Global Warming. Kiss Your Ass Goodbye.

[haveatit]

So we will be dead by 2050? I will probably be dead so I guess it sucks to be you.

Have any children and grandchildren? It will suck for them.

 

[haveatit]

I'm not flexible enought to kiss my ass. Heck, I'm not even flexible enough to kiss myself in the one place I wish I could.

Is there a different part I could kiss, instead?

Can you kiss your foot? Maybe it will help when you use it to kick the bucket.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Then tell me there why you think solar panels are a bad idea.

Sun doesn't always shine on those panels.
Sadly, we need constant, reliable power.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What human caused global warming is likely to cause will be unlike anything that has ever happened in Earth's history.

What?

Slightly higher temps? DURR

 

[haveatit]

There is not enough radiant heat/sq foot for solar to provide the needs of our energy intensive economy.

As my post indicated solar farms are being built but not for valid technological reasons but for political reasons.

There is no program that is not subsidized at some level and that is false economics.

Solar is fine for adding a few degrees to my screened in swimming pool or to power a calculator but it can't compete with fossil or nuclear to run my AC, hot water heater, dryer, vehicle etc.

There is a narrow band of desert in SW US where solar is marginally cost effective. Every place else (including my sunshine state of Florida) it is a bust compared to fossil.

That is why President Potatohead is doing everything he can to drive up the cost of fossil fuels and that is despicable.

I mentioned the thread to have this discussion. In it you will see an area about 140 miles square on a picture of the U.S. that would show all the solar panels it would take to power the U.S. Both day and night. Everywhere! Though Elon Musk thinks it could be done with a total area 100 miles square. And his engineering talents have made him a multi billionaire. You are nothing compared to him. I wish we could have been having a similar discussion a little over 100 years ago. Then you could tell me all the reasons why Tesla's AC current wouldn't work. And no doubt you would have done so.

 

[haveatit]

Sun doesn't always shine on those panels.
Sadly, we need constant, reliable power.

There will still need to be a power grid to transmit power from places where the sun is shining to areas where it isn't. Though even on a cloudy day, solar panels still work. Maybe not as well as in full sunlight. But they still work. And for where the sun does shine, excess power can be stored in a number of ways for nighttime use. The net result will be constant, reliable power. If done right, far more than we could ever possibly need.

 

[haveatit]

What?

Slightly higher temps? DURR

The warmer it gets, the FASTER it will get even warmer. Then the FASTER it will get even warmer. Then the FASTER it will get even warmer. Etc. etc. etc. Then you take in all the methane release, which is around 86 times more potent of a greenhouse gas than CO2, it gets even worse. FASTER!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There will still need to be a power grid to transmit power from places where the sun is shining to areas where it isn't.

There isn't a long enough power line to get solar to Chicago at midnight.

And for where the sun does shine, excess power can be stored in a number of ways for nighttime use.

In addition to tens of trillions in solar panels, we needs trillions in batteries?
What February, when the days are short and cloudy and snowy and no sun all week?
Is California going to ship all their electricity to Chicago?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The warmer it gets, the FASTER it will get even warmer. Then the FASTER it will get even warmer. Then the FASTER it will get even warmer. Etc. etc. etc. Then you take in all the methane release, which is around 86 times more potent of a greenhouse gas than CO2, it gets even worse. FASTER!

I know, slightly warmer.

Never happened before?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Can you kiss your foot? Maybe it will help when you use it to kick the bucket.

Wanting my death already, are you?

You Stalinists say the sweetest things!

 

[frigidweirdo]

It doesn't specify time frames accurately enough. Especially more recent history. The graphs I posted in my thread are far better. How often do I have to say things like that before being accused of not wanting to have this conversation.

What on Earth do you mean it doesn't specify time frames accurately enough?

You want accurate data like we're getting today from satellites?

The graphs you posted in your OP just seem to be whatever you can get without any rhyme or reason.

The reason why I posted the chart I posted is because the Earth appears to have been in a 100,000 year cycle for about 400,000 years. That means what's happening NOW is more likely to be following what has happened in the last 400,000 years than what has happened before.

When the dinosaurs were around CO2 was high. During different periods of Earth's evolution we've had different atmospheres. At one point there was no oxygen, and after certain mass extinctions oxygen has become more and more prevalent.

Looking at charts from the past 200 years is pointless because it's such a short amount of time. It's like looking at breakfast and trying to figure out where you'll be in ten years time.

You have posted the 100,000 year cycle temperature chart. Stuck, bizarrely between two two hundred year charts. With no explanation about what it actually means.

But if you want to use YOUR chart, then who freaking cares, it's the same as my chart.

Your chart. 120,000 years ago temperatures reached about -62 degrees. 240,000 years ago they reached -63 degrees, 320,000 years ago they reached -60 degrees.

Right now we're at about -66 degrees which is three degrees COOLER than in the previous cycles and SIX DEGREES cooler than what has happened before. Even though CO2 levels are higher.

Which A) suggests CO2 isn't all it's cracked up to be, it's not like CO2 goes up and temperatures go up automatically and instantly. And B) it suggests the world temperature could rise WITHOUT HUMAN INTERFERENCE, by at least three more degrees.

So, what would the world temperatures be right now had humans not industrialized?

 

[Redfish]

There is another thread around here that I posted in called, "Power the WORLD with solar panels." Look at the thread. Look at the pictures posted. Then tell me there why you think solar panels are a bad idea.

they are not a bad idea but to generate enough power to run this country they would have to cover every square inch from border to border, and they are not cheap and take tons of fossil fuel to manufacture, and most are made in China. Why do you want to ship all of the world's wealth to china?

 

[Redfish]

There is not enough radiant heat/sq foot for solar to provide the needs of our energy intensive economy.

As my post indicated solar farms are being built but not for valid technological reasons but for political reasons.

There is no program that is not subsidized at some level and that is false economics.

Solar is fine for adding a few degrees to my screened in swimming pool or to power a calculator but it can't compete with fossil or nuclear to run my AC, hot water heater, dryer, vehicle etc.

There is a narrow band of desert in SW US where solar is marginally cost effective. Every place else (including my sunshine state of Florida) it is a bust compared to fossil.

That is why President Potatohead is doing everything he can to drive up the cost of fossil fuels and that is despicable.

correct and they do not produce any power at night or on cloudy days.

 

[Redfish]

What on Earth do you mean it doesn't specify time frames accurately enough?

You want accurate data like we're getting today from satellites?

The graphs you posted in your OP just seem to be whatever you can get without any rhyme or reason.

The reason why I posted the chart I posted is because the Earth appears to have been in a 100,000 year cycle for about 400,000 years. That means what's happening NOW is more likely to be following what has happened in the last 400,000 years than what has happened before.

When the dinosaurs were around CO2 was high. During different periods of Earth's evolution we've had different atmospheres. At one point there was no oxygen, and after certain mass extinctions oxygen has become more and more prevalent.

Looking at charts from the past 200 years is pointless because it's such a short amount of time. It's like looking at breakfast and trying to figure out where you'll be in ten years time.

You have posted the 100,000 year cycle temperature chart. Stuck, bizarrely between two two hundred year charts. With no explanation about what it actually means.

But if you want to use YOUR chart, then who freaking cares, it's the same as my chart.

View attachment 653720

Your chart. 120,000 years ago temperatures reached about -62 degrees. 240,000 years ago they reached -63 degrees, 320,000 years ago they reached -60 degrees.

Right now we're at about -66 degrees which is three degrees COOLER than in the previous cycles and SIX DEGREES cooler than what has happened before. Even though CO2 levels are higher.

Which A) suggests CO2 isn't all it's cracked up to be, it's not like CO2 goes up and temperatures go up automatically and instantly. And B) it suggests the world temperature could rise WITHOUT HUMAN INTERFERENCE, by at least three more degrees.

So, what would the world temperatures be right now had humans not industrialized?

don't confuse the cultists with logic and facts.

 

[Papageorgio]

Have any children and grandchildren? It will suck for them.

Yep, that’s life but you offer no hope.

 

[Crick]

Yep, that’s life but you offer no hope.

"That's life"? Are you that fatalistic with all the challenges "life" presents us? I'll bet you're not.

 

[Papageorgio]

That's life? Are you that fatalistic with all the challenges "life" presents us? I'll bet you're not.

The OP is the dumbass that said the world would have no life in 2050. I am not arguing with a fatalist., what the hell is the point?

I noticed you didn’t jump him but jumped me.

 

[Flopper]

Have any children and grandchildren? It will suck for them.

Good Point. Global Warming will have no real effect on me or most people reading this board. I worry about what kind of world we are leaving for my kids and grandkids. This planet belongs to not just us but all that have come before us and will come after us. We are just custodians.

 

[Flopper]

they are not a bad idea but to generate enough power to run this country they would have to cover every square inch from border to border, and they are not cheap and take tons of fossil fuel to manufacture, and most are made in China. Why do you want to ship all of the world's wealth to china?

You're exaggerating. Given the U.S. consumes about 4 petawatt hours of electricity per year, we’d need about 13,600,000 acres or 21,250 square miles of solar panels to meet the total electricity requirements of the United States for a year. That's about the size of West Virginia.

How much solar would it take to power the U.S.?

Critics claim that there simply isn’t enough land in the U.S. to power the country with solar. We dig through the numbers to reveal an answer that might surprise you.

www.freeingenergy.com

 

[Papageorgio]

Good Point. Global Warming will have no real effect on me or most people reading this board. I worry about what kind of world we are leaving for my kids and grandkids. This planet belongs to not just us but all that have come before us and will come after us. We are just custodians.

It doesn't matter what you do, according to the OP the world will end by 2050, so according to him, all is lost. Why worry?