Freeman Dyson (whom the New York Times describes as “infinitely smart”) says global warming is a religion
The head of the IPCC agrees.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Climate Engineering
- The World’s Worst Scientists
- “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- A Real Hockey Stick
- A Real Hockey Stick
- Doubling Energy Costs
- Doubling Energy Costs
- “You Can’t Hide Your Lying Eyes”
- Australia Permanent Drought Update
- Let Them Burn Wood
- “New computer modeling”
- Climate Destroying Shrimp
- What’s At Stake?
- Too Hot To Live
- What’s At Stake?
- “The world began to end on 12th May 2024”
- “Climate change is a myth”
- Racist Gas
- RFK Jr. Discusses The Green New Deal And Climate
- “world is on edge of climate abyss, UN warns”
- Ivy Echo Chamber
- Climate Homicide
- Much Ado About Nothing
- Homophobic Gas
- World Bank Expectations
Recent Comments
- Ivan G Wainwright on Climate Engineering
- Russell Cook on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- Bruce of Newcastle on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- Conrad Ziefle on The World’s Worst Scientists
- arn on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- Francis Barnett on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- arn on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- Steve Cooksey on “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- spren on “You Can’t Hide Your Lying Eyes”
- Jack the Insider on Doubling Energy Costs
I have been saying this for a while now. Which is why I suggested you drop the Steven Goddard crap and switch to Martin Luther. Heresy to doctrine is what we’re all about here..
AGW evidence is certainly weak – like many Religions one must also have blind faith to commit.
Climate Change is also Tribal; followers will lock to a shared principle despite contrary evidence.
Marsh says:” AGW evidence is certainly weak – like many Religions one must also have blind faith to commit.”
Citing a faulty understanding of religion does not help understanding AGW. Neither would exist without some evidence.
“Climate Change is also Tribal; followers will lock to a shared principle despite contrary evidence.”
Naturally; but what causes the “lock”? It is evidence, and it is valued higher than your contrary evidence.
No, Michael 2 : It is not only about contrary evidence – the AGW belief hinges upon the demonizing of an essential Gas for all life to exist- blaming CO2 ; totally rediculous.
In the atmosphere it’s less than .04% ,, the “hypothesis” that increasing CO2 levels is a causation for Climate Change is without evidence ; as weak as the percentage today !
…
Water vapour is more of a “contributing factor” would you propose we stop using H2O
because some wacko’s have a “hypothesis” that it’s bad ; what next from Warmist’s ?
There are many causes for Climate Change ; most of them NATURAL, not man made,
as to Warming ?? Any real research will show a trend towards Cooling in recent years!
( even if CO2 increased ten fold we would NOT see the temperatures as claimed! )
…
Antarctica in recent months set records for the most ICE in recorded history, the Arctic has more ICE than three years ago and even the Great Lakes froze over… if you can’t see this as evidence that contradicts Global Warming ; this has become your Religion.
A true person of Science would have to rethink ; trends do not match the hypothesis.
Add to the fact, almost all of the AGW Predictions over the past decade, “have failed”
and failed spectacularly to the point of embarrassing like the “Ship Of Fools”…
…
Many discovered this AGW to be a farce years ago ; others are slow on the uptake.
1- List all climate forcings, order them from most to least effective, and then quantify them.
2- Please provide even one peer reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as the cause of recent, or any, global climate changes.
There is nothing unusual or unprecedented about our climate, or how we got here. For 4,500,000,000 years climates have always changed, naturally. This means there has been a set precedent, and the burden of proof falls on natural climate change deniers like yourself.
So, where is your evidence?
Gator69 , that’s a great statement , I wouldn’t mind using / applying from time to time. Only problem is, not many will try & come back with evidence; they see us as heretics.
It drives the believers, deceivers, and receivers nuts. Every one of their catastrophic claims are based upon models, models that cannot possibly work without proper input.
If they cannot answer question one (and they cannot), then there is no answer to question two (which there is not). Natural variability must be disproven, or at least quantified, before we can accept CAGW as anything other than science fiction.
Please feel free to borrow, but be prepared for the meltdown! 😆
On yahoo answers here, ‘Who is Steve Goddard’: The top answer (critical of Steve) is the top one at 8 and the common sense one in support is at 7 points (it was 6, I added mine) If anyone would like add to it. 🙂
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=A9mSs20ewDBVPF8AwstLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTE0bDM1ZWh0BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNARjb2xvA2lyMgR2dGlkA1ZJUFVLMzFfMQ–?qid=20110309123406AA1ne91
But the question is something like “who is science denier Steven Goddard”.
This is similar to asking someone if they have stopped beating their wife. The real “science deniers” are those who believe in AGW when there is no evidence to support it.
Also the above link didn’t quite work, I had to do a search. Try following perhaps
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110309123406AA1ne91
South Africa faces a dark and cold winter with power outages.
16 Apr 2015 -At a grim briefing to the parliamentary press corps yesterday, Public Enterprises Minister Lyn Brown admitted that because of the state of the ageing power plants, electricity loadshedding would be implemented in winter for the first time this year.
Winter is when many rely on electricity to shield them from the cold, and when electricity use skyrockets.
Brown revealed that the utility’s diesel and coal stock almost ran out at the weekend. That, and the weather-related increased demand for electricity, forced the country into stage 3 loadshedding on Tuesday. Stage 4 is a national blackout.
She said that without loadshedding, South Africa was “in great danger” of a national blackout and that loadshedding would continue for at least the next two years.
While apologising to South Africans for the inconvenience, Brown said it was best if people planned around the hours their areas would be without electricity.
Comment from Robert Felix: Load shedding is a bureaucrat’s way of saying that people will be left without power for a few hours each day. With Obama’s ever more strident – and successful – attempts to shut down our coal industry, I wonder how long it will take before U.S. utilities are forced to apply load shedding to major cities in the Northeast.
http://iceagenow.info/2015/04/south-afroca-faces-dark-cold-winter-power-outages/
http://www.dispatchlive.co.za/news/sa-faces-a-dark-and-cold-winter-with-outages/
“I wonder how long it will take before U.S. utilities are forced to apply load shedding to major cities in the Northeast.”
Rolling blackouts were common in California a few years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis
Yes, I know about the California blackouts quite well, as my girlfriend at the time was responsible for choosing which areas got blacked out, for how long, and when.
Market manipulation was the main cause. And what is Gov Brown calling for? Market manipulation.
With Gov. Jerry Brown throwing his political weight behind a plan to get half of California’s electricity from renewable energy, experts say the idea is an ambitious but attainable way to limit climate change.
California utilities are on track to meet the state’s current clean energy mandate, which requires them to buy 33 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020. In his inaugural address last week, Brown proposed raising that mandate to 50 percent by 2030, as one of several steps to reduce emissions of planet-warming greenhouse gases.
http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2015/01/09/brown-calls-percent-renewable-mandate/21514667/
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg…
-Thomas Jefferson
This is my problem with the religion of climate change, it picks my pocket. Believe what you want, but do not force me to tithe at the point of a gun.
http://theblacksphere.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/IRS-Swat-Team.jpg
And who do most alarmists go to when they want information? Al Gore, probably the stupidest guy ever to step foot on the planet. Correction, maybe second stupidest, don’t forget Obama.
Too many of our voting public would rather get their information from reality stars than the smartest guy on the planet. Or pick up a People magazine to read what Leonardo DiCaprio has to say. Why are so many people so lazy when they have to know they will end up paying for this hoax?
It’s a sad sad world.
The problem is there are so many religious people who believe in god that it is easy to lean on them and get a majority of them to support you….especially if you appear to make your argument from the point of view that you don’t want to upset the creator in some way…..commit a ‘sin’…..or damage ‘god’s given earth’.
When so many people believe in life after death it is easy to make them believe they are shaping the afterlife in this current lifetime by good deed or good doing. (by motivating them to think ‘it will be worth it’)
There is no logical reason to assume that nature and the earth are supposed to be the ideal environment for humans…..nobody should therefore concern themselves if the planet’s natural environmental tendency is towards favouring colder or warmer species, or even no higher species at all.
The belief that the earth was created by god and that man was put upon it is being challenged now as the earth’s own mechanisms tend towards a different outcome…and this has turned the religious into even greater apologists and self haters.
In the lack of a single piece of evidence that global warming is caused by man at all, god believers everywhere use the meme that ‘god doesn’t have to show himself to exist’ to satisfy their scientific curiosity too.
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg…
-Thomas Jefferson
And you’ve done your best to completely misinterpret what i said Gator
i don’t mind anyone who wants to believe in god….I am not hurting anyone by making observations about common traits they share, without demeaning their belief one bit.
Some of my neighbours believe in god, some don’t , nobody minds who cares what……the god believers think the non believers all have problems which could be solved if they believed in god…..and the non believers don’t see their lives as problem filled, and enjoy their lives while wondering why some people need to believe in god.
On one hand you might argue that the PC brigade have gone too far, and on the other you don’t like people sometimes speaking their mind………why not resolve your position finally ?
Do you have a point? My position does not need resolution.
Apart from the point that it wasn’t your position, because you just can’t write your position….you speak in requotes.
Don’t talk to me about heroes…
Don’t talk to me period, village idiot.
Chris: stoning to death by christianity, as spelled out in the bible
That is what intelligent people call ‘The Old Testament’, and existed before Christ, you moron.
When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”
-John 8:7
Come on Chris! Show us your vast knowledge! 😆
Do I need to repeat that you were wrong, again? Yep!
Chris the village idiot spews:
“Islamic Law”…Nobody fears it. It doesn’t actually exist
Why do you feel it necessary to keep proving that you are an idiot? We know already! 😆
To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/;[1] also shari’a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], “legislation”) means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion.[2][3][4] The term “sharia” has been largely identified with Islam in English usage.[5]
Sharia (Islamic law) deals with several topics including: crime, politics, and economics, as well as personal matters such as sexual intercourse, hygiene, diet, prayer, everyday etiquette and fasting..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
… and Chris, the evidence supporting your speculation is?
Does speculation require evidence in order to exist as speculation ?
I don’t think any of us could do any more than claim to be sharing merely personal opinions
No, of course not. Speculation doesn’t need evidence to be called speculation.
It’s just that you make bold claims in the face of evidence to the contrary. It is a common practice in human discourse to try to come with something to support a claim. Even global warming alarmists are trying to pretend they have evidence.
I just wrote something ordinary speculating about the possible connections between people having a self serving belief system which they think is special, and the ability to control people through that system
i didn’t make a single bold claim…..you say there is ‘evidence to the contrary’ but the piece you used as evidence is a mere opinion piece……..
If you say I made claims in the face of evidence to the contrary then you must be of the belief that the evidence which contradicted what I said in my first comment on this thread existed in this thread before I made such claims. If it existed before my comment, where is it ? It isn’t there.
You have created an argument based on a fallacy, by altering the order in time of the way events did unfold.
Yes, you did.
Your comment’s just more bluster, Chris. See the rest of it here.
Chris, what is going through your head. That is the biggest bunch of BS you’ve come up with in a long time. You have come up with a lot of BS in the past, but you’ve outdone yourself on this one.
My only thought is that you are bored and looking to stir the pot. You have written this comment just to get some conflict going so you can put your poison pen to work.
Chris can show what he’s made of by answering my questions.
I don’t know what he’s made of, and I hope he enlightens me by responding. But I grew upon a farm and I know what his most recent post here looks and smells like.
I don’t feel a need to satisfy your overhwelming sense of self importance….that doesn’t prove anything though, does it ?
Well, it shows that after you make a claim without evidence and get challenged about it, you choose to repeat the claim without responding to the challenge.
That’s how alarmists deal with challenges to their beliefs, is it not?
My alleged sense of self importance has nothing to do with it, Chris. It’s about you and how you react, not about me. You started by making a bold claim. I only responded.
“Well, it shows that after you make a claim without evidence and get challenged about it,”
What ‘claim’ did I make ?
I asserted a hypothesis based on easily observable traits within people…….do you think you are immune to the power of suggestion ?
Psychologists will be lining up to talk to you if you say that you believe that you are…..because they would be able to write a paper all about your delusions
You forgot again? 😆
That’s quite the claim, young man. Can you really make people do all these things? Can you lean on them and make them believe?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrbl5868Mss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ4zGBrKllU
Col Welly quotes “, god believers everywhere use the meme that ‘god doesn’t have to show himself to exist”
And says that is a ‘claim’ to something
Has old welly never asked a christian where god is ? All the ones I have asked say they don’t need to see ‘him’ to believe that ‘he’ exists
What i am curious about is where you think religions come from ? what is the purpose for their creation ? Religions are control systems, disputing that they can be used to make people believe things which are not true requires a long leap of the imagination doesn’t it ?
Just announced on Gator’s favourite website – The pope to host a climate change summit..
http://www.catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=59803
Isn’t that kind of going to oblige catholics to stop questioning ‘the official consensus’ ?
Here is how one religious person is using the belief pathway to convince others that the research has been done professionally and is beyond question – beter just believe it folks
http://www.catholic.org/news/green/story.php?id=50128
I think this could be an issue which will separate some ‘slight disbelievers’ from the church forever 🙂
What a dumbass! 😆
I am not Catholic, and a member of no church village idiot.
Once again Dumb Dumb talks out of his arse again!
The village idiot just keeps burnishing his credentials! 😆
stoning to death by christianity, as spelled out in the bible
That is what intelligent people call ‘The Old Testament’, and existed before Christ, you moron.
When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”
-John 8:7
Come on Chris! Show us your vast knowledge! 😆
Do I need to repeat that you were wrong, again? Yep!
Chris the village idiot spews:
“Islamic Law”…Nobody fears it. It doesn’t actually exist
Why do you feel it necessary to keep proving that you are an idiot? We know already! 😆
To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/;[1] also shari’a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], “legislation”) means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion.[2][3][4] The term “sharia” has been largely identified with Islam in English usage.[5]
Sharia (Islamic law) deals with several topics including: crime, politics, and economics, as well as personal matters such as sexual intercourse, hygiene, diet, prayer, everyday etiquette and fasting..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
Find somebody else who does not yet know you are a fool, and enlighten them for a change. 😆
Concentrate, kid, concentrate. I am quoting you. 😆
You claim:
Gator not a catholic ? I never said you were, I just tugged your chain because in the past you’ve quoted the well respected scientific source ‘catholic.org’ … but now that you’ve so strongly rejected the idea that you are not a catholic, you make it seem like you really are 😉
You didn’t tug my chain, you failed to get a ‘dig’ in again. Why do you talk about things of which you are completely ignorant? 😆
So you’re dropping the claims off one at a time now…just down to the two…..
Do you dispute that religious people are easy to manipulate through the misuse of their beliefs against them. ?
I don’t need to prove how easy it is….just go to church and you’ll see that they will believe anything in the name of god…for the sake of salvation….or whatever else…..the evidence is, quite literally, self evident.
People are very easy to fool…as they said before – the bigger the lie the easier it is for people to believe it……..Hermann Gorring proved it , Caesar proved it….Bush and Blair proved it..
It is hard enough to discover a massive lie when you consider yourself to be wide awake……how can it be anything but more difficult to detect it when you have already adopted the same personal beliefs to a man at an altar who promises you peace, joy and life after death ?
Now the pope is on board with the climate change brigade it’s only a matter of time before skeptics are considered to be really very evil people…. I’ve lived through that sort of nonsense a few times and survived, but I fear for some people who will be caught in the middle
Once again, Chris the religious zealot tells us what happens in church. 😆
The village idiot says…
stoning to death by christianity, as spelled out in the bible
That is what intelligent people call ‘The Old Testament’, and existed before Christ, you moron.
When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”
-John 8:7
Come on Chris! Show us your vast knowledge! 😆
Do I need to repeat that you were wrong, again? Yep!
Chris the village idiot spews:
“Islamic Law”…Nobody fears it. It doesn’t actually exist
Why do you feel it necessary to keep proving that you are an idiot? We know already! 😆
To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/;[1] also shari’a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], “legislation”) means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion.[2][3][4] The term “sharia” has been largely identified with Islam in English usage.[5]
Sharia (Islamic law) deals with several topics including: crime, politics, and economics, as well as personal matters such as sexual intercourse, hygiene, diet, prayer, everyday etiquette and fasting..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
What did Bigfoot do when you caught him? 😆
No, Chris, not dropping anything. You made the third claim, too. I’m just trying to make it easier for you to concentrate and I think it’s working here and there.
Let’s find a common foundation:
People are easy to fool.
AGW is bunk.
People believe the AGW bunk.
You and I are wondering why so many people believe the bunk.
Now, you say that it’s easy to make people who believe in God also believe the AGW bunk. I don’t think so, and while anecdotal, among people I know the atheists are more likely to believe in AGW and the believers less likely. Katharine Hayhoe became a darling of the atheist left here in the U.S. because they believe she can make inroads among religious AGW skeptics. She shows these skeptics at the beginning of her video. So the AGW believers support my anecdotal evidence. Overall there are polls and studies showing more AGW belief among progressives and less among conservatives. Other studies show more belief in God among conservatives than Progressives. While not “a proof” because of potential overlaps and deltas, this is at least an indication that atheists are more likely to believe in AGW.
Furthermore, in my life experience, Christians were more rather than less resistant to the lure of alternative religions like Communism or Nazism. I think you don’t really know much about Christians. I don’t have much experience with members of other religions so I’m leaving them out.
Good luck sorting through it. Examine the origin of your own beliefs. I do.
Sorry, I have to go now to solve a problem caused by our typical heavy spring snow. It will be hours before I get back. The Pope will have to wait.
Gator – You didn’t tug my chain, you failed to get a ‘dig’ in again. Why do you talk about things of which you are completely ignorant? 😆
Ignorant ? I don’t ignore religion….I look at it and reject it.
If that’s ignorance then yeah okay…whatever, it doesn’t bother me all the same
Yes, you’ve investigated sooooo thoroughly! 😆
The village idiot says:
stoning to death by christianity, as spelled out in the bible
That is what intelligent people call ‘The Old Testament’, and existed before Christ, you moron.
When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”
-John 8:7
Come on Chris! Show us your vast knowledge! 😆
Do I need to repeat that you were wrong, again? Yep!
Chris the village idiot spews:
“Islamic Law”…Nobody fears it. It doesn’t actually exist
Why do you feel it necessary to keep proving that you are an idiot? We know already! 😆
To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/;[1] also shari’a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], “legislation”) means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion.[2][3][4] The term “sharia” has been largely identified with Islam in English usage.[5]
Sharia (Islamic law) deals with several topics including: crime, politics, and economics, as well as personal matters such as sexual intercourse, hygiene, diet, prayer, everyday etiquette and fasting..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
Stop! My sides are hurting! 😆
You see, Chris, your namesake, the preeminent Progressive scientist Chris Mooney, as well as Bill Myers, Mother Jones and others agonize about conservative Christians’ lack of faith in global warming.
Mooney writes
The Progressives bet on Katharine Hayhoe to fix the problem (Time magazine listed her in 100 most influential people).
Do you argue in your theological treatise that Hayhoeism is superfluous because believers in God are already on board with global warming, or do you argue that Hayhoe is smart and will be successful in her campaign to change the prevailing Christian skepticism?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY1HweENTeU
http://billmoyers.com/2014/05/03/how-to-convince-conservative-christians-that-global-warming-is-real
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/05/inquiring-minds-katharine-hayhoe-faith-climate
I would indulge anyone who dared to know honestly how to interpret what i said (as if it isn’t plainly obvious already) ……but you seem to have all adopted the presuppositional position before you thought about it
Lets say for arguments sake, that 50% of a population are religious, god believers, and the rest completely atheist, completely indifferent when it comes to thoughts of an existing god.
How can you convince the atheists, who have no basic belief which you can hijack and manipulate ? They have no obvious fear about which you can wrap the words of your argument. The god believers are much easier to convince – you just present your argument in a way which appeals to their already existing beliefs, or even more simple than that, to their thought processes which they constructed in order to maintain a belief in god.
On a more basic level, that practiced belief is a manifestation of a fear control method, because you must fear god if you believe in god.
How easy is it to manipulate people with their own fears ? very simple.
It would be interesting to see figures of those who believe in AGW and those who don’t….how many are deeply religious and how many are not.
Morte blathering on religion from the man who said this…
stoning to death by christianity, as spelled out in the bible
That is what intelligent people call ‘The Old Testament’, and existed before Christ, you moron.
When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”
-John 8:7
Come on Chris! Show us your vast knowledge! 😆
Do I need to repeat that you were wrong, again? Yep!
Chris the village idiot spews:
“Islamic Law”…Nobody fears it. It doesn’t actually exist
Why do you feel it necessary to keep proving that you are an idiot? We know already! 😆
To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/;[1] also shari’a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], “legislation”) means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion.[2][3][4] The term “sharia” has been largely identified with Islam in English usage.[5]
Sharia (Islamic law) deals with several topics including: crime, politics, and economics, as well as personal matters such as sexual intercourse, hygiene, diet, prayer, everyday etiquette and fasting..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
How original more requotes…….. we’ll be drowning in them at this rate.
Rarely a single thought leaves your PC without you having to pad it out with a requote.
Somewhere along the way you assumed that finding a topical quote makes you a learned person…….
Gee, the village idiot has an issue when I expose him for what he is. Shocking! 😆
“Gee, the village idiot has an issue when I expose him for what he is. Shocking! 😆
You find me shocking ? 🙂
Appears Chris is back to ‘normal’, and completely confused again. 😆
He still missed understanding #5.
Needs a longer extension ladder to get out of the hole, but keeps digging anyway.
Heh. You have a strong basic belief that you have no basic belief.
One of the funnier things I’ve heard this week (and I hear plenty of funny in the People’s Republic of Boulder every day).
Chris, I’m right to think you are quite young, am I not?
Chris Barron commented on Reader Quiz.
You won’t see me telling Americans who they should vote for, not least of all because I think that representative voting is dumb and insults everybody’s intelligence….but maybe I will have to make an exception now…… you should vote for……….someone who doesn’t need to spend millions on campaigning to get you to vote for them.
Chris gets a little confused ocassionally, and the rest of the time he is completely confused. 😆
I remember you catching him there.
Chris is one of the people who manage to contradict themselves not just within the same paragraph but within the same sentence. His scattershot style and combativeness provide plenty of enjoyment here. Arguing with him is like shooting fish in a barrel but I have to admit to a little guilty satisfaction in smacking him.
A friend of mine just reminded me of an entertaining incident that happened about 20 years ago. Several of us bantered briefly about some Republican tax proposals at a party when we noticed the Progressive wife of a coworker standing nearby and listening intently.
There was a lull in the conversation. Suddenly and without warning she screamed at the whole room:
“Fucking Republicans! They want to kill all the prairie dogs!”
Why do Progressives hate cows? Are they simply jealous of the complete herd mentality?
Years ago I remember receiving a postcard printed by the Audubon Society stating that the black tailed prairie dog was non-existent except on wildlife preserves. I knew differently, because I was a college professor, the Director of the Natural Resource Center and a rangeland researcher at Oglala Lakota College on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. At that time, 70% of the tribal rangeland on the one and a half million-acre reservation was infested with these “non-existent” prairie dogs, rendering much of the rangeland unsuitable for cattle grazing… Like most rodents, prairie dogs reproduce quickly. They can produce at least one litter of pups a year with 4 – 6 pups per litter. Most of their natural predators other than humans have been eliminated or greatly reduced in number. As a result, there is little environmental pressure to keep their numbers in check. Their numbers may increase rapidly, and colonies expand to meet the new “housing demand.”
http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/environmental/200703prairiedogs.html
Well, if we must control their populations, and we must, let’s make their deaths as quick and painless as possible…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xxv4RG8bBEU
“Chris, I’m right to think you are quite young, am I not?”
What’s the right answer you want to hear ?
If I am young and admit it you will patronise me
If I am young and deny it you will patronise me
If I am old and admit to being young (unlikely) you will patronise me
If I am old and am honest you will patronise me
can you do anything but patronise as a way to enhance your own self image ? Probably not but let’s see 😉
Chris, I don’t really care. It was just a tease. Boastful young guys like to make a lot of silly noises and old guys like to make fun of them. Maybe they remember doing it themselves when they were young.
You should instead think about the important part you skipped:
You have a strong basic belief that you have no basic belief.
I know I got under your skin but stop worrying about me. Concentrate and think about your own beliefs. That’s how you make it in the older crowd. Hopefully you will get old yourself. You will need those skills.
—–
BTW, you answered my teaser question without knowing it.
“Chris, I’m right to think you are quite young, am I not?”
I was discussing his age with him just the other day.
We figured out that the low IQ 13 years olds I once had the amusement to try to teach, were way ahead of him.
Do you take the BD Camera? I quite enjoy BoulderNative very much.
Who knows whether you are old or young, and why should anyone care…You’re having to focus your attention not on rejecting things which I said but on things which you hoped I said.
A person who doesn’t think that religion is a system for control has a great deal of blind faith indeed !
The authority on religion has (mis)spoken! 😆
The village idiot just keeps burnishing his credentials! 😆
stoning to death by christianity, as spelled out in the bible
That is what intelligent people call ‘The Old Testament’, and existed before Christ, you moron.
When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”
-John 8:7
Come on Chris! Show us your vast knowledge! 😆
Do I need to repeat that you were wrong, again? Yep!
Chris the village idiot spews:
“Islamic Law”…Nobody fears it. It doesn’t actually exist
Why do you feel it necessary to keep proving that you are an idiot? We know already! 😆
To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/;[1] also shari’a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], “legislation”) means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion.[2][3][4] The term “sharia” has been largely identified with Islam in English usage.[5]
Sharia (Islamic law) deals with several topics including: crime, politics, and economics, as well as personal matters such as sexual intercourse, hygiene, diet, prayer, everyday etiquette and fasting..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
Can’t wait for the next sermon on the mount. 😆
Well, certainly. I hope nobody spoke through you like a séance medium when you said the following:
Can you really make people do things, kid? Concentrate before you answer.
Welly sez ;)- I know I got under your skin but stop worrying about me. Concentrate and think about your own beliefs. That’s how you make it in the older crowd. Hopefully you will get old yourself. You will need those skills.
The old need the young, without them their wisdom has no value…don’t forget that….and as you think i am young i will accept that compliment. !
Eureka, you get it! Of course the old need the young! You are making great progress, Chris. Now, concentrate. There are plenty of morons running around without you. Don’t join them!
roflmao.. you don’t get under anyone’s skin.
Where did you ever get such a strange idea ? Your worthless ego, perhaps?
We are laughing at you, strange little child.
#5.. stop digging. !!!
We don’t have a long enough ladder to rescue you.
It really is the best laugh I have had all day, maybe all week! 😆
I won’t always please you …….. but on those days be kind to yourself and remind yourself that you’re only human, and other people have ideas too
Andy the teacher said “roflmao.. you don’t get under anyone’s skin.”
In response to a post I made, which began with a quote of Colorado Wellington’s, that he got under my skin…
And then the ‘teacher’ Andy , who at this point had not read Welly’s statement and was not aware that those words were Welly’s and not mine (and failing to notice my joke use of ‘sez’ as a youthful identifier in response to Welly’s comment about my age, but at this point it is neither here nor there) totally made a tit of himself (as even teachers do) by then giving me something of a telling off as if it was my ego which said “I know I got under your skin”…when i said nothing of the sort
I guess Andy, that you should have A) read and understood before commenting and B) aimed your comment at Weily who, I have to completely agree with you….does seem to have an ego problem.
Class dismissed 😉
Yes child, you are dismissed, and often. 😆
Gator, you can call me last into the kingdom of heaven too 😉
Your ignorance is showing again! 😆
Lord, judge me not by my sins but my exceptional eBay feedback 😉
Are you quoting from your religious text? 😆
“Atheism is [the inmate’s] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being,”
https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/13-1009/13-1009-2013-08-16.pdf
Sure enough, we see the same trend as with political affiliation: The more religious a person is, the more likely they are to deny climate change. Whereas 80% of atheists accept climate change, only 56% of all very religious Americans agree. 😆
http://www.randalolson.com/2014/09/13/who-are-the-climate-change-deniers/
And the environment in prison is a fair representation of life in the real world of course ,and there’s a flying pig over there……
The judges are not prisoners idiot! 😆
Another keeper!
And did you see this? Worth repeating… again and again and…
Sure enough, we see the same trend as with political affiliation: The more religious a person is, the more likely they are to deny climate change. Whereas 80% of atheists accept climate change, only 56% of all very religious Americans agree. 😆
http://www.randalolson.com/2014/09/13/who-are-the-climate-change-deniers/
I’ll see you your Randal Olson and up you THE POPE
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/pope-francis-to-issue-climate-change-call-to-arms-for-worlds-catholics-in-measures-that-will-anger-vatican-conservatives-9947357.html
So? You found one, of the 56%.
80% of atheists accept climate change, only 56% of all very religious Americans agree.
Is math hard for engineers? 😆
Another keeper!
Come on genius, keep ’em coming, I need more dumbass statements from you. 😆
“The judges are not prisoners idiot! :lol:”
The environment in prison is not the same….regardless of your kneejerk reaction.
Where in the world outside prison can you imagine a judge calling atheism a religion ?
Oh wait….I have some news….this will be a bombshell to some here no doubt at all….please do all sit down. before reading…..
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/20/atheist-religion-tax-breaks/2678367/
Atheism is a religion as far as tax breaks go !
How does that saying go ? “God loves a tryer” Hahaha !
The judges were not ruling on prison environments idiot, they were ruling on whether or not atheism is a religion. They ruled it is. Welcome to the club bro! 😆
Keep ’em coming!
Your goal is at the other end of the field genius! 😆
But government lawyers say that atheist leaders can be ministers, too, since atheism can function as a religion.
Ask Andy, and maybe he can help you with you math issues too.
80% of atheists accept climate change, only 56% of all very religious Americans agree.
Ask him which number is larger. 😆
I found ONE ? WHAT ?
The pope i s worth…..oh…..a few million….
Now back to your data, that 80% of atheists agree with global warming and 56% ‘very religious’ Americans don’t. I suppose you support that ?
http://www.randalolson.com/wp-content/uploads/climate_change_religiosity.png
Ask yourself this….are the slightly religious, religious ? Are the moderately religious also religious ? I believe they are, do you agree or disagree ?
Now, using a logical approach (favoured by engineers) we need to know the actual numbers of people involved…The obvious reason why this is important to know is because we can then attribute a realistic figure to how many people are involved on either side.
Only 20% of Americans say they have no religion. If 80% of that 20% believe in global warming that means that 16% of the population are atheists who believe in global warming.
Of the remaining 80% of the population who are religious, 56% of those describing themselves as very religious believe AGW is real, and 66% of those describing themselves as moderately religious believe that AGW is real, and 76% of those describing themselves as slightly religious believe that global warming, AGM is real
From a maths point of view….which of those two groups do you think is going to contain more people….the 16% of the population identified as atheists who believe in global warming…..or the group containing everybody who described themsleves as being religious in some way (and presumably believe in god)
I know where I’ld put my money if we were going to bet….but that#s engineering maths for you.
But…do feel free through the use of maths that the group of religious people who believe in global warming is smaller than the obviously already small group of global warming believing atheists.
Nice hand waving Pope Chris. 😆
Ask Andy, and maybe he can help you with you math issues too.
80% of atheists accept climate change, only 56% of all very religious Americans agree.
Ask him which number is larger.
Climate change and AGW are two different things. It’s the same with atheist and religion. I would tend to agree that atheist are more libertarian than the religious. And when I see atheist or the religious claiming to be libertarians I know you are full of shit. Hijack the meme comes to mind.
I am a Libertarian.
blustered by Gator
“Ask Andy, and maybe he can help you with you math issues too.
80% of atheists accept climate change, only 56% of all very religious Americans agree.
Ask him which number is larger. :lol:”
I am sure I don’t need anybody to help me figure out which is the largest number when represented as a percentage….but it’s clear that 80% of atheists accounts for merely 16% of the population.
Perhaps it is you who is need of Andy’s help now…..He will hopefully tell you that this is one of those times when using raw percentage as a tool for selective comparison is not a wise move
We are taliking about percentages Chris. Or do engineers not understand percentages? Something else Andy can help you with.
What the poll clearly shows is that atheists, as a group, are more gullible when it comes to their preferred religion of AGW.
Get over it.
“But government lawyers say that atheist leaders can be ministers, too, since atheism can function as a religion.”
And the atheist leaders maintained that they were not ministers.
Yes, and Al Gore claims to be a climate expert. Your actions define you.
But until you can say what percentage of all religious people believe that AGW is real you cannot assert that atheists are more gullible
56% of ‘very religious’ believe in AGW.
ADD 66% of moderately religious
ADD 76% of slightly religious
Total = percentage of all religious people who believe AGW is real
If you have the distribution figures for the numbers of people belonging to each of the three groups you have to accept exist then you won’t mind sharing those numbers for the sake of clarity…..and only then your assertion can be judged to be correct or not 🙂
We are talking about demographics and percentages. What part of that do you not get?
Keep digging! 😆
As for Me I think I am a conservative, justification for taxes are needed. Some people need to taken care of, that is the liberal in Me. So How would it look to other nations if we don’t practice what we lecture others not to do, and then there is this religion bullshit, so don’t claim morals and ethics based on that crap because this AGW crap is not much different then the religion crap.
Libertarians are not anarchists, we recognize the need for the goverment to provide some basic services, and that requires taxes. I used to be a conservative.
religion: noun re·li·gion \ri-?li-j?n\
1- the belief in a god or in a group of gods
2- an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
3- an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion
Everyone has a belief, so everyone has a religion.
If they’re religious then they’re already gullible……..as there are more of the religious people than the atheists I don’t see the problem ?
We know you don’t, it’s not your fault. Maybe it’s genetic.
Exactly, so remember that when there is a topic that you think is morally wrong in your mind and leave it to the people directly involved. This AGW bullshit directly involves all of us it is no different than religion or politics, and those out there that communism will save the world, keep living in that green bubble.
My belief in how society should operate…
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. … Reason and free enquiry are the only effectual agents against error.
-Thomas Jefferson
Gator “Everyone has a belief, ”
Is that so ……..
You believe there is no God.
Chris you are part of the problem.
Of course he is, he wants to pick your pocket, and kill people, based upon his beliefs.
“Exactly, so remember that when there is a topic that you think is morally wrong in your mind and leave it to the people directly involved. This AGW bullshit directly involves all of us it is no different than religion or politics, and those out there that communism will save the world, keep living in that green bubble.”
YES but you need to keep it in perspective…..no point being a waterpistol man….life is too short, don’t waste it trying to change something which you cannot
Gator, I don’t know for sure, but believing in imaginary things speaks for it’s self.
Have I asked you to convert? Have I asked you for money, or told you how to live your life? No.
So what difference does it make?
Belief “: a feeling of being sure that someone or something exists or that something is true”
Hmmm, that isn’t how I feel about a lack of god, and not merely because it isn’t an issue of feeling for me.
You cannot prove a negative, so it is indeed a belief.
Well Chris, that is where you and I part ways, wou can believe what ever it is you want, don’t include Me. A scam is a scam no matter how you frame it.
“Of course he is, he wants to pick your pocket, and kill people, based upon his beliefs.”
What a ridiculous thing to say 🙂
Are you, or are you not for wind turbine subsidies?
So Chris how do you think this is going to work out?
Because there is a club and we aren’t in it, unless you are and aren’t saying.
“Well Chris, that is where you and I part ways, wou can believe what ever it is you want, don’t include Me. A scam is a scam no matter how you frame it.”
The USA government changed it’s plans on tax relief for small vehicles not too long ago up to $100,00 per vehicle for business use…from it’s previous much lower level.
That was a scam, designed to help GM sell more Hummers which were retailing at just below the $100k mark
Or was it just a tax break ?
Chris Barron says:
March 17, 2015 at 5:15 pm
The government agreed a short term subsidy period for each wind farm…the subsidies do not last forever…..within the lifetime of the first turbine at a single location the subsidy will end, because the site will be in profit then and able to pay for itself….in later years, when the nacelle (at the top of the tower) has been replaced for a very much cheaper refurbished unit the return on financial investment is very high compared to a lot of conventional businesses.
So it sounds as if you do support subsidies for wind. You evaded answering my question, just like the weasel that you are, so I just pulled from my files.
That is picking pockets based upon a belief, and will result in higher energy costs, and more fuel povert deaths.
So it’s “let them eat cake” then, yep keep going down that road, do you own one of them vehicles? Do you think I own one of them?
“Are you, or are you not for wind turbine subsidies?”
The wind turbines here get some subsidy, which is being reduced. Do I cry about it either way ? no . Do I think it has been necessary to help the energy companies bridge the gap between the government forcing them into building more renewables and the long payback period ? I can’t see how else it was going to work.
It is wrong for a government to force a private industry into spending money on something in such a rapid way that it threatens the existence of those companies. and not at the same time offer some assistance.
The energy companies didn’t volunteer to install more renewables….the decision to do that was taken at government level , at Kyoto and other summits and the energy companies have had no option but to do as they were told or face penalties.
I don’t hold energy companies to task for taking subsidies which they needed in order to keep their head above water.
This is nothing new though, it happens all the time…..in every industry…….our government decided that it would accept directives which capped the number of sheep our nation will produce, and a lot of the sheep farmers nearly went out of business because the number was lower than before, and would have gone out of business, had they not received their subsidies for *not* farming sheep.
This is how it is in the world where we have mastered high levels of productivity, suddenly a small change of policy can have a catastrophic effect on many connected industries.
I hear the arguments about wind and am sympathetic….but many people who think coal is the sure winner aren’t very aware of how difficult it is to bring coal fired stations online quickly…..or how difficult it is to prevent supply overshoot of thermal power stations when demand suddenly drops….those stations often dump excess power in large amounts in various ways…….wind can be like that too but nobody in the pro thermal camp really wants to know.
People also argue that wind gets paid to not produce electricity sometimes…but that is nothing new either….thermal stations have also taken those payments, but nobody wants to hear about that either.
I don’t care about the subsidies…I’m sure the energy companies do though, many of which are getting over their honeymoon period and tightening their belts as they prepare for post subsidy life. Many people forecast that those companies will fail as soon as subsidies end, but then they don’t seem to be able to provide numbers representative of individual business cases.
You guys carry on screaming into your buttholes that subsidies are unfair if you like and see where ti gets you….from experience it wont get you far….as usual , time will tell, and if wind does survive after subsidies be happy that you can form an argument along the lines ‘ it could never have been possible without subsidies’ and then you get to say that you contributed in some way , as some sort of reluctant supporter 😉
Can wind begin without subsidies ? In my opinion, yes, but it requires a different business model and a great deal of consumer support than we currently have in the steeply profit led energy market……shareholders in energy companies would need to accept lower returns on their investment in the short term (who hasn’t seen energy companies make obscene profits even without subsidies) .Smaller scale neighbourhood projects are a good start….of course it’s not ideal for everyone, but for those who it is suitable for then why not let them go for it ? It would just leave more coal and gas for everyone else…..
Addressing the intermitency issue, of course it is not going to be possible for one single location to have full wind power 24hours per day….and it begs belief sometimes that some people feel the need to shout about that in a world where most people have stood in the wind and know the implications. A diverse mix is a good mix though, and as the system develops one area can support another, not merely with wind, but other forms of renewable.
Wind power aside for a moment, for years I’ve been maddened by our governments blindness to the fact that we have one of the worlds best tidal resources, but I’m pleased that we are looking at installing tidal lagoons at long last, which will be able to provide for over 15% of demand for 18 hrs per day. Again, it is intermittent though but a diverse mix is a good mix. It is low cost, predictable….and when the greens complain that a few fish get minced in the turbines then you just give em a wee nudge and down the hatch they go 😉
Renewables aside, one thing is for sure – a dependency on thermal power is good and reliable and yet , here at least, vulnerable to market forces…..nearly 60% of our gas and over 80% of our coal comes from other countries. We have good levels of wind, hydro and tidal resources and it seems daft not to use them, just in case……we don’t want to be too dependent on foreign aid, if you know what I mean
Okay of you live in the US then the picture is quite different, you can go on burning your resources and suffer only small incremental price rises in the near future, but as time goes on and it becomes cheaper to maintain a wind farm over 60 years than it does to extract more and more difficult to access fossil fuels things will change.
I think with me one of the fossil fuel issues is about the question of how many reserves of each fuel type exist, and what does it cost to retrieve them…..those figures are constantly being pulled up and then down….. why ? Geologists should know for sure…….but then …….without being too rude to them …..a geologist who works for an energy company has a different pay bonus scheme to a geologist who works for an independent company…..and as for cost to recover….large engineering projects more often than not run overbudget…I know that last point really really well
So the answer is yes.
Thank you!
You proved my point.
Chris, when that happens, the free, and I mean Free market will be there. You don’t force that crap it happens.
“Because there is a club and we aren’t in it, unless you are and aren’t saying.”
I predict that in one way or another, the almost universal feeling to want to ‘belong’ will accelerate our own demise.
I’ve been thrown out of better clubs than this 😉 (as the saying goes)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-P614lmP3Y
Good, and it looks good on ya.
“The wind turbines here get some subsidy, which is being reduced. Do I cry about it either way ? no”
It doesn’t bother me if you think that what i said here means that I completely support subsidies (it clearly doesn’t say that)……..but your reason for wanting to know is probably guilt related. (if you were unaware of that) Amen
your reason for wanting to know is probably guilt related.
Projecting a little? 😆
You support tyranny, and I do not.
You pick pockets, and I do not.
You advocate policies that kill innocents, and I do not.
Glad we finally got that cleared up.
All you had to do was say “yes”. 😆
Serves ya right that you joined a club and get thrown out. 😆
I have yet to see any effort to demonstrate that wind technology, as implemented, is net-energy-positive. When you include all the necessary decommissioning activities, transmission losses, dumping of unused surplus power, the need to use power to turn the blades during calm weather, energy used to aim the devices, maintenance needs, energy for the site prep and the actual construction (including the extra lines to connect a wind farm to the grid), storage and recovery losses (in the event that there is any storage), computing power including proper climate control, and energy to move all the employees around as they do their jobs … I don’t see how it can be!
“You cannot prove a negative, so it is indeed a belief.”
Not so.
The natural state is that there is no doG in this room. It is a fact, not a belief.
My wife believes there is a doG but I say no, there is no doG here
She says you cannot prove a negative.
I remind here that until she brought up the issue of the existence of a doG there was no doubt on the matter.
Once the positive position has been surrendered the result is not a regression to the negative, but merely just a position which represents the initial truth which is in itself evidence of no doG being in existence here
Prove there is no God genius.
What crap is that Chris, doG? You can’t even say God. Who made God? Is that simple enough.
Ya see what Chris, is at is being a devider, he is an AGW believer, and using religeon and the race card. Aren’t ya Chris?
“I have yet to see any effort to demonstrate that wind technology, as implemented, is net-energy-positive. When you include all the necessary decommissioning activities, transmission losses, dumping of unused surplus power, the need to use power to turn the blades during calm weather, energy used to aim the devices, maintenance needs, energy for the site prep and the actual construction (including the extra lines to connect a wind farm to the grid), storage and recovery losses (in the event that there is any storage), computing power including proper climate control, and energy to move all the employees around as they do their jobs … I don’t see how it can be!”
What decommissioning activities ? (this isn’t casting doubt, it is a serious question) All of the UK installed wind is set to be installed for decades, and if the nacelle requires refurbishing then it is switched out for another….there is no decommissioning involved at that time, it is like refitting your car with an engine when the old one wears out and you continue driving. The removed nacelle is returned for refurbishing, new bearings fitted etc and the copper windings are checked.
Transmission losses are identical to the transmission losses of all energy generators….here in the UK it is about 3% of net production….the same for all generators – so why would wind be different ?
Dumping of unused power is addressed by various methods of energy storage, some a few years in the future, others, like pumped hydro storage are working fine today.
“The need to use power to turn the blades during calm weather”
This is something you could enlighten me on….in calm weather blades do not normally turn…..there is no need to power stationary blades, some forms of generators do need small amounts of power to keep the stator energised – could that be what you’ve read about ?
“Energy used to aim the devices”
Getting into very small fractions of total energy produced here……
” … I don’t see how it can be!””
Have your calculations proved that there is a net loss of energy ?
“Prove there is no God genius.”
I don’t need to prove the existence of something I am never going to need or believe in ……if there is a god in your life then I am happy for you 😉
… if there is a god in your life then I am happy for you.
Then why don’t you act like it? Jealous? 😆
The Amazing Randi (one of your go-to guys!) admits that one cannot prove a negative. Good showman!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWJTUAezxAI
The Amazing Randi uses Santa and flying reindeer as a straw man argument, which is unnecessary, but he gets laughs. I don’t believe in Santa or flying reindeer either, but if you do, fine. It costs me nothing, unless you push them off a building onto someone.
The upshot is, The Amazing Randi cannot push God off a building. So his presentation is an informal fallacy, based on false representation. And it only proves that you cannot prove a negative, which he admits. I am not asking anyone to believe in God, I am not picking pockets or harming anyone, and therefore I do not need to prove his existence. It is what is called ‘faith’, and it is mine, and not yours.
So why are you obsessed with it? It costs you nothing, unlike your beliefs, which we have shown are very costly.
Thanks for the keeper genius!
Poor Chris, you have failed junior high.. AGAIN !!
You have no class to dismiss.
remember #5, Chris?
Stop digging .. the hole you are in is way too deep.
Christ, do you use wind power yourself?
Poor little child-mind Chris doesn’t even read he, himself, wrote.
No wonder his mind is scattered all over the bottom of the barrel.
Not a single coherent thought in his whole juvenile understanding of anything.
Bizarre, but very funny to watch. 🙂
“What crap is that Chris, doG? You can’t even say God. Who made God? Is that simple enough.”
As far as I’m aware, man made ‘god’. Just like men have done over the ages in order to fulfill there needs and explain a mysterious world. It can also be said that god was created as a centralising theme to organise groups of people to work together for a common cause.
It’s very old fashioned, we have replacement systems which achieve the same goals these days, which don’t require a god
“Christ, do you use wind power yourself?”
Christ ? 😉
Of course I use wind sourced electricity, every day….it is impossible to specify an electricity tariff which does not contain wind power ? or am I mistaken and somewhere there is a ‘no wind’ tariff ?
No, You, Chris relies totally and absolutely on fossil fuels.
He has continually refused the challenge to turn off his electricity whenever there is no wind.
NO-ONE can rely on wind power. He knows that. It is inherently UNRELIABLE.
All his comments re wind power are just hypocritical bluster, he does NOT believe what he says. He LIES to himself, as well as everyone else.
So now you expect Me to believe your crap too. PPM all over again.
If you want to sound like the gift to hunamity then Christ it is!:lol:
If you want to sound like the gift to humanity then Christ it is! 😆
Hey just for you Christ err Chris, because ya know all is perfect in yer world! 😆
A quick question for Chris, (self-styled wind guru)
If you have a 100MW wind farm, what is the amount of electricity can you absolutely guarantee to provide, say, 95% of the time ?
Exactly, Gator, The Amazing Randi. Like I told you before there are somethings I can’t explain but it seems to work. If it works for some and harms no one then good, if it has an opposire effect, then there is a problem.
Imagine that, we can have opposing beliefs, still respect one another, and harm noone.
Chris has alot of catching up to do! 😆
“No, You, Chris relies totally and absolutely on fossil fuels.”
So, down with nuclear is it then ?
“He has continually refused the challenge to turn off his electricity whenever there is no wind.”
Only a fuckwit would turn off one source and deny themsleves when another is available….there will always be other available sources.
But only a fuckwit and a half would put all their eggs in one basket
“NO-ONE can rely on wind power. He knows that. It is inherently UNRELIABLE”
Is that NO-ONE at all in the whole world , not one ? I’m just checking…it seems pretty absolute and I know of some guys in the US who have only wind power in their mountain homes….but if you tell me they don’t exist then by the strength of your conviction I must surely agree to it 😉 (I’ll leave the people i know in Spain’s Sierra Nevada who only have renewables out of it too)
“All his comments re wind power are just hypocritical bluster, he does NOT believe what he says. He LIES to himself, as well as everyone else.”
It’s beyond belief and is now fact, I KNOW that we need a diverse energy mix, I have never said we can use 100% wind power and if you have paid any attention to the answers i have given in the past to the same questions I have said I envisage that the potential for wind, at full utilisation, can be about 15%-25% continuous of all we need….it can replace nuclear here in the UK and save us from the budget threatening costs of nuclear * if allowed to be developed to it’s full potential. But that is perhaps only because we have a very windy island. and a small nuclear generation pool compared to some other countries
Will it be developed that much ? I don’t care I never have…I just take the position that there is no point jumping on the ‘lets all hate renewables’ bandwagon unless you do the maths and look at what happens in the real world, over many decades, and not just a single iteration of one nacelle lifetime. Wind isn’t the most profitable renewable source, but it isn’t the dead loss that a single iteration calculation will show it to be, if you keep the site online over decades. The only thing stopping it from working is if the wind stops blowing at that site forever more…pretty unlikely
I am genuinely surprised that your next line wasn’t “You’re either with us or without us buddy, the bus is leaving”
Night all ! enjoy your entertaining bandwagon
Regarding the disputations raised with me abound wind power, it’s not my desire to get into it at this time; I have done so in the past, and there are valid responses to all but one of the objections. But let me correct something I wrote; I believe it is in very cold weather that the blades are turned using grid power. I had incorrectly said calm weather.
Night all ! enjoy your entertaining bandwagon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3-a4qWCtIg
“enjoy your entertaining bandwagon”
But the clown sounds like he is leaving the building !
Who will we have to laugh at.
Wind is currently providing 7% for the UK.
A few days ago, it was providing NOTHING. That’s reliability for you 😉
With the subsidies, the ridiculous feed-in tariffs and rules and payments to land-owners, and the mandatory usage of wind generated electricity, forcing real power stations to operate inefficiently, there would be no wind power.
Think of the money these monstrosities have WASTED !!
It could have been spent on something worthwhile..
Chris might even have been able to get a basic education !
It’s hard to know where to start, because the only thing exceeding his arrogance, is his ignorance.
But math is definitely a weak point.
Wind can never replace fossil fuels and/or nuclear.
Wind is inconsistent and irregular. Base load requirements are for solid , consistent electricity supplies. Available when needed.
Wind is a FAD, a feel-good TOY that got out of hand. And once the subsidies, feed-in rules, and mandatory use rules are abolished in the, hopefully, not too distant future, wind energy will die a natural death….
….because it is NOT an alternative !!
Well the only problem I see, is it is everywhere, Ontario and Quebec are going ahead with this cap and trade here, so even here we are screwed. I said it before when they can’t get the feds they go after the state and municipal governments, sound familiar?
Don’t worry, it always comes to an end when they run out of other peoples money, and millions die. 😉
They used to have a single “showpiece” wind turbine in Newcastle, (NSW Australia.)
Odd beast….. Totally calm weather, the blades would be moving,
but come a stiff breeze, they would be stationary.
I always thought it was meant to be the other way around 😉
Thankfully, it has now been removed to make way for the 4th Coal terminal 🙂
Well, between them and the Ninbys, I hope they run out soon and change corurse. But i don’t think that’ll happen. I have more faith that jesus will be back before any politician will change the course of their previious admin. The tax is just too much for them to let go of. They always think they can make more of it than the previous admin. And we are not in the club, we just vote for them.
Gator, you know, “The Amazing Randi.” discredited dowsing right? And you remember What I said to you about about it, Right?
More unsupported nonsense. A can not remember the quote, but words to the affect that an atheist does not believe in nothing, they make government their god.
Roy Spencer’s religion was ridiculed often among the CAGW supporters.
C.Wellington said,
“I don’t think so, and while anecdotal, among people I know the atheists are more likely to believe in AGW and the believers less likely.
I agree.
Chris at least now admits that he does not know. “It would be interesting to see figures of those who believe in AGW and those who don’t….how many are deeply religious and how many are not.”
Amazing how he avoids answering a direct question though…
That’s the problem, you believe that an athiest believes in nothing, It’s just you can’t come to terms of people not believeing from tour train of thought.
your train of thought.
Ok, I will bite. What do you believe in regarding creation? Steady State? Recycled Big bang?
1. I think I’m probably an agnostic atheist.
2. I don’t care what someone’s else’s religion is. that’s their business.
I will respect their choice so long as they respect mine and so long as they don’t try to force me to accept those parts of their religious that I don’t agree with.
One of my best friends and colleagues is an Iranian Muslim, I have roomed with him on conferences occasionally. When its his prayer time, I go and have a cup of coffee.. seems fair to me, he appreciates the gesture.
I will also attend friend’s wedding or (in one case, funeral) in any church that it happens to be held in.
Regarding the origins of the Earth and the universe….. It is one of this things I accept that we do not really know and probably never will. Everybody has their pet beliefs or theories. One of them may actually be correct, maybe, or not.
As to AGW.. a load of agenda driven, twisted non-science BS !!!
Pity it has become so much like a cult type religion rather than real science.
What’s so smart about him? He isn’t saying anything I haven’t been saying for the past 25 years. He also make errors/omissions. He claims that CO2 is warming the earth but there is no proof of that. He leaves out the beneficial effects of more CO2 on plants and fails to talk about the imminent ending of the current brief interglacial. Color me not impressed.
Will Happer is light years ahead of him. But even he when through his warmist phase. I never did and never thought that warming would be anything but good anyway. Guess I’m some kind of infitity+1 genius.
Please tell me you aren’t comparing your “genius” to Freeman Dyson’s without providing any form of evidence other than your own opinion.
The staff of their Prophet.
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2013/03/fixing-marcott-mess-in-climate-science.html
https://www.google.com/search?q=hockey+stick&rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7RVEA_enUS618&biw=1260&bih=859&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=gyQxVan9GIL1oASn_oC4Ag&sqi=2&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ#rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-SearchBox&tbm=isch&q=hockey+stick+pinterest&imgrc=iygSwpGWz-7GkM%253A%3BBXKCTdp6wD-ceM%3Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fs-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com%252F736x%252Fe1%252F18%252F80%252Fe118802047212ea49d9c2bbd089b1ede.jpg%3Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.pinterest.com%252Fpin%252F99571841734216749%252F%3B700%3B1000
Thank you, Steven, for “calling a spade a shovel!” The truth will set us free.
When the curtain is finally pulled on seventy years (1945-2015) of lock-step consensus thinking, we will see Stalin won WWII by capturing Japan’s atomic bomb plant at Konan, Korea and holding the American crew of a B29 bomber for negotiations in AUG-SEPT 1945 until:
Nations and National Academies of Sciences were United on 24 Oct 1945 in order to:
_ a.) Hide the DESTRUCTIVE FORCE in cores of heavy atoms, and
_ b.) Save the world from possible nuclear annihilation [1]
Precise measurements have clearly demonstrated the absurdity of this 1945 decision to rule the world by deceit:
THE FORCE OF DESTRUCTION in cores of heavy atoms is also THE CREATIVE FORCE in the Sun’s core that sustains our lives [2].
Fear of self-incrimination keeps NAS members and winners of Nobel and Crafoord Prizes from now addressing the measurements [2]. They are not at fault for lying to the public for seven (7) decades. Otherwise they would be denied research grants, tenure, promotion and access to top-ranked journals for scientific publications.
Almost everyone who has a job now – policemen, janitors, school teachers, construction workers, news reporters, bureaucrats, etc. – works for Big Brother.
We must let go of blame for the past seventy years of deception and focus our efforts on restoring the basic rights of citizens.
1. “Aston’s WARNING (12 DEC 1922); CHAOS & FEAR (AUG 1945)” https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/CHAOS_and_FEAR_August_1945.pdf
2. “Solar Energy for school teachers,”
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Supplement.pdf
If you want to get rich than doing a lot of science is not the way.
Freeman Dyson
https://youtu.be/QEe76a9hZZA
Thanks, Robertv, for the video of Freeman Dyson.
I met Freeman at the” 1976 Gregynog Workshop on Isotopic Anomalies” in Gregynog, Wales.
Sir Fred Hoyle and Willie Fowler were also there. The BBC crew were there filming Sir Fred Hoyle. That prevented me from getting to talk privately with Hoyle about the Sun.
George Will touched on this subject in yesterday’s opinion column.
Discussing Syracuse University’s dscision to divest all fossil fuel stocks from their endowment he compared the ‘sustainability movement’ it to a fundamentalist religion.
Here’s the best part:
“Like many religions’ premises, the sustainability movement’s premises are more assumed than demonstrated. Second, weighing the costs of obedience to sustainability’s commandments is considered unworthy. Third, the sustainability crusade supplies acolytes with a worldview that infuses their lives with purpose and meaning. Fourth, the sustainability movement uses apocalyptic rhetoric to express its eschatology. Fifth, the church of sustainability seeks converts, encourages conformity to orthodoxy and regards rival interpretations of reality as heretical impediments to salvation.”
He pretty much nailed it.
You can read the entire column at:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will041615.php3#bDi0FiqEyOssMl1r.99
Crap, got to proof-read BEFORE I post.
I’m currently vacationing on an island off Bali called Lembongan for a friends birthday.
Relaxed discussion turned to how much humidity exists in the tropics versus elsewhere.
Normal weather talk turned to how much snow the NE of America has received this past winter. And how cold the past four winters have been.
8 of the 9 present (me being the 9th) all agreed this was a direct sign of “global warming”. One added “climate change” but all agreed on “global warming”.
Further, the “global warming” case was backed up by one, in the huge increase in Antarctic ice causing penguins to “die”.
I kid you not.
I added with correction “climate change you probably mean”, but the table shut me down knowing my ‘sceptical’ stance. I simply tried to give them a way out of believing that cold is caused by hot.
The scam is so sophisticated that even people I know well blame freezing, record breaking winters, 8 foot deep Great Lake ice, record Antarctic ice and 8 feet of Boston snow etc etc on not “climate change”, but as a sign of “global warming”.
Forest fires were a big hit. But explanations that they, hurricanes and tornadoes are at record lows were greeted with scorn and venomous disbelief.
When people you know well confuse cold with hot with such ideological ease, I get completely blown away.
The scam is brilliant. Hot = cold. Wet = dry. Flood = drought. Man = evil.
I am reminded of Isaiah 5:20,21
20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
What planet are your friends from?
Planet groupthink, where it’s better to have a ’cause’ than not, and how dare anyone accept data, reason or any other inconvenient fact that might harm or whither that cause.
Mostly they’re afraid to go against the ‘right’ side of the argument. Because if you’re on the ‘right’ side of the argument it’s always true.
#AGW has nothing to do with science. It’s a noble cause that feels right.
What is their country of origin? I have to go searching for ‘believers’ around here. Global warmig is considered a joke, at best, where I live. There was a hippy in a nearby town, who was a ‘beleiver’, but thankfully he moved away last year. I now have to travel the next county over to find people that gullible.
“I now have to travel the next county over to find people that gullible.”
Half your luck !!
My boss in my last research contract was a rabid “believer”.
After many discussions, I finally got him down to pulling out “the precautionary principle”.
I quietly accepted his defeat. 🙂
I don’t even bother to discuss it any more. It’s like talking to a wall that thinks you’re stupid.
To paraphrase Charlie Brown’s Linus “There are three things I have learned never to discuss with people: religion, politics, and the Global Warming.” (with apologies to the Great Pumpkin)
Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
I’m currently vacationing on an island off Bali called Lembongan for a friends birthday.
Relaxed discussion turned to how much humidity exists in the tropics versus elsewhere.
Normal weather talk turned to how much snow the NE of America has received this past winter. And how cold the past four winters have been.
8 of the 9 present (me being the 9th) all agreed this was a direct sign of “global warming”. One added “climate change” but all agreed on “global warming”.
Further, the “global warming” case was backed up by one, in that the huge increase in Antarctic ice causing penguins to “die”.
I kid you not.
I added with correction “climate change you probably mean”, but the table shut me down knowing my ‘sceptical’ stance. I simply tried to give them a way out of believing that cold is caused by hot.
The scam is so sophisticated that even people I know well blame freezing, record breaking winters, 8 foot deep Great Lake ice, record Antarctic ice and 8 feet of Boston snow etc etc on not “climate change”, but as a sign of “global warming”.
Forest fires were a big hit. But explanations that they, hurricanes and tornadoes are at record lows were greeted with scorn and venomous disbelief.
When people you know well confuse cold with hot with such ideological ease, I get completely blown away.
The scam is brilliant. Hot = cold. Wet = dry. Flood = drought. Man = evil.
“Atheism is [the inmate’s] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being,”
https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/13-1009/13-1009-2013-08-16.pdf
BTW – Hitler was also an atheist, as was Mao, and Stalin. But they never tried to control anyone.
gator,
You can’t convince religious folks like Chris. He doesn’t believe it, but he is far more of a religious fanatic than any Jehovah’s Witness. If I were you I wouldn’t waste any more pixels on him. It’s not worth the aggravation.
Believers in catastrophic AGW are just as religious. Facts don’t matter to them. Evidence doesn’t matter. Belief is all they need. Like argumentative atheists, they don’t think they’re religious.
But of course they are, because CAGW is their belief. If they were reasonable, they wouldn’t be climate alarmists. Because that belief lacks credible facts and evidence.
Pretty much,
I just enjoy enabling arrogant fools in their own demise. 😆
If you want an Imaginary friend then that is cool too. Just don’t push it on anyone and creep anyone out with it.,
I never do.
I know you enough to know the difference. But you you have to stay focused. You are one of the good ones.
And I can see it now, just how that sounds, Chris and his irk will be posting this as some proof of something. They did it before just like that harry hammer in the bathtub website way back.
I believe this is the bathtub to which you referred…
About MFB
Welcome! google3d495549482a90fa.html
I am Ed Darrell. Millard Fillmore‘s Bathtub is my weblog.
https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/this-bathtub-this-blog/
Ray was raised a fundamentalist Christian in Wichita, Kansas, by parents who eventually became missionaries, and among family members highly involved in church life.[3] This fundamentalist upbringing informs much of his later writing.[4] In 1979, Ray joined the Quaker church, and later he attended the Presbyterian church.[5] From 1969 to 1984 he taught Sunday school, preached, and was a tenor soloist in several church choirs. He left the church in the mid 1980s and identifies as an atheist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darrel_Ray
Truth on ice.
There is a difference, though. Ice thins, gets weaker, and covers less area. As that happens, as the planet warms, the density of denialists does not appear to decrease, at least not fast, and not toward greater understanding and less insanity.
https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/category/climate-change/
Just sayin’! 😆
😆 Sick eh?
You forgot the spiritual father of them all, Vladimir I. Lenin, whose controlling influence and terroristic philosophy continue to this day in every country on Earth and have nearly competed their total takeover of earthly governments and the false religions.
(Thereby making previous Communist advances during the 1930s-80s look like a minor pothole by comparison.)
What’s that you say, they don’t kill as many people today? Well, possibly. But if so, they’re just biding their time. In that case, then when they perceive that their position is sufficiently secure, they will unleash a maelstrom of murder against every nation, class and creed, which will dwarf all of the previous genocides, put together.
They cannot fail to do so. It is their inherent nature, borne of an evil, hateful and rebellious spirit. We would do well not to forget this.
PPM, Power, prestige, and money.
So you say, and you’re entitled to your belief, as well as to the expression of it, unbridled by a corrupt and rebellious world.
Nope, you do from that comment!
No, I don’t, with all due respect.
I don’t believe in that from what you stated, so why do you say it then?
For the preaching of the cross is to them who perish , foolishness ; but to us who are saved , it is the power of God. For it is written , I will destroy the wisdom of the wise , and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God he world by wisdom knew not God , it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them who believe . For the Jews require a sign , and the Greeks seek after wisdom : but we preach Christ crucified , before the Jews a stumblingblock , and before the Greeks foolishness ; but before them who are called , both Jews and Greeks , Christ the power of God , and the wisdom of God. Because foolishness of God is wiser than men ; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
If you say so, but that was 2000 years ago, so if you believe that pretains to you then good fer you!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pj21A3pIGRU
http://web.archive.org/web/20120222121116/http://sovereignty.net/p/gov/ggpp.html
unced – hear maurice strong and rothschild
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUdgiehz9dU
Is there any wonder why maurice strong lives in China now!
I wrote a song
Only Cry For CO2
Don’t cry but if you do
only cry for CO2
Don’t cry for me
Don’t cry for you
Only cry for CO2
Don’t cry for the children
Don’t cry for malnutrition
Don’t cry for the cold and shivering
Don’t cry for the poverty stricken
only cry for CO2
Don’t cry for nuttin’
Only cry for CO2
Pretty much the way Greens roll: sacrifice humanity on the alter of imagined CO2 threat. What schmucks.
The mafioso would always go to confession and make their souls clean, with the full blessing of the church.
I wonder, how does that filth Di Caprio cleanse his soul?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3044176/Leonardo-DiCaprio-eco-warrior-flew-private-jet-NY-LA-SIX-times-SIX-weeks-Sony-hack-documents-reveal.html
For some it may be a religion, for others – a fashion subject….. Unfortunately, there are many politicians who see this issue like one that can bring them votes and visibility, and, happily, there are some people who see it like a science, who analyse and understand the problem and propose real solutions.
Chris, The wind Barron seems to be missing the point that religion is being used to force belief in CAGW. The Catholic Pope has come out supporting CAGW and demanding his priest preach CAGW gospil in church. and the Anglican bishops commit to new climate justice agenda
http://catholicclimatemovement.global/catholic-teachings-on-climate-change/
This is not unexpected since religion has been one of the pillars of the leftists pushing socialism down the throats of Americans.
There are various lists of the pillars of the left. They include:
Acadamia
The MSM
Hollywood
Religion
The socialists of South and Central America have used the Catholic church for their “social justice” movement for decades now, and it has slowly caught on in the US. They preach that Jesus would want us to force everyone to pay for state run programs for the poor and needy. But Jesus preached about individual salvation, it cannot be brought about by the state, it must come from within. It is a corruption of the core teachings of Christ.
But Hitler was a socialist, and also used the churches to sway public opinion, right along with academia, media and pop culture. Hitler was an atheist.
National Socialism and religion cannot exist together…. The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity…. Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things.
Adolph Hitler, Night of 11th-12th July, 1941
Of the group, Religion is the last to latch onto CAGW this Century to strengthen their legitimacy with Society,,, but it’s another liability like a trojan horse; they never learn…