More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[PMZ]

I'm surprised to see you spouting such prejudicial nonsense. I thought you were a follow-the-numbers sorta fellow.

You talking to me? What the hell did that mean anyway?

It's what happens when you follow the cause rather than the evidence.

 

[flacaltenn]

Yes -- I'm "a numbers kind of guy"..

Smart Sustainable Investing

A lot of green has moved into green funds. That's the finding of the U.S. Social Investing Forum, which reports some $3.74 trillion in socially responsible investments last year, up 22 percent from in 2010.

While both public and private sectors have embraced environmentally sustainable investing in particular, the economic returns of such strategies have largely failed to justify their appeal.

One highly visible example is CalPERS, the nation's largest pension fund. The $259 billion pension made a $900 million investment in a green energy fund that recently had a 9.7 percent annualized loss.

CalPERS' chief investment officer, seemingly disconnected from the imperative to invest for returns as well as values, called the debacle a "noble way to lose money." Perhaps the loss has caused CalPERS to rethink how it goes about investing (not to mention handling its PR), green or otherwise.

 

[PMZ]

Right, conservatives don't waste trillions to store CO2 underground.
We leave the expensive idiocy to liberals.

Ignoring problems is typically the most expensive alternative. You seem to have special access to the future that allows you to be certain that this is an exception.

But not as expensive, and certainly not as stupid as inventing problems which is what the AGW hoax is all about.

Running out of fossil fuels is a given. We always knew that they were a temporary solution.

AGW is a given. The only unknown are the precise consequences. We're learning more about them every day. At least most of us are.

 

[Abraham3]

I'm surprised to see you spouting such prejudicial nonsense. I thought you were a follow-the-numbers sorta fellow.

You talking to me? What the hell did that mean anyway?

I would not have thought you would have offered "all liberals are stupid" type comments. No more than you'd tell us all blacks are violent or all Chinese are deceitful or all Jews are stingy.

Y'know? Just disappointed, I guess.

 

[PMZ]

I'm surprised to see you spouting such prejudicial nonsense. I thought you were a follow-the-numbers sorta fellow.

You talking to me? What the hell did that mean anyway?

I would not have thought you would have offered "all liberals are stupid" type comments. No more than you'd tell us all blacks are violent or all Chinese are deceitful or all Jews are
stingy.

Y'know? Just disappointed, I guess.

They really are running out of rational resistance. I think that this is to be expected given their intractability.

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm surprised to see you spouting such prejudicial nonsense. I thought you were a follow-the-numbers sorta fellow.

You talking to me? What the hell did that mean anyway?

I would not have thought you would have offered "all liberals are stupid" type comments. No more than you'd tell us all blacks are violent or all Chinese are deceitful or all Jews are stingy.

Y'know? Just disappointed, I guess.

Well heck --- I apologize if that's what bit your butt. I thought it would be clear that we were talking about CALIFORNIA leftists. And they are CERTIFIABLY stupid as a collective. Demonstrated time and time and time again..



But seriously man --- with your invented intellectual superiority heaped upon your atheist framework --- you're one to talk about stupid sweeping painful generalizations ---- eh??

 

[polarbear]

Ignoring problems is typically the most expensive alternative. You seem to have special access to the future that allows you to be certain that this is an exception.

But not as expensive, and certainly not as stupid as inventing problems which is what the AGW hoax is all about.

Running out of fossil fuels is a given. We always knew that they were a temporary solution.

AGW is a given. The only unknown are the precise consequences. We're learning more about them every day. At least most of us are.

Did you keep track how often we are supposed to be out of fossil fuel already ? If it`s a given then do tell us to the nearest century when we`ll run out. In all these previous predictions that had us "dried out" already 20 years ago the Chinese were not even part of the equation.
But they have become part of it right around that time and we still got oil.
Not just that we are finding more than it takes to keep going for at least 200 more years even if we factor in the demand growth.
The first thing you would see if we would run out any time sooner is not a drop in oil prices as is happening ever more frequently.
Whenever oil is going up, that`s got nothing to do with oil being in short supply....it`s pegged to the U.S. Dollar which Obama keeps devaluating.
If the U.S. $ were not mere "Fiat" money but backed by any real collateral, then you would have noticed by how much oil prices have gone down in reality...even when compared to other "renewable" commodities.
Again you claim to know something that neither geologists or anyone else knows including oil exporters who keep investing in the infrastructure to bring all that extra oil to the markets.
It`s just another doomsday prophecy and the only thing people like you are doing is to hinder any infrastructure improvements, such as pipelines in order to see an "oil shortage" happening in your lifetime.
When Germany was cut off from the middle east oil fields and what they had access to in Africa it took them less than a year to come up with a process to make synthetic hydrocarbons, polymers, lubricants and everything from synthetic Octane to Cetane (=Diesel & Jet fuel).
Most of our technology had been "confiscated" by the U.S. and the Soviets..and there was a lot more than just the Rockets, Jets etc to it.
That particular process had been handed over to what is now known as Union Carbide and they have used it later and can use it again any time they want to...but why should they do so now while we are awash with oil?

 

[PMZ]

But not as expensive, and certainly not as stupid as inventing problems which is what the AGW hoax is all about.

Running out of fossil fuels is a given. We always knew that they were a temporary solution.

AGW is a given. The only unknown are the precise consequences. We're learning more about them every day. At least most of us are.

Did you keep track how often we are supposed to be out of fossil fuel already ? If it`s a given then do tell us to the nearest century when we`ll run out. In all these previous predictions that had us "dried out" already 20 years ago the Chinese were not even part of the equation.
But they have become part of it right around that time and we still got oil.
Not just that we are finding more than it takes to keep going for at least 200 more years even if we factor in the demand growth.
The first thing you would see if we would run out any time sooner is not a drop in oil prices as is happening ever more frequently.
Whenever oil is going up, that`s got nothing to do with oil being in short supply....it`s pegged to the U.S. Dollar which Obama keeps devaluating.
If the U.S. $ were not mere "Fiat" money but backed by any real collateral, then you would have noticed by how much oil prices have gone down in reality...even when compared to other "renewable" commodities.
Again you claim to know something that neither geologists or anyone else knows including oil exporters who keep investing in the infrastructure to bring all that extra oil to the markets.
It`s just another doomsday prophecy and the only thing people like you are doing is to hinder any infrastructure improvements, such as pipelines in order to see an "oil shortage" happening in your lifetime.
When Germany was cut off from the middle east oil fields and what they had access to in Africa it took them less than a year to come up with a process to make synthetic hydrocarbons, polymers, lubricants and everything from synthetic Octane to Cetane (=Diesel & Jet fuel).
Most of our technology had been "confiscated" by the U.S. and the Soviets..and there was a lot more than just the Rockets, Jets etc to it.
That particular process had been handed over to what is now known as Union Carbide and they have used it later and can use it again any time they want to...but why should they do so now while we are awash with oil?

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The entire world, regardless of their particular energy situations will be under a similar financial burden vis a vis the consequences of AGW. Not the least of those consequences will be wars to determine who will survive and who won't.

I won't be here and I'm glad. I hate the thought of my kids and grandchildren being dealt that hand by my generation.

 

[polarbear]

I`m still waiting for your "sustainable" energy "alternative" which replaces fossil fuel.
Talk is cheap...and you have no clue whatsoever.
Can`t find it at Wikipedia right?...just this obsolete crap:
Coal liquefaction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which is not even remotely related to the synthetic fuel process Germany did use and which is now intellectual property of Union Carbide.
At Union Carbide they weren`t dumb enough to patent it, because that would have forced a full & public disclosure...and patent rights do expire.
I assure you that you can bury your oil Angst because Union Carbide could produce all the synthetic oil they`ld want to on short notice.
The process is so efficient and cheap that you could do it even in a modest lab if you knew how it works.
Matter of fact wind turbines and our current photo-voltaic technology would mesh perfectly with this process...but you have no idea what this process is because your "knowledge" is confined to what you can Google and all you get is the ridiculous & obsolete crap that`s on Wiki concerning synthetic fuel....while shooting off your Mr. knowitall mouth every day all day long.
I`ll give you a hint...
What does the name Union Carbide imply?
Have you any idea what Calcium Carbide is and what it is used for?
I guess not, but for any serious Chemical engineer that hint is already good enough to find the literature what the additional reaction stages would be to get Gasoline, Diesel or longer H-C- chains....but unless such engineers know some key details which catalyst they`ll never get it either.

 

[flacaltenn]

I`m still waiting for your "sustainable" energy "alternative" which replaces fossil fuel.
Talk is cheap...and you have no clue whatsoever.
Can`t find it at Wikipedia right?...just this obsolete crap:
Coal liquefaction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which is not even remotely related to the synthetic fuel process Germany did use and which is now intellectual property of Union Carbide.
At Union Carbide they weren`t dumb enough to patent it, because that would have forced a full & public disclosure...and patent rights do expire.
I assure you that you can bury your oil Angst because Union Carbide could produce all the synthetic oil they`ld want to on short notice.
The process is so efficient and cheap that you could do it even in a modest lab if you knew how it works.
Matter of fact wind turbines and our current photo-voltaic technology would mesh perfectly with this process...but you have no idea what this process is because your "knowledge" is confined to what you can Google and all you get is the ridiculous & obsolete crap that`s on Wiki concerning synthetic fuel....while shooting off your Mr. knowitall mouth every day all day long.
I`ll give you a hint...
What does the name Union Carbide imply?
Have you any idea what Calcium Carbide is and what it is used for?
I guess not, but for any serious Chemical engineer that hint is already good enough to find the literature what the additional reaction stages would be to get Gasoline, Diesel or longer H-C- chains....but unless such engineers know some key details which catalyst they`ll never get it either.

Another example of "alternatives" that COULD be economically done if we took the crappy performing wind and solar OFF THE GRID and used them to make either hydrogen or synthfuels from that old recipe..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Running out of fossil fuels is a given. We always knew that they were a temporary solution.

AGW is a given. The only unknown are the precise consequences. We're learning more about them every day. At least most of us are.

Did you keep track how often we are supposed to be out of fossil fuel already ? If it`s a given then do tell us to the nearest century when we`ll run out. In all these previous predictions that had us "dried out" already 20 years ago the Chinese were not even part of the equation.
But they have become part of it right around that time and we still got oil.
Not just that we are finding more than it takes to keep going for at least 200 more years even if we factor in the demand growth.
The first thing you would see if we would run out any time sooner is not a drop in oil prices as is happening ever more frequently.
Whenever oil is going up, that`s got nothing to do with oil being in short supply....it`s pegged to the U.S. Dollar which Obama keeps devaluating.
If the U.S. $ were not mere "Fiat" money but backed by any real collateral, then you would have noticed by how much oil prices have gone down in reality...even when compared to other "renewable" commodities.
Again you claim to know something that neither geologists or anyone else knows including oil exporters who keep investing in the infrastructure to bring all that extra oil to the markets.
It`s just another doomsday prophecy and the only thing people like you are doing is to hinder any infrastructure improvements, such as pipelines in order to see an "oil shortage" happening in your lifetime.
When Germany was cut off from the middle east oil fields and what they had access to in Africa it took them less than a year to come up with a process to make synthetic hydrocarbons, polymers, lubricants and everything from synthetic Octane to Cetane (=Diesel & Jet fuel).
Most of our technology had been "confiscated" by the U.S. and the Soviets..and there was a lot more than just the Rockets, Jets etc to it.
That particular process had been handed over to what is now known as Union Carbide and they have used it later and can use it again any time they want to...but why should they do so now while we are awash with oil?

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The entire world, regardless of their particular energy situations will be under a similar financial burden vis a vis the consequences of AGW. Not the least of those consequences will be wars to determine who will survive and who won't.

I won't be here and I'm glad. I hate the thought of my kids and grandchildren being dealt that hand by my generation.

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The liberal solution to high energy prices in the future is to make energy prices high, immediately.
People who understand economics are laughing at you.

 

[PMZ]

Did you keep track how often we are supposed to be out of fossil fuel already ? If it`s a given then do tell us to the nearest century when we`ll run out. In all these previous predictions that had us "dried out" already 20 years ago the Chinese were not even part of the equation.
But they have become part of it right around that time and we still got oil.
Not just that we are finding more than it takes to keep going for at least 200 more years even if we factor in the demand growth.
The first thing you would see if we would run out any time sooner is not a drop in oil prices as is happening ever more frequently.
Whenever oil is going up, that`s got nothing to do with oil being in short supply....it`s pegged to the U.S. Dollar which Obama keeps devaluating.
If the U.S. $ were not mere "Fiat" money but backed by any real collateral, then you would have noticed by how much oil prices have gone down in reality...even when compared to other "renewable" commodities.
Again you claim to know something that neither geologists or anyone else knows including oil exporters who keep investing in the infrastructure to bring all that extra oil to the markets.
It`s just another doomsday prophecy and the only thing people like you are doing is to hinder any infrastructure improvements, such as pipelines in order to see an "oil shortage" happening in your lifetime.
When Germany was cut off from the middle east oil fields and what they had access to in Africa it took them less than a year to come up with a process to make synthetic hydrocarbons, polymers, lubricants and everything from synthetic Octane to Cetane (=Diesel & Jet fuel).
Most of our technology had been "confiscated" by the U.S. and the Soviets..and there was a lot more than just the Rockets, Jets etc to it.
That particular process had been handed over to what is now known as Union Carbide and they have used it later and can use it again any time they want to...but why should they do so now while we are awash with oil?

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The entire world, regardless of their particular energy situations will be under a similar financial burden vis a vis the consequences of AGW. Not the least of those consequences will be wars to determine who will survive and who won't.

I won't be here and I'm glad. I hate the thought of my kids and grandchildren being dealt that hand by my generation.

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The liberal solution to high energy prices in the future is to make energy prices high, immediately.
People who understand economics are laughing at you.

Of course your "solution" is to have cheap energy for yourself and unaffordable energy for future generations.

That's why you're always going to be losing elections which is exactly as it should be.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The entire world, regardless of their particular energy situations will be under a similar financial burden vis a vis the consequences of AGW. Not the least of those consequences will be wars to determine who will survive and who won't.

I won't be here and I'm glad. I hate the thought of my kids and grandchildren being dealt that hand by my generation.

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The liberal solution to high energy prices in the future is to make energy prices high, immediately.
People who understand economics are laughing at you.

Of course your "solution" is to have cheap energy for yourself and unaffordable energy for future generations.

That's why you're always going to be losing elections which is exactly as it should be.

Of course your "solution" is to have cheap energy for yourself and unaffordable energy for future generations.

Yes, end cheap energy, NOW!
Liberals want our energy unaffordable, NOW!

 

[PMZ]

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The liberal solution to high energy prices in the future is to make energy prices high, immediately.
People who understand economics are laughing at you.

Of course your "solution" is to have cheap energy for yourself and unaffordable energy for future generations.

That's why you're always going to be losing elections which is exactly as it should be.

Of course your "solution" is to have cheap energy for yourself and unaffordable energy for future generations.

Yes, end cheap energy, NOW!
Liberals want our energy unaffordable, NOW!

Irresponsibility is a tough sell to Americans Toddster.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of course your "solution" is to have cheap energy for yourself and unaffordable energy for future generations.

That's why you're always going to be losing elections which is exactly as it should be.

Of course your "solution" is to have cheap energy for yourself and unaffordable energy for future generations.

Yes, end cheap energy, NOW!
Liberals want our energy unaffordable, NOW!

Irresponsibility is a tough sell to Americans Toddster.

So is expensive, unreliable energy, when cheaper, reliable energy is all around us.

 

[PMZ]

Of course your "solution" is to have cheap energy for yourself and unaffordable energy for future generations.

Yes, end cheap energy, NOW!
Liberals want our energy unaffordable, NOW!

Irresponsibility is a tough sell to Americans Toddster.

So is expensive, unreliable energy, when cheaper, reliable energy is all around us.

Not when "cheaper, reliable energy" is the result of very temporary, at this time, conditions.

 

[skookerasbil]

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The entire world, regardless of their particular energy situations will be under a similar financial burden vis a vis the consequences of AGW. Not the least of those consequences will be wars to determine who will survive and who won't.

I won't be here and I'm glad. I hate the thought of my kids and grandchildren being dealt that hand by my generation.

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The liberal solution to high energy prices in the future is to make energy prices high, immediately.
People who understand economics are laughing at you.

Of course your "solution" is to have cheap energy for yourself and unaffordable energy for future generations.

That's why you're always going to be losing elections which is exactly as it should be.

HOLY ****







A poster child for lefty thinking. These people think there should be a solution to everything and all that needs to be fixed are the broken institutions constructed by human beings = biggest difference between the left and conservative thinking people, who realize that in this world, most times, you have two choices: suck and suckier. Take your pick.......which of course is the real world. The lefty thinker has this fascinating inability to understand necessary tradeoffs. In this case, it is the desire.......at any cost........to purge the world of fossil fuels......immediately. These mental cases don't take ONE SINGLE MOMENT to either weigh those necessary tradeoffs or consider the utter impossibility of doing so.........

To illustrate, the conservative thinker knows with 100% certainty that had there been no fossil fuels in Europe lasts winter, millions would have died from the cold. Millions. The far lefty doesn't give a **** as long as the established narrative is pushed lock, stock and barrel.


The absolute reality is......no matter who wins elections ( you stupid **** ) fossil fuels are going nowhere for decades and decades.


Which is what I call >>>>>>>




winning

 

[PMZ]

Fossil fuels will be so expensive by the end of this century, due to the inevitable low supply, and predictable high demand, that those countries that haven't made significant progress towards replacements, are going to be devastatingly uncompetitive.

The liberal solution to high energy prices in the future is to make energy prices high, immediately.
People who understand economics are laughing at you.

Of course your "solution" is to have cheap energy for yourself and unaffordable energy for future generations.

That's why you're always going to be losing elections which is exactly as it should be.

HOLY ****







A poster child for lefty thinking. These people think there should be a solution to everything and all that needs to be fixed are the broken institutions constructed by human beings = biggest difference between the left and conservative thinking people, who realize that in this world, most times, you have two choices: suck and suckier. Take your pick.......which of course is the real world. The lefty thinker has this fascinating inability to understand necessary tradeoffs. In this case, it is the desire.......at any cost........to purge the world of fossil fuels......immediately. These mental cases don't take ONE SINGLE MOMENT to either weigh those necessary tradeoffs or consider the utter impossibility of doing so.........

To illustrate, the conservative thinker knows with 100% certainty that had there been no fossil fuels in Europe lasts winter, millions would have died from the cold. Millions. The far lefty doesn't give a **** as long as the established narrative is pushed lock, stock and barrel.


The absolute reality is......no matter who wins elections ( you stupid **** ) fossil fuels are going nowhere for decades and decades.


Which is what I call >>>>>>>




winning

Here's today's load of skooker science.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Irresponsibility is a tough sell to Americans Toddster.

So is expensive, unreliable energy, when cheaper, reliable energy is all around us.

Not when "cheaper, reliable energy" is the result of very temporary, at this time, conditions.

Temporary? Like the next 100 years or more?

 

[PMZ]

So is expensive, unreliable energy, when cheaper, reliable energy is all around us.

Not when "cheaper, reliable energy" is the result of very temporary, at this time, conditions.

Temporary? Like the next 100 years or more?

You happy with the price of gasoline today?

You have this idiotic notion that fossil fuel prices will stay the same until the day that they run out.