"Drill, baby, drill"

[billvon 2,391]

>which industry does matter

Not really. They are both protecting their bottom line. They are both using the same tactics. They are both denying parts of the same science (i.e. that particulate pollution causes lung disease.) They are even using the same people to do it.

>the is a big big difference
>A direct relationship to tobacco usage can be shown

It would be fun to watch you argue with a tobacco risk denier.

[rushmc 18]

There is science on the tobacco side

Not so much for the coal fired plants kill people


Just WAGs meant to support and failing movement.

and in the end, it is the man made climate change ideology you care about

but your problem is data like the following.

Regardless of WHO talks about the numbers.

Quote

No Statistically Significant Satellite Warming For 23 Years (Now Includes February Data)

Quote

March 2, 2016 at 10:11 am
1. The “Pause” hasn’t disappeared. It now just has a beginning and an end. But it is right there in the data where it always was, and it doesn’t cease to exist merely because we can’t calculate one starting from the present and working backwards.

2. The “Pause” was never significant in terms of showing the CO2 doesn’t heat up the earth. It only became significant because the warmist community (Jones, Santer, etc) said that natural variability was too small to cancel the warming of CO2 for more than a period of 10 years…er 15…er 17 and made a big deal out of it.

So regardless of the “Pause” having ended or not, what we have is conclusive evidence that the models either:
a) grossly under estimated natural variability or
b) grossly over estimated CO2 sensitivity or
c) both

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/07/no-statistically-significant-satellite-warming-for-23-years-now-includes-february-data/

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

And this just out!

another prediction fails.....
From Anthony Watts

Quote

According to a new study in Nature, the Northern Hemisphere has experienced considerably larger variations in precipitation during the past twelve centuries than in the twentieth century. Researchers from Sweden, Germany, and Switzerland have found that climate models overestimated the increase in wet and dry extremes as temperatures increased during the twentieth century. The new results will enable us to improve the accuracy of climate models and to better predict future precipitation changes.

From AFP:

Predictions of unprecedented rainfall extremes in the 20th century driven by global warming turned out wrong, a study said Wednesday, casting doubt on methods used to project future trends. A massive trawl of Northern Hemisphere rainfall data for the last 1,200 years revealed there had been more dramatic wet-dry weather extremes in earlier, cooler centuries before humans set off fossil fuel-driven global warming.
.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[GTAVercetti 0]

rushmc

And this just out!

another prediction fails.....
From Anthony Watts

Quote

According to a new study in Nature, the Northern Hemisphere has experienced considerably larger variations in precipitation during the past twelve centuries than in the twentieth century. Researchers from Sweden, Germany, and Switzerland have found that climate models overestimated the increase in wet and dry extremes as temperatures increased during the twentieth century. The new results will enable us to improve the accuracy of climate models and to better predict future precipitation changes.

From AFP:

Predictions of unprecedented rainfall extremes in the 20th century driven by global warming turned out wrong, a study said Wednesday, casting doubt on methods used to project future trends. A massive trawl of Northern Hemisphere rainfall data for the last 1,200 years revealed there had been more dramatic wet-dry weather extremes in earlier, cooler centuries before humans set off fossil fuel-driven global warming.
.

Talk about cherry-picking. I just looked that guy up. Not really what I would call a "hard-science" source.

How about the actual report? Or peer-reviews?

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[billvon 2,391]

>but your problem is data like the following.

"People write numbers in something they call a report and people like you buy."

Or is that only applied when you disagree with the science?

[normiss 622]

It was summarized when Rush said:
"another prediction fails.....
From Anthony Watts "

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>but your problem is data like the following.

"People write numbers in something they call a report and people like you buy."

Or is that only applied when you disagree with the science?

I agree with science when you do not politicize it.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Anthony Watts believes in man made climate change

He does not believe that it will ever be as extreme as the alarmists say

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 622]

This must be the "dumbing down" to which you referred.

[rushmc 18]

normiss

This must be the "dumbing down" to which you referred.

If it helps you I can get lower or closer to your level
Just let me know

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 622]

Yes we all know you can accomplish the former.

[GTAVercetti 0]

rushmc

***This must be the "dumbing down" to which you referred.

If it helps you I can get lower or closer to your level
Just let me know

I love how you think these are all "zingers" and that you are just nailing us with your wit.

Protip: your (sic) not.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[brenthutch 383]

Why can't we just be happy that we have cheap, abundant, domestic energy for generations to come. I know it ruins your wind and solar wet dream, but that is a small price to pay IMHO.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi brent,

Quote

but that is a small price to pay IMHO

IMO it is not the price you pay, it is the price that our heirs will pay.

Jerry Baumchen

[gowlerk 1,903]

brenthutch

Why can't we just be happy that we have cheap, abundant, domestic energy for generations to come. I know it ruins your wind and solar wet dream, but that is a small price to pay IMHO.

I think we are pretty happy. Every time I fill up the tank lately I know I am. But the future counts too. If we don't begin to develop alternate clean power now it won't be there when we need it. Generations to come? Your lack of foresight and unwillingness to improve the situation would leave those future generations struggling. Long after you are gone.

"Wet dream?" When you talk like that, I have to start counting you as a "deadender". Why do you need to be insulting like that? My guess is that you are frustrated because your position and arguments are so weak.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[brenthutch 383]

Wet dream, quixotic notion, failure-bound fantasy, hair-brained scheme, wrong-headed idea; take your pick. Because it is clear that many on this forum don't know how progress works, let me help out. Technology does not proceed in a linear fashion; advances take place at an ever-increasing rate.
For example: A sailor from the 1400s would feel right at home on a ship of the 1700s, while an electrical engineer from the 1980s would be completely flummoxed today. The advances that will occur in the next 40 years will be more than the entire arc of human history that preceded it. It is foolhardy to squander billions on non-problems in the meantime.
Why, then, do we do it? H.L. Mencken said it best: "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
Clearly we have a lot of folks in this forum who fear hobgoblins.

[gowlerk 1,903]

Quote

The advances that will occur in the next 40 years will be more than the entire arc of human history that preceded it.

That will only be true if we get to work on it. You are calling for us to settle for being content with what we have for the next several generations. I will grant you that windmills are a technology from the 6th century. But coal predates recorded history.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[brenthutch 383]

Soooo your position is that no progress can happen unless the government pays for it???

Like the iPhone development grant? The cotton gin tax credit? The light bulb feed-in tariff? The model T; bankrolled by the department of transportation? The printing press?

Apparently you wish to place our future in the hands of these guys
http://www.gobankingrates.com/personal-finance/20-biggest-boondoggles/

Oh BTW recorded history is redundant.

[gowlerk 1,903]

Quote

Soooo your position is that no progress can happen unless the government pays for it???

In this day and age high tech always begins with government funding. Think Apollo, nuclear energy, the internet, biotech and genetics. The iphone would not exist without ARPANET. Sport skydiving would not exist without the military.

Yup, government is a definite part of the puzzle. How much gas would the USA be burning without the Interstate system? In the old days kings were the patrons of science. Now it's the people through their government.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[brenthutch 383]

gowlerk

Quote

Soooo your position is that no progress can happen unless the government pays for it???

In this day and age high tech always begins with government funding.

Like 3D printing?
I will concede that government has a role to play, infrastructure, defense, and such. However the notion that "high tech always begins with government funding" is just plain nonsense.
Nuclear energy, Apollo and the Internet are either directly or indirectly related to defense. Meddling in the energy markets, like subsidizing ethanol, is boondogglery at its worse.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3540967/ns/business-oil_and_energy/t/ethanol-boon-or-boondoggle/

[gowlerk 1,903]

Our energy supply system is a very large ship to turn around. Many utilities are still publicly owned. It's a massive endeavor, it needs a massive organization.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[brenthutch 383]

gowlerk

Our energy supply system is a very large ship to turn around. Many utilities are still publicly owned. It's a massive endeavor, it needs a massive organization.

I will ask again; just how much government funding and intervention was required to shepherd the shift from coal to natural gas? Very large ship and massive endeavor withstanding.

[gowlerk 1,903]

I'm not sure. But I'd be very surprised if the gas distribution system in cities was not given some level of support. When it was installed. You are probably talking about electricity generation though.

The government has intervened there mostly by requiring less pollution from power plants. Gas has a huge advantage there.
Just exactly which aspect of current energy policy do you object to? You seem to have a blanket feeling of opposition to any regulation at all. And it's very hard to discuss these issues in blanket terms. It always gets off into the weeds. So if you want a real debate, how about one small issue at a time?

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[brenthutch 383]

I guess my position would best be summed up by saying that I would rather spend our preciously constrained resources on feeding the hungry and educating our children, than giving tax breaks to the wealthy to buy a new toy (Tesla) or lining the pockets of ADM (ethanol).

[normiss 622]

There are some interesting stories from old Alcatel engineers about that program.
Abandoning a project that someone else picks up?