the cost of wind power

[TwoForFlinching]

that was an interesting presentation. but remember all of this is assuming that "climate change" is actually happening? and IF it is is it actually because of fossil fuel? he seems to like nuclear as clean energy but with so few nuclear sites actually in existence and considering the magnitude of a single accident. will he still have the same attitude later. the questions???? Is climate change real? and IF it is,are we causing it or is it a natural cycle that happens in a time frame beyond our ability to comprehend??? or is climate change a fabrication to allow the subsequent taxation of humanity???

Fair questions. I was at best on the fence and open minded to the whole climate change. I don't have a political side, so that never played into my belief or disbelief. The convincing paper I read about climate change seemed conclusive through proven, peer reviewed solid science. It was when they managed to decipher the isotope makeup of the CO2 floating around in the atmosphere.

The idea is, the same chemical can come from many different sources, and each one will be different based on the makeup and measurement of the isotopes. Kind of like organic naturally occurring arsenic, lab created arsenic, and plant derived arsenic are all arsenic, but by measuring the atomic weight of the isotopes, they can be identified uniquely even though they're all the same.

It's hard to deny the CO2 buildup in the atmosphere over the last few decades. I don't think anyone on either side denies that. For years, since ice cores show this as a cyclical phenomenon, that's what I believed it was, the earths natural cycle. Then came a paper about the isotope makeup of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Many different variant exist in the atmosphere, and the study identified them by their isotopic weight. They found that naturally occurring CO2's were steady across the atmosphere. Algea and plankton blooms soak it up and make it H2O like trees and plants do, but on a larger scale. The one CO2 isotopes that were steadily growing in the air were those that conclusively occur in the burning of fossil fuels.

It's really more interesting than I can explain it off the top of my head. Worth taking a dive into it even if to try to prove it incorrect.

I still believe we're in a cycle of a warmer planet due to a greenhouse effect. The science shows earth has done this for millennia... but it also shows humans have sped up the process over the last two hundred years by burning fossil fuels in measuring the isotopes specific to those fuels. The science supports that. More importantly, you shouldn't let it distract you from the fact that Jeffrey Epstien didn't kill himself.

 

[TerryMiller]

I love getting into discussions with those worried about global warming.

I always tell them that there is a plus side to global warming...

...after seeing their blank stares, I explain that crops can be grown and harvested further north than what is normally their area. Thus, we have the opportunity of even MORE food.

 

[cowadle]

are fossil fuels natural occurring? if carbon is the question then what about the carbon that makes up in fossil fuels? was it once in a free state in some pre historic earth condition?

 

[dennishoddy]

The earth has been warming since Oklahoma was covered in glaciers.
Yes, @TERRY, we have great farming now in areas that have benefited from global warming.
When melting to global warming Oklahoma was 200’ deep under the oceans.
We have fossils found only in the oceans in limestone and chert deposits around Ponca City to prove it.
We have the cleanest air in a hundred years currently and the “warmers” are screaming it’s warming the earth faster!!
So what should we do? Get a little pollution into the atmosphere to slow warming down and improve the economy because that would be introduced by manufacturing, or create a new “green energy” department that would create “environmentally safe” pollution to shade the earth resulting in no more sunny days?
This greenie movement is the most hilarious thing I’ve ever experienced.
No matter what happens on the planet, be it hurricanes, forest fires started by lightning or a litany of other occurrences, it’s attributed to “global warming” that’s been occurring for millions of years before humans were on the earth.
Then they scream that humans are speeding up the process.
The “science” says the recent lack of pollutants in our atmosphere is harmful.
Nothing can satisfy them. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
Meanwhile demonrats keep giving money to the greenies as political favors with most failing because they were sham companies like Solindria.

 

[TerryMiller]

The earth has been warming since Oklahoma was covered in glaciers.
Yes, @TERRY, we have great farming now in areas that have benefited from global warming.
When melting to global warming Oklahoma was 200’ deep under the oceans.
We have fossils found only in the oceans in limestone and chert deposits around Ponca City to prove it.
We have the cleanest air in a hundred years currently and the “warmers” are screaming it’s warming the earth faster!!
So what should we do? Get a little pollution into the atmosphere to slow warming down and improve the economy because that would be introduced by manufacturing, or create a new “green energy” department that would create “environmentally safe” pollution to shade the earth resulting in no more sunny days?
This greenie movement is the most hilarious thing I’ve ever experienced.
No matter what happens on the planet, be it hurricanes, forest fires started by lightning or a litany of other occurrences, it’s attributed to “global warming” that’s been occurring for millions of years before humans were on the earth.
Then they scream that humans are speeding up the process.
The “science” says the recent lack of pollutants in our atmosphere is harmful.
Nothing can satisfy them. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
Meanwhile demonrats keep giving money to the greenies as political favors with most failing because they were sham companies like Solindria.

That in bold above: perhaps that is a result of Noah's global flood?

 

[cowadle]

according to claus schwab and a few others. the northern hemisphere countries need to pay the southern hemisphere countries a fee in the form of a carbon tax. has more to do with social justice or environmental justice than the actual atmosphere. but HEY!!! never let a crisis go to waste!

 

[cowadle]

not picking on you but since you brought up the bible. the bible states that nothing mankind can do will destroy the earth. also states the earth won't flood again. the second coming of Jesus has nothing that i can find to do with the atmosphere.