brenthutch 383 #2701 September 3, 2020 6 hours ago, billvon said: Yes they should. So should we, since we are doing a LOT more of it than Japan is. If we should be doing more, why did California (the green energy leader) opt for dirty fossil fuels when an extra windmill, some solar panels and a few batteries would have sufficed? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #2702 September 4, 2020 12 hours ago, brenthutch said: If we should be doing more, why did California (the green energy leader) opt for dirty fossil fuels when an extra windmill, some solar panels and a few batteries would have sufficed? Laziness? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #2703 September 4, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, turtlespeed said: Laziness? No, they just got slapped in the face with reality. Edited September 4, 2020 by brenthutch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #2704 September 8, 2020 (edited) https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbryce/2020/09/06/the-trillion-dollar-reason-biden-wont-ban-fracking/#66dad47eaccf “Here’s a comparison: 34 exajoules is roughly equal to India’s total energy use in 2019. Here’s another: that increase in output – again, just the increase in domestic oil and natural gas production over that period (2005-2019) – was greater than the output of all global non-hydro renewable energy (solar, wind, and biomass) production in 2019.” ”Energy costs are particularly important to the low- and middle-income voters that Biden needs to beat Trump.” Sorry guys, no matter who wins, no Green New Deal. Edited September 8, 2020 by brenthutch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #2705 September 11, 2020 On 9/8/2020 at 12:01 PM, brenthutch said: https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbryce/2020/09/06/the-trillion-dollar-reason-biden-wont-ban-fracking/#66dad47eaccf “Here’s a comparison: 34 exajoules is roughly equal to India’s total energy use in 2019. Here’s another: that increase in output – again, just the increase in domestic oil and natural gas production over that period (2005-2019) – was greater than the output of all global non-hydro renewable energy (solar, wind, and biomass) production in 2019.” ”Energy costs are particularly important to the low- and middle-income voters that Biden needs to beat Trump.” Sorry guys, no matter who wins, no Green New Deal. That doesn't mean we should abandon the progress. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #2706 September 14, 2020 On 9/11/2020 at 7:31 PM, turtlespeed said: That doesn't mean we should abandon the progress. This is why it’s not progress https://www.prageru.com/video/whats-wrong-with-wind-and-solar/?utm_source=Main+Mailing+List&utm_campaign=50f21f798c-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_04_09_06_29_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f90832343d-50f21f798c-178854846 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #2707 September 14, 2020 3 hours ago, brenthutch said: This is why it’s not progress https://www.prageru.com/video/whats-wrong-with-wind-and-solar/?utm_source=Main+Mailing+List&utm_campaign=50f21f798c-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_04_09_06_29_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f90832343d-50f21f798c-178854846 Very droll to suggest PragerU is in any way unbiased. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #2708 September 14, 2020 14 minutes ago, kallend said: Very droll to suggest PragerU is in any way unbiased. Hey Pollyanna, very naive to suggest there is a world where bias does not exist. Bias aside, what are the facts with which you take issue? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #2709 September 15, 2020 27 minutes ago, brenthutch said: Hey Pollyanna, very naive to suggest there is a world where bias does not exist. Bias aside, what are the facts with which you take issue? I doubt very much you will get him to answer that. He doesn't answer when you call him to task. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #2710 September 15, 2020 (edited) 10 minutes ago, turtlespeed said: I doubt very much you will get him to answer that. He doesn't answer when you call him to task. He won’t, he can’t. Edited September 15, 2020 by brenthutch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
olofscience 421 #2711 September 15, 2020 7 hours ago, turtlespeed said: I doubt very much you will get him to answer that. He doesn't answer when you call him to task. 7 hours ago, brenthutch said: He won’t, he can’t. Kallend is an accomplished scientist and scientists know what kind of biases exist, how to identify it in scientific papers, and how to correct for it. Bias is literally one of the FIRST things we have consider. Ever wonder why the covid-19 vaccine trials are done double blind? It's really troublesome to do them like that but it's really important. He has much more actual experience (and accomplishments) with accounting for bias than you guys with your Fox news and Google "research". Just fyi. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #2712 September 15, 2020 10 hours ago, brenthutch said: Hey Pollyanna, Personal attacks are not allowed on this forum. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #2713 September 15, 2020 11 hours ago, turtlespeed said: 12 hours ago, brenthutch said: very naive to suggest there is a world where bias does not exist. Bias aside, what are the facts with which you take issue? I doubt very much you will get him to answer that. Often he just uses one of his default hotkey replies: "Reading comprehension problem?" "weasel weasel weasel" "I will not feed the trolls" (then feeds perceived troll, lol) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #2714 September 15, 2020 11 hours ago, turtlespeed said: I doubt very much you will get him to answer that. He doesn't answer when you call him to task. That loud bang was the hypocrisy meter exploding. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #2715 September 15, 2020 4 hours ago, olofscience said: Kallend is an accomplished scientist and scientists know what kind of biases exist, how to identify it in scientific papers Appeal to irrelevant authority. 4 hours ago, olofscience said: Ever wonder why the covid-19 vaccine trials are done double blind? Because even in a controlled setting scientists can't be trusted with their own bias, let alone some internet forum. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #2716 September 15, 2020 1 minute ago, Coreece said: Often he just uses one of his default hotkey replies: "Reading comprehension problem?" "weasel weasel weasel" "I will not feed the trolls" (then feeds perceived troll, lol) Prager doesn't even pretend to be unbiased. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #2717 September 15, 2020 1 hour ago, kallend said: Personal attacks are not allowed on this forum. “Pollyanna noun an excessively cheerful or optimistic person.“ See? Not a personal attack. Would you have preferred Curmudgeon? Now that I have addressed that, what specifically did you take issue with on the PragerU vid? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #2718 September 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, kallend said: Prager doesn't even pretend to be unbiased. So...you give more consideration to sources that pretend to be unbiased? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #2719 September 15, 2020 1 hour ago, brenthutch said: So...you give more consideration to sources that pretend to be unbiased? I prefer sources like the National Academies of Science and Engineering over Breitbart, Prager and WattsUp. Clearly your mileage varies. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #2720 September 15, 2020 16 minutes ago, kallend said: I prefer sources like the National Academies of Science and Engineering over Breitbart, Prager and WattsUp. Clearly your mileage varies. Your refusal to engage at a substantive level reveals your inability to do so. If the Prager video was so awful it would be easy to rebut, however it isn’t and you can’t. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #2721 September 15, 2020 46 minutes ago, kallend said: I prefer sources like the National Academies of Science and Engineering Ok, here is a gem from NAE ”Many people believe that wind and solar energy are essential for replacing nonrenewable fossil fuels. They also believe that wind and solar are unique in providing energy that’s carbon-free and inexhaustible. A closer look shows that such beliefs are based on illusions and wishful thinking.” Better? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 1,912 #2722 September 15, 2020 1 hour ago, kallend said: I prefer sources like the National Academies of Science and Engineering over Breitbart, Prager and WattsUp. Clearly your mileage varies. You sir are clearly an elitist and not to be trusted in an era of "New Age Emotionalism". (a term I just coined and expect full credit for) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JoeWeber 2,299 #2723 September 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, gowlerk said: You sir are clearly an elitist and not to be trusted in an era of "New Age Emotionalism". (a term I just coined and expect full credit for) Can we Culture Cancel him? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
olofscience 421 #2724 September 15, 2020 7 hours ago, Coreece said: Appeal to irrelevant authority. It's pretty relevant if the discussion is knowledge of bias. In a discussion of primarily science-related debate ("green new deal equals magical thinking") it's especially relevant. 7 hours ago, Coreece said: Because even in a controlled setting scientists can't be trusted with their own bias, let alone some internet forum. And who do you think is creating and managing those controlled settings? People in advertising like you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #2725 September 16, 2020 7 hours ago, olofscience said: It's pretty relevant if the discussion is knowledge of bias. In a discussion of primarily science-related debate ("green new deal equals magical thinking") it's especially relevant. And who do you think is creating and managing those controlled settings? People in advertising like you? No. Scientists and lab assistants with bias. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites