User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:08:52 PM EDT
[#1]
And you were expecting what, exactly, when you signed up for this course?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:10:37 PM EDT
[#2]
I don't know, but I can find fossilized shells and shark teeth in my area and we're 90 miles from the coast. I'd say it was warmer a few years before humans got here.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:11:18 PM EDT
[#3]
Why the hell would you take a shitty class like that?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:11:20 PM EDT
[#4]
What is he personally doing to fight global warming. If it is such a problem he should be biking every day and removing the A/C and furnace from his home.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:11:40 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And you were expecting what, exactly, when you signed up for this course. To knock out a GenEd requirement. This class seemed to be one of the least painful on the list. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:13:53 PM EDT
[#6]
Well, they use to call it "global warming". Then they were caught red-handed lying about the data, so they changed it to "climate change". It may be getting warmer, it may be getting colder. No matter what though, any change is the fault of the Republicans and the only solution is wealth redistribution.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:14:33 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ask him to explain why temps were much higher in the Jurassic period but yet co2 was lower. What is he personally doing to fight global warming. If it is such a problem he should be biking every day and removing the A/C and furnace from his home. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ask him to explain why temps were much higher in the Jurassic period but yet co2 was lower. What is he personally doing to fight global warming. If it is such a problem he should be biking every day and removing the A/C and furnace from his home. He just bought a Prius. Problem solved! 
This is how it was explained: Plants take in CO2 and produce oxygen. All that CO2 was then trapped underground in the form of coal and oil. When we burn it, we release that CO2 back into the environment. Quoted:
I don't know, but I can find fossilized shells and shark teeth in my area and we're 90 miles from the coast. I'd say it was warmer a few years before humans got here. Well, if the ocean went back to those levels there would be big problems. If anything, that supports Obama's claim that climate change is the biggest threat to the world. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:15:01 PM EDT
[#8]
Apparently your guest speaker has no grasp of facts.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:15:32 PM EDT
[#9]
I don't deny that the climate may well be changing. The climate has and always will change.
I do deny that mankind is solely responsible for it and that we need to act NOWNOWNOWOMGNOW WE ALL GONNA DIEEEEE the way they want us to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:16:04 PM EDT
[#10]
CO2 is necessary for life, yet the lefties treat it as if it were poison.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:16:44 PM EDT
[#11]
Climate is always changing, and has since the earth was formed and will continue to change until the sun goes nova.
Man does not contribute a significant amount of CO2, compared to the earths natural processes. C02 is a small contributor to the green house effect. The Green house effect is only one of many climate influencers. If anything it stabilizes temperatures. Climate is a mixture of different cycles from different causes that sometimes combine or subtract their effects. Looking at a historical view, we are still working our way out of the last mini ice age, the planet should be warming up a bit. There has been no warming over the past 20 years or so. Warming is good. Longer growing seasons, more food. Historically, the "Dark Ages" was a cooling period marked by long cold dark winters, which reduced the growing cycles in the northern areas (ie. Scandinavia), which is why the Vikings headed south to find food. The Renaissance marked the end of the cooling period, suddenly there was more food available.... So, Climate Change is real and natural. Man's influence on Climate is not an issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:16:54 PM EDT
[#12]
The earth is old and dynamic been changing for a long time, always has.
Been warmer been cooler |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:17:08 PM EDT
[#13]
Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors.
Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:17:22 PM EDT
[#14]
Was there a very cold period between 1300 and 1850?
Should we expect the earth to warm up after that period, or is it only a result man? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:17:58 PM EDT
[#15]
Sure.
Is it real? Probably. Is it something man caused and/or can mitigate? Probably not. Should it shape fiscal policy and inhibit industrial growth? Hell no. Did I miss anything? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:18:46 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He just bought a Prius. Problem solved!
This is how it was explained: Plants take in CO2 and produce oxygen. All that CO2 was then trapped underground in the form of coal and oil. When we burn it, we release that CO2 back into the environment. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ask him to explain why temps were much higher in the Jurassic period but yet co2 was lower. What is he personally doing to fight global warming. If it is such a problem he should be biking every day and removing the A/C and furnace from his home. He just bought a Prius. Problem solved!
This is how it was explained: Plants take in CO2 and produce oxygen. All that CO2 was then trapped underground in the form of coal and oil. When we burn it, we release that CO2 back into the environment. More or less, yes. Except the coal is a hydrocarbon chain, not CO2. When it oxidizes they main products are H2O and CO2. H2O is a condensable, and fairly stable in the atmosphere at current temperatures; CO2 is not, and can accumulate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:20:04 PM EDT
[#17]
No. It's junk science fueled by a political agenda. For an example, look up the video of Ted Cruz dismantling the president of the Sierra Club in a Senate hearing. It's fantastic.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:22:24 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sure. Is it real? Probably. Is it something man caused and/or can mitigate? Probably not. Should it shape fiscal policy and inhibit industrial growth? Hell no. Did I miss anything? So should we keep burning coal as fast as possible because it's cheaper than solar and wind? Should we even worry about "clean coal" upgrades? Serious question. What about CAFE standards on cars? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:22:28 PM EDT
[#19]
A couple of questions I'd ask:
What is the ideal temperature of the earth? and The glaciers retreated about 10,000 years ago, Well before the industrial age. What melted them? I'd recommend the book "unstoppable global warming: every 1500 years", which debunks the "scientific" studies pushed by the alarmists, and looks at the facts over a longer period of time, from the historical, archeological, and geological record. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:22:33 PM EDT
[#20]
Temperature changes on Earth are heavily influenced by the sun (kind of like how the relationship between the Earth and the sun gives us night and day, summer and winter).
That's why we can detect Venus going through similar temperature changes as Earth. There are no evil SUVs or factories on Venus. Pollution is real and habitat, air quality, water quality all matter. Respect for the environment is valid. APG is a politically motivated bunch of bullshit. By the way, receding ice has revealed entire forests worth of tree stumps. Huh...must have been a forest there once upon a time. It must have been warmer back then...before SUVs and factories. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:22:39 PM EDT
[#21]
If it's real, I find it funny that none of the "solutions" they advocate stand much of a chance of fixing it. You sure aren't going to reduce global CO2 emissions meaningfully by having a few upper-class westerners buy Priuses that are maybe 30% more efficient than their old car, and of course sell their used cars to other people who will keep driving them.
Assuming that it's all real, IMHO the only solution that stands a chance of really helping is to go all-in on nuclear fission power. I'm talking like get moving on building dozens of new plants like yesterday. There's nothing else that is ready to scale up to hundreds of gigawatts of power production without massively disrupting something else in the environment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:26:20 PM EDT
[#22]
The composition of the atmosphere is changing.
The Temperature on earth's surface changes over time. Some scientists link those two together. However, their models don't ever work. Some politicians want to use those models to propose policies that give them more control of the economy. Those policies do not, however, make any significant change in what the models (that don't work) predict. That's basically Global warming in a nutshell. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:26:48 PM EDT
[#23]
We have about 180 years of temperature data on a planet that is millions of years old.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:27:47 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't deny that the climate may well be changing. The climate has and always will change. I do deny that mankind is solely responsible for it and that we need to act NOWNOWNOWOMGNOW WE ALL GONNA DIEEEEE the way they want us to. I think the big issue, according to "them" is not the next 5-10 years, but 100-300 years. When we talked about what to do with radioactive waste one guest speaker said one big problem is making signs that can still be read and understood in 1,000 years because some waste will last for a really long time (half-life and all that). If civilization collapses, they don't want some Fallout 3 lone survivor stumbling into a disposal site and dying from radiation. Super dumb argument IMO but whatever. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:27:57 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
The professor keeps blaming republicans for all the problems in the world and saying that most of them deny climate change. All those billions of evil Republicans in China and India, no doubt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:29:36 PM EDT
[#26]
The "science" of AGW is driven by pursuit of federal grant $s. The more the recipient crows about AGW, the more federal grant $s he gets.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:31:35 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So should we keep burning coal as fast as possible because it's cheaper than solar and wind? Should we even worry about "clean coal" upgrades? Serious question. What about CAFE standards on cars? 'Clean Coal' is pretty much dead by current regulations; you can't build a new coal plant, and upgrading even the newest old ones is uneconomical. Coal does have other bad emissions that need to be controlled. CAFE is a complete pile of BS. Cars don't contribute meaningfully to our emissions; you could take every single one off the road and it would barely change the sum-total number. Same with Electric cars. Ask him about Nuclear power. If he's really worried about atmospheric emissions, he should love Nuclear. Hint: He won't; and he'll tell you all sorts of horror stories about it, which a little research will likely prove false. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:33:31 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the big issue, according to "them" is not the next 5-10 years, but 100-300 years. When we talked about what to do with radioactive waste one guest speaker said one big problem is making signs that can still be read and understood in 1,000 years because some waste will last for a really long time (half-life and all that). If civilization collapses, they don't want some Fallout 3 lone survivor stumbling into a disposal site and dying from radiation. Super dumb argument IMO but whatever. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't deny that the climate may well be changing. The climate has and always will change. I do deny that mankind is solely responsible for it and that we need to act NOWNOWNOWOMGNOW WE ALL GONNA DIEEEEE the way they want us to. I think the big issue, according to "them" is not the next 5-10 years, but 100-300 years. When we talked about what to do with radioactive waste one guest speaker said one big problem is making signs that can still be read and understood in 1,000 years because some waste will last for a really long time (half-life and all that). If civilization collapses, they don't want some Fallout 3 lone survivor stumbling into a disposal site and dying from radiation. Super dumb argument IMO but whatever. To mitigate that, you'd bury it deeply underground, preferably in a geologically stable mountain. But they don't want to do that. Or you'd recycle the waste, which can be turned into new fuel. But that's a no-go, also. Keep in mind... 'solving' this would actually reduce the politicians power. And we can't have that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:34:01 PM EDT
[#29]
87% say NO
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:34:24 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors. Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. 
https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:34:54 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 'Clean Coal' is pretty much dead by current regulations; you can't build a new coal plant, and upgrading even the newest old ones is uneconomical. Coal does have other bad emissions that need to be controlled. CAFE is a complete pile of BS. Cars don't contribute meaningfully to our emissions; you could take every single one off the road and it would barely change the sum-total number. Same with Electric cars. Ask him about Nuclear power. If he's really worried about atmospheric emissions, he should love Nuclear. Hint: He won't; and he'll tell you all sorts of horror stories about it, which a little research will likely prove false. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So should we keep burning coal as fast as possible because it's cheaper than solar and wind? Should we even worry about "clean coal" upgrades? Serious question. What about CAFE standards on cars? 'Clean Coal' is pretty much dead by current regulations; you can't build a new coal plant, and upgrading even the newest old ones is uneconomical. Coal does have other bad emissions that need to be controlled. CAFE is a complete pile of BS. Cars don't contribute meaningfully to our emissions; you could take every single one off the road and it would barely change the sum-total number. Same with Electric cars. Ask him about Nuclear power. If he's really worried about atmospheric emissions, he should love Nuclear. Hint: He won't; and he'll tell you all sorts of horror stories about it, which a little research will likely prove false. Peabody Bankruptcy Offers Stark Warning To Oil And Gas Groups Of Risks Of Ignoring Climate Change http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikescott/2016/04/14/peabody-bankruptcy-offers-stark-warning-to-oil-and-gas-groups-of-risks-of-ignoring-climate-change/#671fcfa06d50 "The announcement that Peabody, the world’s largest private sector coal miner, has filed for bankruptcy has sent shockwaves through the fossil fuel industry and it acts as a warning to oil and gas companies – and their investors – about how quickly things can change." "Peabody is the 50th coal company to file for bankruptcy since 2012 and a startling example of the industry’s failure to anticipate how future markets might be limited by tighter environmental regulations."...[more] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:35:00 PM EDT
[#32]
Complete and utter Liberal Bullshit not backed up by verifiable and peer reviewed science.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:35:34 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the big issue, according to "them" is not the next 5-10 years, but 100-300 years. When we talked about what to do with radioactive waste one guest speaker said one big problem is making signs that can still be read and understood in 1,000 years because some waste will last for a really long time (half-life and all that). If civilization collapses, they don't want some Fallout 3 lone survivor stumbling into a disposal site and dying from radiation. Super dumb argument IMO but whatever. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't deny that the climate may well be changing. The climate has and always will change. I do deny that mankind is solely responsible for it and that we need to act NOWNOWNOWOMGNOW WE ALL GONNA DIEEEEE the way they want us to. I think the big issue, according to "them" is not the next 5-10 years, but 100-300 years. When we talked about what to do with radioactive waste one guest speaker said one big problem is making signs that can still be read and understood in 1,000 years because some waste will last for a really long time (half-life and all that). If civilization collapses, they don't want some Fallout 3 lone survivor stumbling into a disposal site and dying from radiation. Super dumb argument IMO but whatever. It's an exponential decay. A 300 year time period allows almost all of the cesium, strontium, etc, to decay to insignificant levels, and those are the most biologically troublesome wastes we have today. On the 1000 year scale, that's where the plutoniums and lower weight uraniums become problematic, because they have longer half lives, but having longer have lives, they don't have the same activity of the shorter lived cesium, etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:35:49 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So should we keep burning coal as fast as possible because it's cheaper than solar and wind? Should we even worry about "clean coal" upgrades? Serious question. What about CAFE standards on cars? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Sure. Is it real? Probably. Is it something man caused and/or can mitigate? Probably not. Should it shape fiscal policy and inhibit industrial growth? Hell no. Did I miss anything? So should we keep burning coal as fast as possible because it's cheaper than solar and wind? Should we even worry about "clean coal" upgrades? Serious question. What about CAFE standards on cars? Yes. Yes. Third question, little more complicated: What about them? Should consumers have a say, or not? Should it result in autos the consumers don't want or cannot afford? I think we should all TRY to live/work/play "clean" because it's a good idea. Not be forced by our government (and hypocritical others abroad) by penalty of law based on questionable science. That cannot be questioned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:36:00 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors. Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html What happened on Venus during that period? What caused the ice ages and warm periods between without human effects? Is that graph based on the falsified data everyone now knows about? http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/24/german-professor-nasa-fiddled-climate-data-unbelievable-scale/ "A German professor has confirmed what skeptics from Britain to the US have long suspected: that NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has largely invented "global warming” by tampering with the raw temperature data records." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:36:47 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To knock out a GenEd requirement. This class seemed to be one of the least painful on the list. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
And you were expecting what, exactly, when you signed up for this course. To knock out a GenEd requirement. This class seemed to be one of the least painful on the list. Damn. What happened to history, literature, foreign language ? Those should be Gen Ed choices as well You chose poorly |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:36:57 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
'Clean Coal' is pretty much dead by current regulations; you can't build a new coal plant, and upgrading even the newest old ones is uneconomical. Coal does have other bad emissions that need to be controlled. CAFE is a complete pile of BS. Cars don't contribute meaningfully to our emissions; you could take every single one off the road and it would barely change the sum-total number. Same with Electric cars. Ask him about Nuclear power. If he's really worried about atmospheric emissions, he should love Nuclear. Hint: He won't; and he'll tell you all sorts of horror stories about it, which a little research will likely prove false. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So should we keep burning coal as fast as possible because it's cheaper than solar and wind? Should we even worry about "clean coal" upgrades? Serious question. What about CAFE standards on cars? 'Clean Coal' is pretty much dead by current regulations; you can't build a new coal plant, and upgrading even the newest old ones is uneconomical. Coal does have other bad emissions that need to be controlled. CAFE is a complete pile of BS. Cars don't contribute meaningfully to our emissions; you could take every single one off the road and it would barely change the sum-total number. Same with Electric cars. Ask him about Nuclear power. If he's really worried about atmospheric emissions, he should love Nuclear. Hint: He won't; and he'll tell you all sorts of horror stories about it, which a little research will likely prove false. I agree with you on clean coal. Waste of money. Disagree on CAFE. I'll try to find the graphs. Actually, he loves nuclear. He is always mentioning thorium reactors but he is okay with the current ones as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:39:15 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I agree with you on clean coal. Waste of money. Disagree on CAFE. I'll try to find the graphs. Actually, he loves nuclear. He is always mentioning thorium reactors but he is okay with the current ones as well. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: So should we keep burning coal as fast as possible because it's cheaper than solar and wind? Should we even worry about "clean coal" upgrades? Serious question. What about CAFE standards on cars? 'Clean Coal' is pretty much dead by current regulations; you can't build a new coal plant, and upgrading even the newest old ones is uneconomical. Coal does have other bad emissions that need to be controlled. CAFE is a complete pile of BS. Cars don't contribute meaningfully to our emissions; you could take every single one off the road and it would barely change the sum-total number. Same with Electric cars. Ask him about Nuclear power. If he's really worried about atmospheric emissions, he should love Nuclear. Hint: He won't; and he'll tell you all sorts of horror stories about it, which a little research will likely prove false. I agree with you on clean coal. Waste of money. Disagree on CAFE. I'll try to find the graphs. Actually, he loves nuclear. He is always mentioning thorium reactors but he is okay with the current ones as well. Has he ever worked outside an academic institution? (excluding jobs as a kid to pay his way through school assuming his parents didn't take care of that). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:40:06 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
[url=https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg]https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg[/url] [url=https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html]https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html[/url] Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors. Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. [url=https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg]https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg[/url] [url=https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html]https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html[/url] LoL Your .GOV links made his case |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:40:28 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
CO2 is necessary for life, yet the lefties treat it as if it were poison. I can't wait until we're all forced to wear CO2 breath filters at all times. I'm finally gonna look like the badass I know I am. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:41:00 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes. Yes. Third question, little more complicated: What about them? Should consumers have a say, or not? Should it result in autos the consumers don't want or cannot afford? I think we should all TRY to live/work/play "clean" because it's a good idea. Not be forced by our government (and hypocritical others abroad) by penalty of law based on questionable science. That cannot be questioned. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sure. Is it real? Probably. Is it something man caused and/or can mitigate? Probably not. Should it shape fiscal policy and inhibit industrial growth? Hell no. Did I miss anything? So should we keep burning coal as fast as possible because it's cheaper than solar and wind? Should we even worry about "clean coal" upgrades? Serious question. What about CAFE standards on cars? Yes. Yes. Third question, little more complicated: What about them? Should consumers have a say, or not? Should it result in autos the consumers don't want or cannot afford? I think we should all TRY to live/work/play "clean" because it's a good idea. Not be forced by our government (and hypocritical others abroad) by penalty of law based on questionable science. That cannot be questioned. That's my view. I do not like the government regulated monopoly (power company) spending huge sums of money to buy politicians and fight solar though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:43:05 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn. What happened to history, literature, foreign language ? Those should be Gen Ed choices as well You chose poorly Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
And you were expecting what, exactly, when you signed up for this course. To knock out a GenEd requirement. This class seemed to be one of the least painful on the list. Damn. What happened to history, literature, foreign language ? Those should be Gen Ed choices as well You chose poorly Learn American or move back to Mexico. Most of the literature / history classes were about minorities, feminism, or homosexuals. Aaaand climate change it is! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:43:59 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't know, but I can find fossilized shells and shark teeth in my area and we're 90 miles from the coast. I'd say it was warmer a few years before humans got here. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't know, but I can find fossilized shells and shark teeth in my area and we're 90 miles from the coast. I'd say it was warmer a few years before humans got here. Quoted:
We have about 180 years of temperature data on a planet that is millions of years old. These. It was those eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil SUV-driving Republicans that were to blame 100,000 years ago too, weren't they? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:44:21 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Has he ever worked outside an academic institution? (excluding jobs as a kid to pay his way through school assuming his parents didn't take care of that). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So should we keep burning coal as fast as possible because it's cheaper than solar and wind? Should we even worry about "clean coal" upgrades? Serious question. What about CAFE standards on cars? 'Clean Coal' is pretty much dead by current regulations; you can't build a new coal plant, and upgrading even the newest old ones is uneconomical. Coal does have other bad emissions that need to be controlled. CAFE is a complete pile of BS. Cars don't contribute meaningfully to our emissions; you could take every single one off the road and it would barely change the sum-total number. Same with Electric cars. Ask him about Nuclear power. If he's really worried about atmospheric emissions, he should love Nuclear. Hint: He won't; and he'll tell you all sorts of horror stories about it, which a little research will likely prove false. I agree with you on clean coal. Waste of money. Disagree on CAFE. I'll try to find the graphs. Actually, he loves nuclear. He is always mentioning thorium reactors but he is okay with the current ones as well. Has he ever worked outside an academic institution? (excluding jobs as a kid to pay his way through school assuming his parents didn't take care of that). He started out as a petroleum engineer or something like that in the 80's. I think he currently does real estate and teaches on the side. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:46:25 PM EDT
[#45]
Enviromental Science major chiming in. Also worked in the field and ran a consulting business for years. Went to school in the mid 80's. Never once, do I remember a lecture, paper or anything on "climate change". Not once mentioned in any of my textbooks either.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:46:30 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Learn American or move back to Mexico. Most of the literature / history classes were about minorities, feminism, or homosexuals. Aaaand climate change it is! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
And you were expecting what, exactly, when you signed up for this course. To knock out a GenEd requirement. This class seemed to be one of the least painful on the list. Damn. What happened to history, literature, foreign language ? Those should be Gen Ed choices as well You chose poorly Learn American or move back to Mexico. Most of the literature / history classes were about minorities, feminism, or homosexuals. Aaaand climate change it is! Really ? I think you chose the easiest thing you could find. Or you go to a shitty college. I took extra British lit extra chemistry and extra history ( American and Alabama and history research) and a bunch more outside of my major What's your major ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:46:37 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't know, but I can find fossilized shells and shark teeth in my area and we're 90 miles from the coast. I'd say it was warmer a few years before humans got here. There are seashells in Colorado. Earth changes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:47:27 PM EDT
[#48]
400ppm equals 1/2500th of the atmosphere. Think about that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:49:38 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LoL Your .GOV links made his case Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors. Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html LoL Your .GOV links made his case Oops. Let me find an ARFCOMMER who funded his own research to present the real, unbiased data. And I guess you missed the citations on the EPA site I linked... Just because the EPA posted the graph doesn't mean they did all the research. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:51:45 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oops. Let me find an ARFCOMMER who funded his own research to present the real, unbiased data. And I guess you missed the citations on the EPA site I linked... Just because the EPA posted the graph doesn't mean they did all the research. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors. Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html LoL Your .GOV links made his case Oops. Let me find an ARFCOMMER who funded his own research to present the real, unbiased data. And I guess you missed the citations on the EPA site I linked... Just because the EPA posted the graph doesn't mean they did all the research. You mean this linhttps://www3.epa.<span style='color: red;'>gov</span>/climatechange/basics/facts.htmlk? "about:blank"
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
