Alternative energy
Forums › General Discussion › Alternative energy-
Yourplague wrote:
Ahahaha😺Hippy pride 🚬😚💨
-
Jeff 🍆 Newton wrote:
This is wrong, too by the way.Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
It came from animals and other smal occurrences. I don't see your point in that question, exactly.Hey Newton, bake your noodle on this:
Where did all the carbon come from that fed the plants that eventually became fossil fuels?
Whack job.
RETRACT YOUR EGGPLANT BEFORE I SLICE THE SUCKER OFF! 😲
-
Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
Brown is correct. Greenhouse gasses were way higher in prehistoric times. Let me see about googling a number. Brb with a linkYour earlier statement that the co2 levels are higher than ever before is not true. I expect a formal retraction, and would be pleasantly surprised if you just admit you have no idea what you are talking about.
Take me to school? Gimme a break. Suck on your own eggplant for a change.
-
http://www.biocab.org/carbon_dioxide_geological_timescale.html
20 times higher newton. I also expect a retraction
-
Don't mind me folks. I just really don't give a shit. Just having fun while I can.
Option A: You die.
Option B: You get all freaked out about death by warmth or getting pulled under by a drowning polar bear and then you die.
Option C: You make a copy of your brain to run on a computer... AND THEN YOU DIE.
(Kurzweil is a looney.)
-
You're all so hostile! And B, you're right. Level were that much higher. But our levels are currently even exceeding that of the dinosaurs times! I said earlier!
-
Btw, kurtz and his books were interesting. Hes talking about stuff that is way beyond our time.
-
Jeff 🍆 Newton wrote:
If you read further it depends on the exact era of dinosaursBtw, kurtz and his books were interesting. Hes talking about stuff that is way beyond our time.
-
I have read your article Belial. Even if levels went as high as you said the rise was gradual over a longer amount of time. Today, those levels are rising faster. Such a sudden change in temperature would hit hard. Of course we could make it out. That doesn't mean it will be a smooth transition with no changes to current day life. And brown note, I'm entitled to what I feel is truth, no need to get so damn hostile towards me.
-
Sure he can. We know it's all bs designed to get money and lower pur average quality of life
-
Jeff 🍆 Newton wrote:
Btw, kurtz and his books were interesting. Hes talking about stuff that is way beyond our time.
That's exactly what he wants you to think. He's a fool, and I suspect he knows it.
Think about it. Each time someone in Star Trek "beams down" to the planet below, the pad rips your atoms apart. You are now dead.
The exact copy of you on the planet below *thinks* he's you, but he's no more you than anyone else is. It's a copy of you, made as you were horribly ripped to shreds on the pad.
Such a smart man, and he doesn't even realize this?
-
Jeff 🍆 Newton wrote:
I have read your article Belial. Even if levels went as high as you said the rise was gradual over a longer amount of time. Today, those levels are rising faster. Such a sudden change in temperature would hit hard. Of course we could make it out. That doesn't mean it will be a smooth transition with no changes to current day life. And brown note, I'm entitled to what I feel is truth, no need to get so damn hostile towards me.
I think the Coolaid you've been drinking is making you interpret truth for hostility.
-
Whatever guys. 😓 There's no convincing a republican! 😏😜
-
He makes the same mistake so many of us do...
He thinks individual people are significant.
They aren't.
But he goes further and also thinks making a clone of yourself is living forever.
It isn't.
What a pill-popping shyster that guy is.
-
Jeff 🍆 Newton wrote:
You are entitled to be corrected when you talk from your ass. That's all.I have read your article Belial. Even if levels went as high as you said the rise was gradual over a longer amount of time. Today, those levels are rising faster. Such a sudden change in temperature would hit hard. Of course we could make it out. That doesn't mean it will be a smooth transition with no changes to current day life. And brown note, I'm entitled to what I feel is truth, no need to get so damn hostile towards me.
-
This isn't about politics it's about science. And that is where the "superstars" of climate science have lost it. They are doing bad science and getting funding from governments and corporations to prove a conclusion science will never be able to support so they have to resort to lies and mafia tactics.
-
Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
I hated that part. I always thought, if I copied my brain into a computer then I would be here and alive still. And that would be a new me. Not me. That is not immortality!He makes the same mistake so many of us do...
He thinks individual people are significant.
They aren't.
But he goes further and also thinks making a clone of yourself is living forever.
It isn't.
What a pill-popping shyster that guy is.
-
When did this become about politics, and not geology?
I missed something.
Or maybe fruit newton sees this as ideology... That must be it.
-
Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
He just said he's entitled to his opinion. Much respect and a viable point of view. Even though what you believe is farce. ☺Jeff 🍆 Newton wrote:
You are entitled to be corrected when you talk from your ass. That's all.I have read your article Belial. Even if levels went as high as you said the rise was gradual over a longer amount of time. Today, those levels are rising faster. Such a sudden change in temperature would hit hard. Of course we could make it out. That doesn't mean it will be a smooth transition with no changes to current day life. And brown note, I'm entitled to what I feel is truth, no need to get so damn hostile towards me.
-
I was joking around... Lol
-
Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
When did this become about politics, and not geology?
I missed something.
Or maybe fruit newton sees this as ideology... That must be it.
That is where climate science has gone. Why do you think it went from global cooling in the 70s to global warming in the 90s to climate change in the 2000s.
While the mechanisms and models the climate "scientists" have made up have been disproven in peer reviewed physics journals the fact is that forcing a new tax on people in the name of saving the planet is just too good to give up on.
-
Jeff 🍆 Newton wrote:
Hey.... You know... Just messin' with ya. I never fought you properly, errrr introduced myself properly... I'm brown. I can moo, can you?I was joking around... Lol
-
Revenge wrote: He just said he's entitled to his opinion. Much respect and a viable point of view. Even though what you believe is farce. ☺
Is that blushing smiley face because you have an eggplant up your ass?
-
Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
Ahem. That's my eggplant. Don't go stealing it without asking.Revenge wrote: He just said he's entitled to his opinion. Much respect and a viable point of view. Even though what you believe is farce. ☺
Is that blushing smiley face because you have an eggplant up your ass?
-
⌖🔥Belial🔥⌖ wrote:
I look out my window and see the Three Mile Island cooling towers. 😲💚ǤƦєɛɲՊɑɳҳ℘ℎıƖҽ wrote:
Nuclear is clean and renuable. It's the only form of power that can generate enough to support us. Nuclear has a bad rap but it's our best option⌖🔥Belial🔥⌖ wrote:
No it isn't. Can't tell if joking...Obviously alternative energy is necessary. Nuclear is the best option.
-
Fusion is where it's at. H -> He = da shiznit.
-
Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
Fusion is where it's at. H -> He = da shiznit.
ITER
The physics is almost done. It's just engineering left.
-
I am torn on the topic. On one hand I think it's important, or even our duty to take reasonable precautions to protect our environment. Pollution is bad, it's hard to argue that isn't. Anyone who knowingly and willingly pollutes excessively should be stopped. I don't care if we're talking about major conglomerate chemical manufactures dumping unfiltered waste into the air and water, or a litter bug throwing trash out their car window. It's morally and ethically wrong.
That being said, if we want to burn coal or oil for heat and energy, and we make use of the technology available to do so in the Most environmentally and economically (and there is a balance there) friendly way, then we should do it.
When alternatives can be used effectively, they should be used. Look at wind farms in Wyoming, solar plants in California, and hydroelectric plants along our rivers. Those are effective, both environmentally and economically.
-
As for the carbon debate, what a joke. I have taken several college courses on weather, and climate change with professors on both sides of the argument.
They (either side) rely on statistical analysis of past data to arrive at their findings. Anyone who has ever tried to prove or disprove a point in this method has seen the problem. It's easy to manipulate stats to support your hypothesis. Further complicating the problem is the fact that the co2 levels on earth are anything but uniform. Historic samples from Antarctic ice shelvs are after compared to current data gathered from Hawaii at the maua loa facility. That's on the big island, home of an active volcano, abundant life, and warm ocean waters. All of which expell carbon, and none if which are present in Antarctica.
-
Further complicating the issue is that carbon levels in the atmosphere is minute, so small that many climatologists believe the fluctuations we see are not significant enough to cause the kind of global changes predicted by Hollywood. I don't know that I completely buy that...
At the end of the day, we have bigger things to worry about in my opinion. We should be letting economics handle what fuels we choose to use, and public perception dictate how we use those fuels, while supporting science through continued education to come up with the future of our energy needs.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC