3 3
brenthutch

Green new deal equals magical thinking

Recommended Posts

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
(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 by brenthutch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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
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
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
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
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
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
1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

So...you give more consideration to sources that pretend to be unbiased?  :shock:

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
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
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
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
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
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

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

3 3