What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

What I Don't Understand About "Climate Change"

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
61,288
Reaction score
8,519
Points
2,040
Location
Portland, Ore.
I do not agree.
Since electricity now comes mostly from coal, and EVs are incredibly inefficient do to batter in and out loses, as well as doubling vehicle weight, then EVs increase emissions, not decrease.
The least emissions comes from bio fuel ICE.
Pure bullshit. Renewables produce more electricity in the US than coal.
1632072500609.png

 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
61,288
Reaction score
8,519
Points
2,040
Location
Portland, Ore.
I do not agree.
Since electricity now comes mostly from coal, and EVs are incredibly inefficient do to batter in and out loses, as well as doubling vehicle weight, then EVs increase emissions, not decrease.
The least emissions comes from bio fuel ICE.
EV's inefficient? Pure bullshit.

"An electric vehicle (EV) starts with a huge advantage over an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle: ICE vehicles generally run at about 20% efficiency, meaning that 80% of the energy content of their fuel is wasted, versus EVs which put about 80% of their input energy into turning the wheels.Nov 17, 2009"
 

Iamartiewhitefox

VIP Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2021
Messages
1,047
Reaction score
149
Points
63
1309_temp-2020_comparison-plot-768px.jpg



American Association for the Advancement of Science
"Based on well-established evidence, about 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening." (2014)3

ACS emblem
American Chemical Society
"The Earth’s climate is changing in response to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and particulate matter in the atmosphere, largely as the result of human activities." (2016-2019)4

AGU emblem
American Geophysical Union
"Based on extensive scientific evidence, it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. There is no alterative explanation supported by convincing evidence." (2019)5

AMA emblem
American Medical Association
"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2019)6

AMS emblem
American Meteorological Society
"Research has found a human influence on the climate of the past several decades ... The IPCC (2013), USGCRP (2017), and USGCRP (2018) indicate that it is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-twentieth century." (2019)7

APS emblem
American Physical Society
"Earth's changing climate is a critical issue and poses the risk of significant environmental, social and economic disruptions around the globe. While natural sources of climate variability are significant, multiple lines of evidence indicate that human influences have had an increasingly dominant effect on global climate warming observed since the mid-twentieth century." (2015)8

GSA emblem
The Geological Society of America
"The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2011), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2013) and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (Melillo et al., 2014) that global climate has warmed in response to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases ... Human activities (mainly greenhouse-gas emissions) are the dominant cause of the rapid warming since the middle 1900s (IPCC, 2013)." (2015)9

SCIENCE ACADEMIES
International Academies: Joint Statement
"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)10

UNSAS emblem
U.S. National Academy of Sciences
"Scientists have known for some time, from multiple lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate, primarily through greenhouse gas emissions."11

U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
USGCRP emblem
U.S. Global Change Research Program
"Earth’s climate is now changing faster than at any point in the history of modern civilization, primarily as a result of human activities." (2018, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)12

INTERGOVERNMENTAL BODIES
IPCC emblem
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.”13

“Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems.”14





Just want to address your point #1
The absence of free ask and receive will make pollutants to increase. Manufacturing will go down a lot when the best things are made. Everyone wants to have a well made Titanium bike. A Light Speed or a Lynskey. They could be had by whoever when ask and receive is used. People who make them can ask and receive what they need to build them, and ask for whatever to sustain them, when they are building them. God who made free in everyone, would be beyond amazing.
 

toobfreak

Tungsten/Glass Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
42,675
Reaction score
28,662
Points
2,615
Location
On The Way Home To Earth
Not only can you not read graphs, you are demonstrating the idiocy of the normal "Conservative".

FUCK OFF, moonbat. I've lost more knowledge over the years than you've ever had. Every time you idiots are proven wrong, you never fail to fall back on the same typical "gee are you conservatives dumb," because you can't argue facts outside your cloistered, vacuous atmospheres, as if people only vote one way or the other, or suddenly gain or lose 40 IQ points just because they lean right or left.

I'm always reminded of all the Obama voters who were good as gold great people until after getting sick and tired of 8 years of him and Biden, they switched over to voting for Trump. Then they became "imbecile conservatives." :lmao:

It is the brainwashed assholes like you who keep trying to herd everyone in our country into two hopelessly permanently polarized, divided camps.
 
Last edited:

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
15,560
Reaction score
4,665
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
What have you been smoking?


Ive seen many lefties argue just that.


RUBBISH. Now you are arguing for a simplistic view of one of the Milankovich cycles, but that only partly explains a small part of a fraction of the Earth's cycles I've described.


We are? 200 years? You mean there was man made climate change going on on 1821 when Mozart was penning his first compositions and the steam engine was first being developed?


No. Your fix for it all just as with your shutdowns will prove far more costly than the dilemma you sought to fix.


Really? You think the Earth has never lived through and recovered just fine from two bigger concurrent events than this? :21: :laughing0301: Geez, where did you get your education from, Comedy College?

Just suppose we find as time goes on and the current Milankovich cycle fades that indeed, we are due to head into the next cooling period/mini ice age and our little contributions now are all that is delaying us falling sooner back into a sub-polar climate killing billions? Because the next cooling period is coming, you can bet; we have clocked seven ice ages over the past 2.5 million years not including the little mini cooling periods.

Fact of the matter is that man-made or natural, another hot spell or cooling period is coming, that is the nature of climate-- -- -- CHANGE. Climate is ALWAYS changing, always has, it is only through a miraculously fortuitous stabilizing influence of our large Moon that they are not much worse, and history shows that eventually, it will effect a house cleaning someway, somehow, and eradicate much of the human overpopulation we have inflicted upon the planet-- -- whether we want it or not.

Wrong.
When I said we are compressing the normal climate cycle into about 200 years, that did NOT at all imply it started 200 years ago.
Our main increase started during WWII, and the 200 year estimate is how long it would take to achieve the same temp change as the natural 110,000 year long cycle.
Nothing about starting time was at all implied.

No one mentioned shutdowns.
Reducing car engine size to 1.0 liter so we can get 80 mpg is not shutting anything down.

And yes, the earth has had similar climate catastrophes before, but it is we who do not want that, like when the dinosaurs died out.

And your understanding of climate cycles is all wrong.
The natural climate cycle is over 110,000 years long, so kills NO ONE.
It is so slow it is easy to adapt to, and the world easily adapts to cold.
It is not hot or cold that is the problem, but the speed of change.
If we continue and make the change accelerate to only 200 years, we will not be able to easily adapt to that as we easily can to the longer natural cycle.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
15,560
Reaction score
4,665
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
And therein lies the rub. They cannot have it doing what we have always done without destroying the ecology we depend on. Therefore, we must adapt the new technologies as rapidly as possible. China is already doing that by leading the world in installation of solar and wind, in the adaption of EV's, and in planting new forests.

Except EVs are bad and harmful, not only due to the lithium and rare earth element mining, but because batteries are so heavy and inefficient.
Bio fuel actually cleans emissions out of the air.
Or at least nuclear production of hydrogen makes much more sense than EVs.
For example, there will never be an EV plane.
 

toobfreak

Tungsten/Glass Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
42,675
Reaction score
28,662
Points
2,615
Location
On The Way Home To Earth
Reducing car engine size to 1.0 liter so we can get 80 mpg is not shutting anything down.
WRONG. You go drive a little shitbox eggbeater. I'll keep driving an overpowered car that has the ability to accelerate on demand to get out of the way of collisions and accidents, and is substantial enough that I'll survive a collision with a bigger vehicle. I saw a video of an elephant the other day take one of your little eggbeaters and pick it up with his horn and THROW IT THROUGH THE AIR like it was nothing.

It is so slow it is easy to adapt to, and the world easily adapts to cold.
WRONG. Many of our natural mass extinctions of life on Earth occurred because Earth went back into a cold snowball.

It is not hot or cold that is the problem, but the speed of change.
You talk like you think you are teaching me something. Do you have any idea how important rate of change is to an electrical engineer dealing with AC current? Rate of change is everything, so much so, they've assigned a greek letter to it called DELTA."

If we continue and make the change accelerate to only 200 years, we will not be able to easily adapt to that as we easily can to the longer natural cycle.
Good. It will be as nature intended then since WE are part of nature. The Earth is due for another good house cleaning.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
15,560
Reaction score
4,665
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
Pure bullshit. Renewables produce more electricity in the US than coal.
View attachment 541411

That is a very recent development, and is actually based more on the increase of natural gas generation from fracking that decreased coal.
However, natural gas will soon run out and coal will again be he main source.
Wind and solar will never be the main source.
 

Iamartiewhitefox

VIP Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2021
Messages
1,047
Reaction score
149
Points
63
Here is your fatal flaw.

You assume the left "thinks".

I am not being jovial, facetious or joking in any way or manner. Ordinary bed wetters have no functioning frontal lobes. Some were born without them entirely because generations of them never used their brains, this is evidenced by the fact that dystopian marxist governments have been created, murdered 120 million people, increased poverty, and failed to deliver any semblance of equity beyond feudal societies where a ruling class dominates the proles. You're either equally poor, or "more" equally rich and powerful.


The entire premise of the MMGW hoax is to undermine if not totally destroy anything and everything in America that creates prosperity. It has just as much to do with "protecting the environment" as Gun Control has to do with "public safety". If the bed wetters gave a fruit fly's fuck about "the environment" they would put their efforts behind endeavors that would make a difference,like getting the plastic cleaned up out of the oceans. If "public safety" was a concern, they would at least tacitly support police but also mandate gun safety education, and shooting courses for every sane adult. They should be the biggest advocates of the NRA, but they're the biggest enemy, and they're the enemies of humanity, the COTUS and the USA in general.
Satan thinks rich and powerful. Satan made the thing that comes from nothing through people. That nothing makes people to treat others as if they are nothing. People become what they behold. The left does not use Rightious judging. Condeming judging is not Rightious judging. People who have blood in them should not condemn others. Jesus did not condemn others when on the earth. He had blood in him at the time. Jesus praised people who were like him. Jesus gently counselled people to be like him.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
15,560
Reaction score
4,665
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
EV's inefficient? Pure bullshit.

"An electric vehicle (EV) starts with a huge advantage over an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle: ICE vehicles generally run at about 20% efficiency, meaning that 80% of the energy content of their fuel is wasted, versus EVs which put about 80% of their input energy into turning the wheels.Nov 17, 2009"

Wrong.
ICE like a turbo diesel is over 40% efficient, and EVs are NOT 80% efficient at all.
Electric motors are ONLY 50% efficient, electrical generation is only 50% efficient, transmission of power grid only 90% efficient, battery charging is only 50% efficient, and battery out is only 50% efficient.
Total EV efficiency is less than 10%.
It is by far the least efficient means of transportation.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
123,720
Reaction score
39,875
Points
2,290
Listen sweetpee, you only have to be right once whereas you have been wrong every time.
Go figure
:)-

Unless there were velociraptors on Saturn's Moon Titan, the space program killed the notion of "Peak Oil"

pia23172-home.jpg
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
15,560
Reaction score
4,665
Points
265
Location
New Mexico
WRONG. You go drive a little shitbox eggbeater. I'll keep driving an overpowered car that has the ability to accelerate on demand to get out of the way of collisions and accidents, and is substantial enough that I'll survive a collision with a bigger vehicle. I saw a video of an elephant the other day take one of your little eggbeaters and pick it up with his horn and THROW IT THROUGH THE AIR like it was nothing.


WRONG. Many of our natural mass extinctions of life on Earth occurred because Earth went back into a cold snowball.


You talk like you think you are teaching me something. Do you have any idea how important rate of change is to an electrical engineer dealing with AC current? Rate of change is everything, so much so, they've assigned a greek letter to it called DELTA."


Good. It will be as nature intended then since WE are part of nature. The Earth is due for another good house cleaning.

Wrong.
Strength changes with area while destructive weakness is proportional to volume.
Which is why ants can carry 10 times their own weight and larger organisms can not.
The smaller the car, the more survivable the crash, (assuming you hit something immobile like a brick wall).
The fact a small car hitting a big car will crush the small car , is not a reason to not get smaller cars, but to make bigger cars illegal.

Normal 110,000 year long cycles has never caused extinctions.
There instead would just be migrations.
Humans killed off the large ice age animals, not warming.

There will be no way to adapt to that climate cycle compressed into just 200 years.
The plants and animals can't migrate that fast, and we can't move them.
We will be busy evacuating all the coastal cities as the ocean rises 250'.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
123,720
Reaction score
39,875
Points
2,290
You are the fool here. Apparently you have zero understanding of the history of the Earth, or of natural geological processes. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has varied of the history of the Earth for a number of natural reasons. That hardly means that we can double the amount of GHGs without affecting the temperature of the Earth.
co2_trend_mlo.png


Old Rocks explains why atmospheric CO2 did not decrease despite a worldwide economic slowdown:






.
 

toobfreak

Tungsten/Glass Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
42,675
Reaction score
28,662
Points
2,615
Location
On The Way Home To Earth
Strength changes with area while destructive weakness is proportional to volume.
Whateverthefuck that is supposed to mean! :auiqs.jpg: Wow, what a simplistic view of the world you get with a junior G-man degree!

The smaller the car, the more survivable the crash
I see you haven't been in any bad crashes with a truly big ol' car, so more smoke out of your ass you blow. The big car wins every time. Physics 101.

not a reason to not get smaller cars, but to make bigger cars illegal.
There is no good reason for a small car unless you live in Italy with tiny streets or you are super cheap on gas. And if your commie ass thinks making all the big ol' mean big cars illegal to protect all those tiny death traps you are forcing people to drive in a good idea, just be done with it and outlaw cars altogether and make people drive motorcycles, or bikes, or walk. Hell with it, just ban all private transportation and make everyone wait for the slow, overcrowded, late, public subway! :21:

Normal 110,000 year long cycles has never caused extinctions.
That's right. I never said they did. YOU brought them up. :laugh2:

Humans killed off the large ice age animals, not warming.
Is that another erroneous factoid you pulled out of your ass?

There will be no way to adapt to that climate cycle compressed into just 200 years.
Then bend over and kiss your ass goodbye.

We will be busy evacuating all the coastal cities as the ocean rises 250'.
Glug, Glug, Glug.
 

watchingfromafar

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
3,809
Reaction score
679
Points
140
So you think that we should take do no medical intervention in the Covid.
No, it is our nature to try and save whoever we can. I support this but it is inevitable that herd immunity is the final cure.

At 72 I think my time is due

BTW: I have taken my two shots; hope you have too

:)-
 

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
16,324
Reaction score
1,988
Points
290
Location
N/A
Wrong.
ICE like a turbo diesel is over 40% efficient, and EVs are NOT 80% efficient at all.
Electric motors are ONLY 50% efficient, electrical generation is only 50% efficient, transmission of power grid only 90% efficient, battery charging is only 50% efficient, and battery out is only 50% efficient.
Total EV efficiency is less than 10%.
It is by far the least efficient means of transportation.
Why did you not include the losses involved in obtaining, processing and distributing fuel in your summation of ICE efficiencies? You are trying to compare apples and oranges.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$132.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top