Endless Sphere

ZeroEm wrote: ↑

Jan 17 2020 7:34am

Now, every one knows the warmer Earth gets the more active the plates will be. More earth quakes and increased volcanic activity.

That's a bit of a stretch with no evidence to support it. Not sure how you can say "every one knows."

Metaphorically speaking we are challenged to redesign the plane we are on in mid-flight. It's worse than that even. It's like needing to redesign the plane in mid-flight while the pilot has the door to the cockpit locked, 40% of the passengers on the plane are hell bent on letting it crash just so ...

Save your effort, Bill. Nothing will convince this guy to move away from the denier blog-o-sphere and to consider actual peer-reviewed scientific data and studies.

So, are you saying there have been , and are, NO trends ? At various periods there have have been cooling trends, ( 1940 - 1975) and other periods warming trends (1980-2000), ? The whole AGW debate is based on a trend .! Maybe you missed the facts stated by those eminent , qualified scientists, ......

sendler2112 wrote: ↑

Sep 24 2019 9:49pm

In case you didn't know Greta, here is a full interview to get acquainted with the next Nobel prize winner.
.
https://youtu.be/Dgi30Wy_V74
.

She is a prophet. Sadly, history has not been very kind to prophets.

Very true . But, the real reason climate models are criticised ( except for the unique Russian model ), is because they repeatedly fail to predict anywhere close to what actually happens.. And yes, i am confident i will be fine ! :wink: That statement is absolutely false. The Earth has warmed just ...

So, I downloaded that data (all of the data!) and plotted a trend line myself. It shows a trend of 0.56 degrees F per decade. ........ And what exactly is “all of the data” ? The data points on the plot that YOU showed from the link that YOU gave me. That data. Don't you even know how to plot a tre...

Like all organised groups of scientists, NOAA are a bunch of crooks so I relied on my uneducated armchair analysis to reveal the true trend in their data - shocking warming trend!!! Capture.JPG 1.5°C per leap year means we'll see the oceans boiling in ~50 years. Better get prepping! Open your eyes,...

Give me a link to the page where you got that supposedly NOAA USCRN graph...... ...... I guarantee it's one of your denier sites. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/national-temperature-index/time-series?datasets%5B%5D=uscrn¶meter=anom-tavg&time_scale=p12&begyear=2004&endyear=2017&month=...

The difference is the effect from “Urban Heat Islands” where most of the original temperature stations now find themselves due to urban development over the last 100+ years. If that is the case, then why is the warming trend even greater in the arctic and polar regions? No big cities up there. Urba...

sounds like a scam.

Some points to keep in mind from the video to keep the discussion running true: What State and Federal incentives are being leveraged to offer the bid price of $20/ MWh for the solar pv. Is the Federal Government still subsidizing new grid scale solar at $33/ MWH as it has been? And how much more i...

That said, Jimw1960 already posted you a link... Minor correction. I didn't post him a link. I'm through trying to explain anything to his ignorant self. I'm quite sure he did not bother to watch the video, which was packed with technical details and references to other details that can be looked u...

To put it another way, you've had a month and still haven't worked that out? :D Seriously, it took me all of a few minutes to find out how the per-kWh cost estimates were derived. Anyone interested can find the presentation by LA Dept. of Water and Power staff to their board of commissioners here: ...

Meanwhile, while people here are arguing that it can't be done, people are out there doing it. Los Angeles, California: "Giant batteries and cheap solar power are shoving fossil fuels off the grid" https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/07/giant-batteries-and-cheap-solar-power-are-shoving-fossil-fuels...

You've gone back to being a type 1 denier - "the climate isn't warming, stupid!" The reason you'll get laughed at isn't because scientists can prove you wrong - it's because anyone in the US can prove you wrong by their experiences over the last 30 years. Try telling someone in Barrow, Alaska that ...

I'm reviving this old thread with a good story about Ping battery storage. I hadn't rode my e-bikes for about three years since I moved closer to work. The bikes have been sitting in a shed in the hot Texas sun without ever being charged. Well now I'm selling my house, so had to get the bikes out of...

Ahh ! So your “trillion “. has now become 600 Gt !, Pity you couldnt just “man up” and admit you were wrong !... .....without all this other distraction to try to cover up your bullsh1t. I give up on your ignorant ass. I've never met a mind so closed by a political world view. If you look at the co...

Who is in the hole here ? I notice you have now changed your ranting to CO2, from just Carbon.. And why dont you state that figure for remaining ANTHROPOGENIC carbon in the atmosphere if you are so familiar with it ? You guys are handy with bullsh1t , but a bit shy on real answers ! Have you figure...

That 1.0 Tt iis more like the total carbon in the atmosphere (@410ppm). It’s not the increase (120ppm), let alone the remaining anthropogenic portion. (??ppm) Try again ? We are on track to double the atmospheric CO2 concentration before the end of this century if no action is taking. That's adding...

It might have been "wasted" but it wouldn't have transferred a trillion tons of carbon from deep in the ground into the atmosphere. Would you like to try another “guess” at that carbon tonnage in the atmosphere ? It’s. pretty obvious you do not have a clue what the actual figure really is ! 35 bill...

the energy would've been wasted regardless. wether we existed or not entropy fanz. https://pics.me.me/causing-cancer-since-1964-if-windmills-caused-cancer-pete-townsend-47376304.png It might have been "wasted" but it wouldn't have transferred a trillion tons of carbon from deep in the ground into t...

IE.. wind has priority supply access, whilst coal is on standby to fill the shortfalls. You could read that same data as “wind fail to supply 22% of the time” ! AND....Gas still produces more than double the wind output Sure. For now. But that's changing. By 2040 there will be less than 20% from co...

https://spectrum.ieee.org/image/Mjg5NTQ5NQ.jpeg You have a source for that chart? I'm sure it doesn't include all the hidden subsidies that fossil fuels get. To really compare you need to value the cost to society of the externalities of fossil fuel extraction and consumption. Add in the social cos...

More accurately stated as ... there is no proof that the increase in CO2 levels are the result of anthropogenic activity. :wink: So, in your esteemed opinion, what has happened to the 30 billion tons of CO2 that fossil fuel burning has added to the atmosphere every year for the past several decades...