Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 26 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #13610
    Selco
    Selco
    Survivalist
    member6

    Ice melt in part of Antarctica ‘appears unstoppable,’ NASA says

    I read somewhere few days ago that ice sheet there is actually recovering. Kinda weird that there s controversy about something that should be so easily determined.

    #13614
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    Science is political not scientific.  NASA was compromised long ago like the EPA.

    From 2010

    NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his “foremost” mission as the head of America’s space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world.

    NASA Chief: Next Frontier Better Relations With Muslim World

    #13618
    Profile photo of freedom
    freedom
    Survivalist
    rnews

    This is crazy news, NASA is now part of the green lie. If you do a search in Google for increase in Antarctica ice you get so many news articles. This was a big problem for them so now they are pushing NASA to lie to get there way.

    #13623
    Malgus
    Malgus
    Survivalist
    member8

    Ice is melting… ice is not melting… “global warming” is going to cause the next ice age… wait, no it’s not…

    I just don’t care anymore. Really.

    The Earth is going to do whatever it wants no matter what we do. These asshats can’t even predict the weather one week into the future. What makes them think they can predict what’s going to happen 20, 50, 100 years into the future?

    The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1

    #13625
    Profile photo of gollor
    gollor
    Bushcrafter
    member1

    The complexity of the climate is immense and in some ways still immeasurable. So the science studying it is also very complex. It doesn’t lend itself very well to the craphound soundbite machine that passes for mass media news. If you read something about science on a major news source, you can almost guarantee they got it mostly wrong.

    gollor
    ---------- Life needs an edit button - with find and replace.

    #13637
    Profile photo of WhiteKnight
    WhiteKnight
    Survivalist
    rprepper

    Haha remember how in the 90’s they were saying that by 2010 the US would be 30% submerged? Biggest lie in history. I do not trust any scientist that I do not personally know. How’s that hole in the ozone layer coming along, NASA?

    #13642
    Malgus
    Malgus
    Survivalist
    member8

    The Algore types who are baying about “global warming” or “climate change”… well, most of them are useful idiots. The ones who aren’t useful idiots are the ones who stand to make breathtaking amounts of money brokering “carbon credits”… like Algore himself.

    Average temperature of the earth, right now, is about 54F.

    In the past, long before humans, the average temperature was about 76F. How do we know? Because there were thick forests occupying Greenland, that’s how. And often, folks will completely ignore the Little Ice Age which lasted about 500 years… our current window of “nice” weather has only been around since about 1850… an eyeblink of time.

    Bottom line is that yes, the climate of the earth is changing. But then, it always has been, no matter what anyone does or whether humans were around or not. I very much doubt switching to those corkscrew lightbulbs that suck will do anything to “save” the polar bears or some other cute and cuddly photogenic critter…

    The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1

    #13656
    Profile photo of lci115lewis
    lci115lewis
    Survivalist
    member3

    Those CFLs are great in warmer climates, the give off so much less waste heat when you are struggling to keep temperatures cool enough in your house during the summer.

    And they have gotten much better lately, not very many still have that long power build up before the light is fully on.

    Rob

    #13666
    Malgus
    Malgus
    Survivalist
    member8

    lewis,

    It’s not that those corkscrew lightbulbs that suck exist is what’s eating me… it’s that we are being forced to use them. We should have the option of opting out of using them, if we want.

    I find it darkly funny (I find lots of things darkly funny) that the Almighty Government has forced us to use those sucky corkscrew lightbulbs. Those sucky lightbulbs contain mercury. Not much per bulb, but when you multiply them by the hundreds of millions in the US, it adds up fast.

    Contrast this with the very same Government – the EPA – ratcheting up the pressure, reinterpreting their own stinkin rulings when it comes to coal fired power plants. See, each ton of coal has a small amount of mercury in it. About the size of a sugar cube per metric ton of coal. The Government says that this must be controlled and contained. Failure to do so is unacceptable. And coal plants are being forced out of business because the cost of controlling this infinitesimal amount of mercury would be exorbitant…

    But the very same elemental mercury in all those suck-ass corkscrew lightbulbs is okay for some reason…

    And I just read last week that not only do those suck-ass corkscrew lightbulbs contain mercury, they also use just as much electricity, if not more, than standard incandescent bulbs… so there is no net gain from using them whatsoever… those poor polar bears and other cute cuddly critters… what will they do?

    The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1

    #13668
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    Malgus,

    It is only important that you do as your told. Like peeing in a toilet that doesn’t work because in California they have water issues. Of course the sewer systems were designed for larger amounts of water, so the **** is sitting in the pipes making the whole city stink.

    #13680
    Profile photo of freedom
    freedom
    Survivalist
    rnews

    Hey 1974, My new toilet is great, all you need to do is flush two times! They work !!

    #13686
    Tolik
    Tolik
    Survivalist
    member10

    The earth goes in cycles , there is a thing called rotational wobble , every X amount of years , the earths rotation wobbles , tilting the poles slightly . It does cause climate changes all over the place , but this is a natural occurrence ………nothing man made , we cant blame it on anything we do or are doing . They have found evidence in the sahara desert ( I think Sahara ) in soil core samples that it was a green place at one time , then went back to a desert , and back and forth , each time the earth wobbled . It’s another attempt by governments to think they are in control of ” everything ” , when in reality , they are just as helpless against nature as you and I are .

    #13741
    Profile photo of freedom
    freedom
    Survivalist
    rnews

    Tolik It is about money and control of the people. The green want to make more money and control. The left control the green and they know that the right controls oil, gas and coal.

    #13774
    Profile photo of gollor
    gollor
    Bushcrafter
    member1

    Corporations with public shareholders don’t have political associations besides greed. The whole point of incorporating a company is to try and game the system so the owners can keep more of the money they cheat and steal from their victims…er, “customers”. It only seems like corporations politic because of the agendas of the politicians they buy. They are just trying to further their business interests by getting lawmakers to write laws which favor them and not their competition – or worse laws that protect them from their own wrongdoing.

    So naturally the existing energy companies want as little regulation of their industry as possible so they can keep making more money. They also don’t want some upstart solar or wind companies edging in on their racket.

    Just as naturally the solar and wind companies see all the money to be made satisfying people’s desire for cleaner energy. Or at least to feel better about themselves while they continue to play the same consumerist game. It’s not like the solar and wind companies really care about the environment or clean energy, corporations can’t have a morality when they have outside investors with no stake in the survival of the company. Well, they do, but it’s just to maximize profits.

    Both sides want to control the markets they pillage so they can squeeze out all the pennies they can without interference.

    What we really need is a completely new energy game – a more distributed energy grid. One that is more spread out among the areas that use it. Centralizing those things only helps the corporations to control the money flow, it certainly doesn’t make it more efficient or stable at delivering power to peoples houses.

     

     

    gollor
    ---------- Life needs an edit button - with find and replace.

    #13796
    Malgus
    Malgus
    Survivalist
    member8

    gollor,

    We get it. You hate coal plants, the people who own coal plants, the investors in the coal plants, people who make money, companies who make money and the alleged cozy relationship between government officials and the plant owners..

    You said this —> “So naturally the existing energy companies want as little regulation of their industry as possible so they can keep making more money. They also don’t want some upstart solar or wind companies edging in on their racket.”

    My rebuttle:

    1. There is nothing wrong with making money. Companies that don’t make money aren’t around very long. You don’t found a company in order to lose money. That’s just stupid.

    2. The reason wind and solar haven’t gotten any traction is because there’s no money in it. Developing those technologies is breathtakingly expensive and offer very little in returns. It is the equivalent of dumping your money down a very deep hole.

    3. The War on Coal was started in order to make coal-powered plants so expensive to operate that solar and wind look pretty good in contrast. This is extortion by the EPA and our own Government, no different from some Mob enforcer coming to your store and demanding protection money or “something unfortunate might happen”.

    Here… read this. Pretty good recap of the War on Coal.

    http://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/another-from-teslas-kid-the-war-on-coal/

    Then, you say this –> “Just as naturally the solar and wind companies see all the money to be made satisfying people’s desire for cleaner energy. Or at least to feel better about themselves while they continue to play the same consumerist game. It’s not like the solar and wind companies really care about the environment or clean energy, corporations can’t have a morality when they have outside investors with no stake in the survival of the company. Well, they do, but it’s just to maximize profits.”

    1. “People’s desire” for cleaner energy? What “people”? All I care about is if the lights come on when I flick the switch and my electric bill is affordable. The current boondoggle/swindle going on out west with the Bundy ranch and those stinkin turtles, along with the Chinese, and Dirty Harry using the BLM as a bunch of enforcer goons proves that “clean” energy is just as much a snow-job as anything the government gets involved in…

    2. “Feel better about themselves”? You mean it’s a self-esteem issue? Self-esteem is a piss-poor substitute for self respect.

    3. Again, maximizing profits. Companies are in business to make money. I got no heartburn with that and I have no idea who started this happy horseshit about making money being bad. The same unwashed hippie wannabe’s who crab, ***** and agitate about “social justice” because they chose some stupid non-marketable degree like “Marketing” or “African Studies” would change their tune in a heartbeat if they actually had a JOB. Not my fault they chose poorly when it came to getting a college degree. Like my old daddy told me “Boy? The world needs ditch-diggers too..”

    4. Since the War on Coal was declared, power companies have been throwing older power plants under the bus in an effort to get the EPA off their asses. It has been a war of attrition. The EPA ratchets up the pressure, the power companies decide which plants to save and which to sacrifice to the Almighty God of Government so they can stay in business a few more years. Lather, rinse, repeat. Your picture of coal plant owners schmoozing with politicians in order to make shattering amounts of money is untrue and I’m calling you on it. Right now in my Commonwealth, thanks to the war on coal, we’ve lost several power plants already, over 5,000 people have lost their jobs in Eastern Kentucky, several mine closures have occurred and my electric bill has gone up to compensate for that… thanks to the Government and their EPA enforcer goons, the overall economy of my Commonwealth is even worse shape than ever, and the economy of the Appalachia region is completely shattered… HOW does this make power companies MORE money? Please explain.

    Both sides want to control the markets they pillage so they can squeeze out all the pennies they can without interference.

    Yeah, so? This nonsense all got started back under the Original Progressive, Teddy Roosevelt. You would want one company with a proven track record of doing good business, efficient business to control one market, or millions of little ones that require battalions of inspectors and enforcers to make sure they’re complying with the government’s mandates? Someone has to pay for all that…

    What we really need is a completely new energy game – a more distributed energy grid. One that is more spread out among the areas that use it. Centralizing those things only helps the corporations to control the money flow, it certainly doesn’t make it more efficient or stable at delivering power to peoples houses.

    Erm… huh? What? I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about here… a “more distributed” energy grid? Not to be snarky, but I’ve tried to envision what that would look like – or even what you think it looks like – and I can’t do it…

    “Spread out”? You mean people farther away from the power plants that supply them power? Yeah, that’s not gonna work out too well. See, you still need copper power lines to carry the electricity. Just can’t shoot it through the air just yet.. Farther away the power plants are, the cost goes up. If The Power Company is supplying a region with “X” power, and you move your plant farther away, that means more power lines, which drives up cost (you don’t expect the company to just eat the cost of more power lines, do you? Heh..) or thicker power lines to make up for the increased distance and resistance… or maybe both. Then there’s transportation of fuel to run the plant. Got to build more rail line, which increases costs… And you’re gonna have to pay people more in order to entice them to work at a plant that’s farther from where they live… You think the power company is gonna eat all these increases? Either way, it’s gonna drive up costs. And that will make people very unhappy.

    And actually, having a power plant close by is more efficient than one far away… not so sure about “stable” and I don’t know what you mean by this… you will have to explain…

    The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 26 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.