The Green Paradox, We Must Destroy The World, To Save The World

So, if we don't use renewables, what do we use that isn't bad for the Earth?
that is a good point, everything is bad in one way or another

For electricity, Nuclear power is the only way to go.

If we are really concerned with running out of fossil fuels, Renewables is not a solution, short term or long term. Renewables, either solar or wind, simply takes way too much natural resources. Renewables give us a poor return on the natural resources we use. Intermittent, they dont work at night. Wind sometimes works at night but many a night is still.

Big cities, need to get bigger. More high density housing, in Manhattan, in Los Angeles, San Diego, Portland, Seattle, Atlanta, Miami, Chicago. Wherever there is traffic, commuting, we could build high density housing to alleviate the need to commute.

Commuting, why not electric rails that cars latch onto? Magnetic rails? Inductance? No battery, no problems. In the big cities.

The Renewable Heavy industry simply makes Wall st. rich.
 
that is a good point, everything is bad in one way or another

For electricity, Nuclear power is the only way to go.

If we are really concerned with running out of fossil fuels, Renewables is not a solution, short term or long term. Renewables, either solar or wind, simply takes way too much natural resources. Renewables give us a poor return on the natural resources we use. Intermittent, they dont work at night. Wind sometimes works at night but many a night is still.

Big cities, need to get bigger. More high density housing, in Manhattan, in Los Angeles, San Diego, Portland, Seattle, Atlanta, Miami, Chicago. Wherever there is traffic, commuting, we could build high density housing to alleviate the need to commute.

Commuting, why not electric rails that cars latch onto? Magnetic rails? Inductance? No battery, no problems. In the big cities.

The Renewable Heavy industry simply makes Wall st. rich.

Or how about we reduce the world's population to something that is sustainable?
 
I say, we simply live, and what happens, happens.

The proper way, to...

Sounds like "we mess it all up and then suffer the consequences", proving we really are just biological beings who are predestined to do what they do.
 
Republicans believe they should die in increased floods or droughts or higher intensity hurricanes or drowned by rising sea levels, wiped out by radically changed weather patterns or just plain cooked by rising temperatures. They are SO thoughtful Particularly about birds.
when will your prediction happen? There are less floods, less droughts, and less high intensity hurricanes, no rising sea levels.

When will see your dreams become reality? Never?
 
We're NOT destroying the world....We're attempting to make it better, more efficient and better off.
1. Cleaning up the air and water = higher quality of life.
2. The sun and wind is going to be around for the next billion + years. Coal, natural gas and oil isn't. Humanity mid to long term is better off with resources that will be here for us long term.
3. More in house..Solar and wind is made here in our back yard instead of going to fight for it half way around the world.

I don't see what is your point...I like fusion more but that is 30 years off.
 
when will your prediction happen? There are less floods, less droughts, and less high intensity hurricanes, no rising sea levels.

When will see your dreams become reality? Never?

Here I have refuted every claim you've just made. There are more floods, more droughts, more high intensity hurricanes and rising sea levels. I added increasing ocean heat content just for the icing on the cake.

41598_2016_Article_BFsrep36021_Fig1_HTML.jpg

41467_2018_4253_Fig5_HTML.jpg

41467_2022_30729_Fig1_HTML.png

graphic-showing-change.jpg

hurricane-chart-mphbluefinal.gif

Adjust_TS_Count.png

gmsl_2023rel1_seasons_rmvd.png

22_12_12_sl-chart-11-2020%20(1)%20(1).jpeg

1955-_Ocean_heat_content_-_NOAA.svg

Ocean+Heat+Content1.jpg

 
We're NOT destroying the world....We're attempting to make it better, more efficient and better off.
1. Cleaning up the air and water = higher quality of life.
2. The sun and wind is going to be around for the next billion + years. Coal, natural gas and oil isn't. Humanity mid to long term is better off with resources that will be here for us long term.
3. More in house..Solar and wind is made here in our back yard instead of going to fight for it half way around the world.

I don't see what is your point...I like fusion more but that is 30 years off.
No, fusion research has made some major gains lately. We should have our first operational fusion power plant within a decade.
 
Here I have refuted every claim you've just made. There are more floods, more droughts, more high intensity hurricanes and rising sea levels. I added increasing ocean heat content just for the icing on the cake.

41598_2016_Article_BFsrep36021_Fig1_HTML.jpg

41467_2018_4253_Fig5_HTML.jpg

41467_2022_30729_Fig1_HTML.png

graphic-showing-change.jpg

hurricane-chart-mphbluefinal.gif

Adjust_TS_Count.png

gmsl_2023rel1_seasons_rmvd.png

22_12_12_sl-chart-11-2020%20(1)%20(1).jpeg

1955-_Ocean_heat_content_-_NOAA.svg

Ocean+Heat+Content1.jpg

all your graphs fall short, by years

all your graphs are a gross distortion, adjust to magnify the results to make them look scary

Hurricanes and storms have not been stronger than in the past, if anything, they are weaker. Sadly though, there is more infrastructure to strike so to the ignorant, it seems like they are worst than before.

Either way, more or less, if we go with more, than there is about a zero increase in damage anywhere in the world due to global warming.
 
all your graphs fall short, by years

all your graphs are a gross distortion, adjust to magnify the results to make them look scary

Hurricanes and storms have not been stronger than in the past, if anything, they are weaker. Sadly though, there is more infrastructure to strike so to the ignorant, it seems like they are worst than before.

Either way, more or less, if we go with more, than there is about a zero increase in damage anywhere in the world due to global warming.
That's as pure a case of weaseling as I've ever seen. Your contentions are bullshit. There's a reason I'm posting data and you're spewing bullshit.
 
That's as pure a case of weaseling as I've ever seen. Your contentions are bullshit. There's a reason I'm posting data and you're spewing bullshit.
no, data is numbers, you posted colored pictures, it is nice outside, that is how I know you are full of shit, not to mention, the solution you support destroys the earth by the mile, alternative/renewable/green/clean, did I miss any?

It mine as well be lgbtqARGC
 
no, data is numbers, you posted colored pictures, it is nice outside, that is how I know you are full of shit, not to mention, the solution you support destroys the earth by the mile, alternative/renewable/green/clean, did I miss any?

It mine as well be lgbtqARGC
My posts include verifiable links and data. Your posts contain NOTHING. Got that? NOTHING. Why would anyone believe you?
 
My posts include verifiable links and data. Your posts contain NOTHING. Got that? NOTHING. Why would anyone believe you?
Crick, you know for a fact that I have started numerous threads and have linked dozens of times to show your ignorance. I would think at this point in our interactions, you would be civil and have a desire to actually learn instead of trying your hand at repeating the Democratic Party talking points in regards to climate and energy.

Here is a good example of your ignorance Crick. Crick did a google search to confirm his opinion on Lithium Ion Batteries (I will ignore how crick completely misunderstood my comment). Only thing Crick got wrong is Crick had no idea that a Lithium Ion battery is not the same as a Lithium battery.
The lithium ion battery was invented by a fellow named Lewis Urry who was employed by the Everready Battery company in Canada. He also invented the alkaline battery.

It was not invented by government and it was not the government that developed the demand.

Here is the entry in wikipedia, no mention of Lithium Ion batteries.
Lewis Frederick Urry (29 January 1927 – 19 October 2004) was a Canadian-American chemical engineer and inventor. He invented both the alkaline battery and lithium battery while working for the Eveready Battery company
who invented the lithium ion battery entered in google search results in this;

'Founding Father' of lithium-ion batteries helps solve 40-year ...
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...usg=AOvVaw0urE1Qf9aV2XaNq7unB3ze&opi=89978449
Oak Ridge National Laboratory (.gov)
https://neutrons.ornl.gov › content › ‘founding-father’...

Jul 27, 2021 — Stanley Whittingham was the first to describe the concept of rechargeable lithium-ion batteries, an achievement for which he would share the ...

John B. Goodenough - The Inventor of the Li-ion Battery​


FUERGY
https://www.fuergy.com › blog › john-b-goodenough

Goodenough is a world-class physicist and chemist who is credited for the identification and initial development of the first lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries.
 

Attachments

  • 1687276719267.png
    1687276719267.png
    265 bytes · Views: 3
Crick, you know for a fact that I have started numerous threads and have linked dozens of times to show your ignorance. I would think at this point in our interactions, you would be civil and have a desire to actually learn instead of trying your hand at repeating the Democratic Party talking points in regards to climate and energy.

Here is a good example of your ignorance Crick. Crick did a google search to confirm his opinion on Lithium Ion Batteries (I will ignore how crick completely misunderstood my comment). Only thing Crick got wrong is Crick had no idea that a Lithium Ion battery is not the same as a Lithium battery.


Here is the entry in wikipedia, no mention of Lithium Ion batteries.

who invented the lithium ion battery entered in google search results in this;
Where are your data concerning trends in storm intensity?
 

Forum List

Back
Top