Official Thread for Denial of GreenHouse Effect and Radiative Physics.

[jc456]

Try holding your breath. That is certain to make it hurry along.

So you can’t even define the problem?

And it, whatever, is catastrophic, but you can’t define it! So no it?

 

[Crick]

So you can’t even define the problem?

And it, whatever, is catastrophic, but you can’t define it! So no it?

Have you failed to notice that NO ONE that's been here for more than five minutes wants to talk with you?

 

[jc456]

Have you failed to notice that NO ONE that's been here for more than five minutes wants to talk with you?

their loss. Again, so you have nothing on what we're trying to correct?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You are absolutely right. Let's call that #6



The same way we've been doing it all along.



Chewing gum. Ground coke bottles. Plaster-of-Paris. This could be where nuclear was supposed to go.

Actually, there are substitutes but they certainly aren't perfect: ferrock, hempcrete, greencrete, timbercrete and rammed earth.



Everyone should. You know as well as I that the argument "we shouldn't do it till they do" is puerile idiocy.



Not much, but every little bit helps. Like nuclear.

So, we're down to:

1) Nuclear power
2) Wind, solar, geothermal, wave, tide, OTEC and other renewable sources
3) EV vehicles
4) Reduce soot emissions

We were looking for intelligent, economical solutions. Do you think these qualify?

The same way we've been doing it all along.

Poorly and at great expense.

You know as well as I that the argument "we shouldn't do it till they do" is puerile idiocy.

Spending trillions to cut 5 while India adds 6 and China adds 10 is idiocy.
Expensive, wasteful idiocy. Which is kind of a liberal specialty.

We were looking for intelligent, economical solutions. Do you think these qualify?

Depends on how much they cost.
And on how far away we can keep the liberal idiots away from it.

 

[Crick]

So, you don't really want to talk about any of this. Fine. Have a nice fucking day Todd.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So, you don't really want to talk about any of this. Fine. Have a nice fucking day Todd.

Good solutions that cost way too much, aren't good.
Spending trillions to reduce projected temps in 2100 by 0.1 degrees, isn't good.
But you keep whining.

 

[Crick]

But you never provided a single word about the cost of any of the solutions I listed. Neither did you make any attempt to compare the cost of these solution versus the cost of doing nothing (your solution). If you'd like me to stop whining, have the fucking balls to actually put something out for discussion.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

But you never provided a single word about the cost of any of the solutions I listed. Neither did you make any attempt to compare the cost of these solution versus the cost of doing nothing (your solution). If you'd like me to stop whining, have the fucking balls to actually put something out for discussion.

But you never provided a single word about the cost of any of the solutions I listed.

Neither did you.

But see, I asked........

We were looking for intelligent, economical solutions. Do you think these qualify?

Depends on how much they cost.


Neither did you make any attempt to compare the cost of these solution versus the cost of doing nothing (your solution)

Neither did you.

Before you started stomping your feet.

If you'd like me to stop whining,

That's impossible.

 

[Crick]

But you never provided a single word about the cost of any of the solutions I listed.

Neither did you.

But see, I asked........

We were looking for intelligent, economical solutions. Do you think these qualify?

Depends on how much they cost.


Neither did you make any attempt to compare the cost of these solution versus the cost of doing nothing (your solution)

Neither did you.

Before you started stomping your feet.

If you'd like me to stop whining,

That's impossible.

Right then, you win. And everyone loses.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Right then, you win. And everyone loses.

Not stupidly wasting trillions on less reliable energy is a win for everyone.
Our children and grandchildren will thank us for the larger more robust economy
we leave them.

 

[jc456]

But you never provided a single word about the cost of any of the solutions I listed

Funny, did you?

 

[Crick]

Not stupidly wasting trillions on less reliable energy is a win for everyone.
Our children and grandchildren will thank us for the larger more robust economy
we leave them.

I bet they don't. Their won't be enough money to fix what ails them.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I bet they don't. Their won't be enough money to fix what ails them.

More money than if we wasted it all on crappy wind turbines.

 

[jc456]

I bet they don't. Their won't be enough money to fix what ails them.

what will ail them?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

what will ail them?

Weather.

 

[jc456]

Weather.

No way?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No way?

We could stop it, but we need trillions.
It'll all be better. Promise.

 

[jc456]

We could stop it, but we need trillions.
It'll all be better. Promise.

That doesn’t sound very bright! Don’t we like need water?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That doesn’t sound very bright! Don’t we like need water?

We should probably drink less.......to save the planet.

 

[jc456]

We should probably drink less.......to save the planet.

But when all of our poop ends up on the lawns won’t methane gas increase? Methane is far worse I heard.