How Ignorant Are The Warmers?

Very ignorant it appears.

Discussing what would (according to the corrupt UN) would be required to (allegedly) keep warming over the next century to 2 degrees C.

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2014/07/deep-de-carbonization-can-we-get-there-from-here.html

quote:
“To achieve stabilization at a 2°C warming, we would need to install ~900 ± 500 MW [mega-watts] of carbon emissions-free power generating capacity each day over the next 50 years.”

“Get that? A nuclear power plant-worth of carbon-free energy per day, every day until 2050.”




Taxcutter says:
Doesn’t look doable to me.

Considering that the CRIBs are completely recalcitrant, why should the US or West even bother?

 

Good job falling for an out of context article about an issue you are clearly ignorant about - Looks like you might need to change the title of the thread

 

People in glass houses and all that.... I love the sound of breaking glass!

 

The Warmers don't seem to understand Rayleigh Scattering, or the changes in solar spectrum that occur on regular cycles, and its impact on total solar flux absorption.

Their models keep getting wrong because they're obsessed with CO2, when the only atmospheric gas causing large impacts is actually the Nitrogen.

They keep getting it wrong because they choose to ignore the single largest fluctuating element of the heat equation, the output of Sol.

But then, the agenda is about creating a justification for controlling and profiting from human activity, not accepting the real science.

Given that, and the fact that they ARE, via Obama, making lots of money and gaining lots of power right now, ... perhaps the word Ignorant isn't the best descriptor.

They KNOW what they are spout about Global Warming is bad science at best, and out right fraud in many instances. But it gets them power and money.

So, you might be more accurate to substitute the words "Corrupt, Manipulative and Greedy" for "Ignorant"! ​

-

 

It's a religion for the Warmers. They are void of any common sense.

 

Because if we don't reduce our pollution, we'll all die.

 

How is it that you can see that as a hypothetical motivation for people that want to reduce pollution, but you can't see that as a motivation for the people that are profiting from pollution right now as we speak?

Of course the oil industry wants to go on polluting to their heart's content. They make money that way. This is not hypothetical. It's not grim speculation as to their motives. It's undeniable reality.

But no, their motives must be pure, 'cause ...

... why?

 

Gore wouldn't lie to us to make a profit now would he?

 

While your comment is pretty ridiculous.... the topic was AGW.... not pollution.

 

Taxcutter says:
I doubt that. The air quality in the US is the best it has ever been.

 

A better question would be is how ignorant are the deniers.

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/

 

GW loons will remain ignorant. They simply do not and will not accept the newest and purest information on GW which isnt. Everyone needs to read the report that has finally been released. Read up on the USCRN report that shows in the last 10 years the temps have actually COOLED by .4 degrees C.

How inconvienant for the internet inventor Al Gore!!!!!!!!

 

that is one aspect of it, but the other aspect is the understanding of friction in the ari and how it also affects weather patterns.

 

How is it that people fall for the idea that CO2, required for life, is pollution.

Oh wait, the EPA is getting sued to release the information they were supposed to release when they decided that CO2 was a pollutant.

More challenges to EPA’s objectivity in its GHG endangerment findings.

 

the probelm is the politicizing of global warming. Global warming, or climate change has always existed. the reason is how all animals, including humanns, have interacted with that environemnt. Since man is part of the envirnoment, the logical conclusino is that man has also impacted the environemnt. We have done this by For creating technologies that have harmed and helped the envirnoment. For isntance, corbon dioxide exits naturally and mande made An erupting volcano creates carbon dioxide for instance. So does a car or a coal burning plant. That corbon dioxide affects our environment. We aww this in the 1980's in places like Los Angeles where the air smelled, and in some places smelled like a swere. Now, through laws and technolgoy, that air is now cleaner, which affects the enviornment in a positive way. The deniers want every place to be like Los Angeles of the 1980's and they simply do not understand the damaging effects it will create in the long run.

 

One wonders how dumb the warmers really are. From the "deep decarbonization" (lower case) UN paper.

Paper Here -> deep decarbonization

Chapter 3.1, page 12

CO2 emissions = Population x (GDP/Population) x (Energy/GDP) x (CO2/Energy)

So, if you know anything about math, Population cancels Population, GDP cancels GDP, and Energy cancels Energy so you are left with:

CO2 = CO2

Brilliant, no?

 

Taxcutter says:
No nukes became operational yesterday. We are falling behind the necessary schedule.

 

nuclear power puts a 0 carbon dioxide print in the atmosphere, but the problem is what to do with the toxic byproducts that come with nuclear power. Once that problem is solved, then nuclear power would not be as controversial.

 

yeah ... nice try.Like how In context was - An Inconvenient Truth -.
Which we now all knowed as - A Convenient Lie -.
I mean, is there any doubt as to what lefties are all about.
" this is WAR ! " - James Carville.
NO ... it's more a War on Reality.
a War on Truth.
If it wasn't for Fox news and Talk Radio { Dominated by Conservatives }
this Country would be a Banana Republic,by now.

 

There is nothing controversial at all about the Japanese nuclear plant { Fukushima }
or TEPCO power plant.What happened there is still ongoing and very much a cover-up.
Nuclear power is just marvy until one understands that it is very Un Fail Safe.
In fact,it is THE Most UN FAIL SAFE thing man has ever developed.
It may be Mankinds downfall.
Do Not Fool with Mother Nature.
Nuclear power is Mother Nature in the extreme.

 

The deniers want every place to be like Los Angeles of the 1980's and they simply do not understand the damaging effects it will create in the long run.

You sounded sensible till I read this last sentence and you brought up this strawman. "Deniers" as you characterize us don't want pollution either. We just know it's not the sky is falling scenario that pro AGW think it is. Especially because of all of the lies the Al Gore crowd have been feeding us.

 

Taxcutter says:
Another day goes by within a nuke becoming operational.

We're falling further and further behind schedule.

Of course, the CRIBs don't care.

 

You might want to learn what the US in USCRN stands for.

 

Australia set an all-time record winter low yesterday.

The cooling is not just in the US.

 

You do realize this is how math works, don't you? If both sides of the equation weren't equal, then I would be worried about their work.