you are wrong?

The arguments offered by your side on the issue are those who claim this is a natural event, yet have no proof that is so. They build on this hypothesis to defend Coal and Oil, and attack Green and Renewable Energy Sources. Is that a fair observation?

My argument is we need to prepare Green and Renewable Energy sources, not only because they are pollutants, but because one day they will be in short supply. We experienced that when OPEC flexed their muscles.

Bush II was correct when he stated in the SOTU Address, we as a nation are addicted to oil. My other unanswered question is this:

Do you profit from the oil or coal industry?

Bla, bla, bla, bla,bla.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

I tire of people like you, true believers who use personal attacks ("pseudo educated dupe", for example) and bandy about statistics as if they (you) are an authority.

My BA degrees were in History and Poli Sci, my Master's in the Dept of Education, a special studies program: Human Relations (course work in Psyc. Sociology, Social Psyc. Anthropology, Counseling and IR). And, my education during my 32 year career in Law Enforcement.

Of course I had Math and Science lower division courses (Chem, Physics and Biology). My opinion is based on secondary sources, such as those listed in this link to a number of studies:

Google Scholar

Hm. Not one of your degrees is in an exact science. All subjective all the time eh. No wonder you don't understand how MEASUREMENT works.

And you probably believe 2 + 2 always = 4

What a stupid comment.

You have Been SHOWN numerous times now that Coal is expanding and that the climate we live in is still well within natural variations.

Per Decade warming rate very similar to past warming rates back to the 1800's.
No increase in Tornadoes counts despite the improvement in technology.
Decrease in Landfalling Hurricanes, NO increase in total cyclone energy.
INCREASE in snow and cold in the last 10 years.
Antarctica ice near highest level of instrumental record.
Small increase in precipitation.
on and on it goes in the very opposite of what the AGW conjecture would project to happen.

 

[westwall]

Is the space you always leave before writing something an example of the thought you put into your words?

BTW, I took the History of the West as part of my double major and therein I learned that the Native Americans used buffalo chips for fuel. Lucky for you, you weren't around then, they would have kept you as a source of fuel.

For your edification:

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Why were buffalo so important?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

I tire of people like you, true believers who use personal attacks ("pseudo educated dupe", for example) and bandy about statistics as if they (you) are an authority.

My BA degrees were in History and Poli Sci, my Master's in the Dept of Education, a special studies program: Human Relations (course work in Psyc. Sociology, Social Psyc. Anthropology, Counseling and IR). And, my education during my 32 year career in Law Enforcement.

Of course I had Math and Science lower division courses (Chem, Physics and Biology). My opinion is based on secondary sources, such as those listed in this link to a number of studies:

Google Scholar

Hm. Not one of your degrees is in an exact science. All subjective all the time eh. No wonder you don't understand how MEASUREMENT works.

And you probably believe 2 + 2 always = 4

It all depends on which measurement scale is being used, cupcake.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

I tire of people like you, true believers who use personal attacks ("pseudo educated dupe", for example) and bandy about statistics as if they (you) are an authority.

My BA degrees were in History and Poli Sci, my Master's in the Dept of Education, a special studies program: Human Relations (course work in Psyc. Sociology, Social Psyc. Anthropology, Counseling and IR). And, my education during my 32 year career in Law Enforcement.

Of course I had Math and Science lower division courses (Chem, Physics and Biology). My opinion is based on secondary sources, such as those listed in this link to a number of studies:

Google Scholar

Hm. Not one of your degrees is in an exact science. All subjective all the time eh. No wonder you don't understand how MEASUREMENT works.

And you probably believe 2 + 2 always = 4

It all depends on which measurement scale is being used, cupcake.

Good for you. Be honest now, did you look it up?

You specifically mentioned Minnesota in your screed so i concentrated on the Native Americans of that area and guess what, they had no buffalo chips. DOH!

Nothing worse than a pseudo educated dupe who fancies himself the smartest guy in the room...You never see that sort of people on the skeptical side....guess only the truly educated are bright enough to be skeptics.

I can't help but notice that he doesn't even talk to me any more...guess he thinks by ignoring me, he can take away the sting of having his head cut by a skeptic in a couple of posts.

I tire of people like you, true believers who use personal attacks ("pseudo educated dupe", for example) and bandy about statistics as if they (you) are an authority.

My BA degrees were in History and Poli Sci, my Master's in the Dept of Education, a special studies program: Human Relations (course work in Psyc. Sociology, Social Psyc. Anthropology, Counseling and IR). And, my education during my 32 year career in Law Enforcement.

Of course I had Math and Science lower division courses (Chem, Physics and Biology). My opinion is based on secondary sources, such as those listed in this link to a number of studies:

Google Scholar

Hm. Not one of your degrees is in an exact science. All subjective all the time eh. No wonder you don't understand how MEASUREMENT works.

And you probably believe 2 + 2 always = 4

What a stupid comment.

You have Been SHOWN numerous times now that Coal is expanding and that the climate we live in is still well within natural variations.

Per Decade warming rate very similar to past warming rates back to the 1800's.
No increase in Tornadoes counts despite the improvement in technology.
Decrease in Landfalling Hurricanes, NO increase in total cyclone energy.
INCREASE in snow and cold in the last 10 years.
Antarctica ice near highest level of instrumental record.
Small increase in precipitation.
on and on it goes in the very opposite of what the AGW conjecture would project to happen.

Yawn.