Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, December 11, 2018

In a study published Monday (Dec. 10, 2018) in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers show that humans are reversing a long-term cooling trend tracing back at least 50 million years. And it's taken just two centuries.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"By 2030, Earth's climate is expected to resemble that of the mid-Pliocene, going back more than 3 million years in geologic time. Without reductions in our greenhouse gas emissions, our climates by 2150 could compare to the warm and mostly ice-free Eocene, an epoch that characterized the globe 50 million years ago.

For the study, Burke and Williams -- along with colleagues at the University of Bristol, Columbia University, University of Leeds, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the National Center for Atmospheric Research -- examined the similarities between future climate projections as set forth by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report and several periods of geologic history."

"Baby, it's hot outside!"

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2018-12-11 12:20 AM | Reply

"Baby, it's hot outside!"

#1 | POSTED BY CORKY

Perhaps a song could be written encouraging a cautious female acquaintance to disrobe in the name of comfort?

#2 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-12-11 12:27 AM | Reply

If anything. The girl would need to be coercing her male companion to disrobe.

Or. Perhaps both are female and they just sit around and complain how hot it is.

#3 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-11 12:33 AM | Reply | Funny: 2

Good night, All.

I hope this thread produces some hilarity that I can enjoy tomorrow...

#4 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-12-11 12:38 AM | Reply


But... but... but... it is cold today in the New York City area ...


#5 | Posted by LampLighter at 2018-12-11 09:16 AM | Reply

The problem on its fundamental level is just too many people, with which comes too much pavement and environmental destruction, especially forests. Forests consume CO2. The right balance between human populations and forest acreage would erase the CO2 issue, but its not the only chemical problem modern technology produces. The solution is to make sure every woman is provided a good education. This is guaranteed to slowly reduce population growth without the use of unacceptable coercion or war.

#6 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-12-11 11:50 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"By 2030, Earth's climate is expected to resemble that of the mid-Pliocene, going back more than 3 million years in geologic time.

What human screwed with the climate then?>

#7 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-12-11 11:52 AM | Reply

Shut up, stupid.

#8 | Posted by jpw at 2018-12-11 12:01 PM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 1

If it gets too cold, some of you guys are going to have to deal with shrinkage.

#9 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-12-11 12:02 PM | Reply

What human screwed with the climate then?>

#7 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-12-11 11:52 AM

Let me use small words and a simple analogy. Perhaps this will help.

Imagine stepping outside. Some days it's warmer than others, but if I stopped by and set you on fire, you'd be warmer regardless of what it's like outside.

#10 | Posted by SunTzuMeow at 2018-12-11 12:53 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

"By 2030, Earth's climate is expected to resemble that of the mid-Pliocene, going back more than 3 million years in geologic time.
What human screwed with the climate then?>

#7 | POSTED BY SNIPER

It's not about that its happening. It's about HOW FAST IT IS HAPPENING and the CONSEQUENCES OF IT HAPPENING.

If we can control it, we should because the consequences will be pretty damn awful.

How stupid do you have to be to not get this?

#11 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-12-11 01:29 PM | Reply

What human screwed with the climate then?>

#7 | Posted by Sniper

Republican logic - if climate change occurred before humans, then that means humans can't cause climate change!

If you went to college you should get a refund. But I highly doubt you did.

#12 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-11 01:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

There are too many f•••ing people on this ball. ©️GETOFFMEDZ - 2005

Fact.

#13 | Posted by getoffmedz at 2018-12-11 02:42 PM | Reply

Global warming is something we will deal with one way or another but it shouldn't be a license for the government to tax the ---- out of us.

Our government spending is out of control and there's nothing indicating that they would be anymore responsible with the money from carbon taxes than they would with any other tax dollars.

I'm willing to live the same sacrificial lifestyle as my public servants (lobbyist whores) are willing to live. Whatever that may be.

#14 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-12-11 02:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Global warming is something we will deal with one way or another but it shouldn't be a license for the government to tax the ---- out of us.

True! We don't need no more taxes!

The Gubmint already taxes the ---- out of us for War and Tax Cuts for the Wealthy.

#15 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-12-11 03:16 PM | Reply

If we can control it

We cant. Much less reverse it.

#16 | Posted by boaz at 2018-12-11 03:16 PM | Reply

Global warming is something we will deal with one way or another but it shouldn't be a license for the government to tax the ---- out of us.

Our government spending is out of control and there's nothing indicating that they would be anymore responsible with the money from carbon taxes than they would with any other tax dollars.

I'm willing to live the same sacrificial lifestyle as my public servants (lobbyist whores) are willing to live. Whatever that may be.

#14 | Posted by lfthndthrds

"Global warming is something we will deal with one way or another but it shouldn't be a license for the government to tax the ---- out of us."

So much stupid in that sentence.

"Deal with one way or another" is a real offhand way to describe something that could kill millions.

No one is proposing taxing you is the way to solve climate change. But we need to incentivize energy usage that wont kill people, and DIS incentivize energy usage that will kill people. Do you have another way to do that besides taxes or government spending?

#17 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-11 03:17 PM | Reply

We cant. Much less reverse it.

#16 | Posted by boaz

This message brought to you by the same polluters who said it wasn't happening.

Then they said it wasn't man made.

Then they said it was made made, but nothing we can do about it.

Then they said we could do something about it, but it's too expensive.

Now they say global warming is good because canada will be warmer.

Try and keep up with your propaganda, sucker. You're using outdated talking points.

#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-11 03:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

So Many People

#19 | Posted by LesWit at 2018-12-11 03:29 PM | Reply

The Gubmint already taxes the ---- out of us for War and Tax Cuts for the Wealthy.

#15 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-12-11 03:16 PMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

I don't disagree but I fall back on my last sentences "I'm willing to live the same sacrificial lifestyle as my public servants (lobbyist whores) are willing to live. Whatever that may be"

#20 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-12-11 03:33 PM | Reply

"By 2030, Earth's climate is expected to resemble that of the mid-Pliocene, going back more than 3 million years in geologic time.

What human screwed with the climate then?

Why don't you review the dozens or so times your ridiculous "argument" has been answered on this board alone?

You're either ignorant or willfully ignorant.

You have only proven Trump supporters are intellectual boulders. It's no use engaging them. Just step over them and keep moving.

#21 | Posted by zarnon at 2018-12-11 03:33 PM | Reply

We cant. Much less reverse it.

Climate denialist evolution:

The climate isn't changing (Inhofe's snowball, Global Warming "Hoax" and the ridiculous 'Pause')
The climate is changing but man doesn't have anything to do with it (Sniper's position)
Ok the climate is changing and man has something to with it but it could be a good thing.
The climate is changing, it's man's fault and we're doomed. (Boaz).

Often the denialists will make two of these arguments in the same post.

#22 | Posted by zarnon at 2018-12-11 03:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Apologies for inadvertently repeating SpeakSoftly's point.

#23 | Posted by zarnon at 2018-12-11 04:43 PM | Reply

#23 - Mother Nature has a sure-fire endgame to correct this problem.
• Mass discomfort
• Famine
• Disease
⚙︎☞Extinction

Extinctions are now commonplace with too many f•••ing humans killing, eating, burning everything on or in our planet.

Humans probably can't reverse the accelerating climate changes we are causing but there are so many ways we can slow them down.

#24 | Posted by getoffmedz at 2018-12-11 04:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

So much stupid in that sentence.

"Deal with one way or another" is a real offhand way to describe something that could kill millions.

No one is proposing taxing you is the way to solve climate change. But we need to incentivize energy usage that wont kill people, and DIS incentivize energy usage that will kill people. Do you have another way to do that besides taxes or government spending?

#17 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-11 03:17 PM | Reply

Care to explain what's so stupid about the sentence? By the way, that remark is exactly why you have a fence between you and every single person that doesn't thing exactly like you.

"No one is proposing taxing you is the way to solve climate change"
Then just what is a carbon tax?

"But we need to incentivize energy usage that wont kill people"
I can agree with that. But why say something like that knowing full well that the sacrifices will be made in the middle class. Rich people and politicians aren't going to get onboard with this.

IF it's ok for me to live in a 1000 sq ft house with solar panels and ride my bike as transportation then that should be good enough for everyone. AND, I'm willing to do that as soon as the lobbyist whores follow suit...

#25 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-12-11 04:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

IF it's ok for me to live in a 1000 sq ft house with solar panels and ride my bike as transportation then that should be good enough for everyone. AND, I'm willing to do that as soon as the lobbyist whores follow suit...

#25 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Is that your standard of behavior? You set your bar at the lowest level you observe in the worst people you can find?

#26 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-11 05:35 PM | Reply

Is that your standard of behavior? You set your bar at the lowest level you observe in the worst people you can find?

#26 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2018-12-11 05:35 PM | FLAG:

Nice line of complete BS. Just like the "stupid" comment above. But it's what you do. Set your bar at the lowest level and sling schitt, crossing your fingers in hopes that it sticks somewhere. Because you're void of any intellectual material for an honest conversation..

#27 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-12-11 08:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Humpy is just making America Great Again like it was 50 million years ago when Jesus was here founding America.

#28 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-12-11 09:06 PM | Reply

"our climates by 2150 could compare to the warm and mostly ice-free Eocene, an epoch that characterized the globe 50 million years ago."

It will all be worth it to force Kevin Costner to live on a raft and drink his own pee.

#29 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-11 09:12 PM | Reply

It will all be worth it to force Kevin Costner to live on a raft and drink his own pee.

#29 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

I will watch that! But only if Stormy D watches it with me and spanks me on my bare bottom with my rolled up college newspaper with my first published news story in it.

#30 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-12-11 09:20 PM | Reply

I demand to be spanked with Brett Kavanaugh's calendars!

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-11 10:43 PM | Reply

I'll believe climate change is real...

When corporate and private jets and Mega-yachts and Mega-Mansions are banned...

Till then it's just another way to make a buck off the young and stupid...

#32 | Posted by Pegasus at 2018-12-12 09:37 AM | Reply

Forests consume CO2. The right balance between human populations and forest acreage would erase the CO2 issue..

Actually it's more than that. Photo-plankton in sea water produces far more Oxygen per cubic foot than any type of land based plant. The top two inches of sea water are especially dense with 100 million square miles of surface on the major bodies of water especially the Pacific...

and yet...

TepCo and Fukashima keep dumping millions of gallons of radioactive water into the sea, every day and night, killing EVERYTHING in it.

Millions of Square miles of Carbon Dioxide sucking Oxygen producing photo-plankton have been killed off. Making the Pacific Ocean a radioactive desert... and significantly increasing CO2 levels...

But no-one is talking about it because they is no way to make a buck off this...

It's not CO2 that will kill us... it's Corporate Greed

#33 | Posted by Pegasus at 2018-12-12 10:00 AM | Reply

There are too many ------- people on this ball.

You underestimate how big the planet is. If every human on the planet lived at the same population density as Manhattan, the entire world population could fit in New Zealand.

The problem isn't the number of people, it's the sustainability of how we do things.

#34 | Posted by rcade at 2018-12-12 11:06 AM | Reply

Because you're void of any intellectual material for an honest conversation..

#27 | Posted by lfthndthrds

You're the one taking the position of "I'm not going to do anything that evil lobbyists don't have to do."

I'd expect that sort of comment from sniper or boaz.

#35 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 11:24 AM | Reply

I'll believe climate change is real...

When corporate and private jets and Mega-yachts and Mega-Mansions are banned...

Till then it's just another way to make a buck off the young and stupid...

#32 | Posted by Pegasus

So you'll believe in science when government forces the rich to things.
Until then, science isn't real.

You're a moron.

#36 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 11:25 AM | Reply

Yes, I can see where name calling is indicative of a valid argument...

So you'll believe in science when government forces the rich to things.
Until then, science isn't real.

Yea, pretty much... science is full of counter claims... for every study that shows climate change is "real"... I can find 2 or 3 that says it's not... so it's pretty much a ------ contest...

... only thing is large corporations are paying for these studies and even they admit the Carbon Tax Initiative will do nothing to reduce Carbon pollution... far from it... CBI will give corporations the right to buy pollution credits from poorer countries so they can increase pollution levels in their own factories...

So... where is the governments official Climate Change logo?... there are thousands of Climate Change logo's from corporations around the world but nothing like McGruff the crime dog or Smokey the Bear..."only YOU can prevent Forest Fires!" logo.

It's because our government considers Crime and Forest Fires a big problem...

Climate change? Not so much.. so.... nether do I ...

So what's Al Gores McMansion count up to now 5 or 6?

How does everyone feel about adding a Carbon Tax to Aviation Jet fuel and Maritime(bunker grade) diesel? Because if you have a McYacht or McMansion you should be paying a Carbon Tax to use them...

Remember.... plant a tree... because ONLY you can prevent climate change...

I got a spiffy logo to go with that...

#37 | Posted by Pegasus at 2018-12-12 12:49 PM | Reply

Uh oh, now there is a new group of scientists who are even challenging everything other scientists have ever released about the ice ages and warming periods in between. And those were peer-reviewed, accredited, and all the other buzz words the climate change enthusiasts have used to try to discredit those who introduce scientific results that they don't agree with.

#38 | Posted by humtake at 2018-12-12 12:56 PM | Reply

"...now there is a new group of scientists who are even challenging everything other scientists have ever released about the ice ages and warming periods in between. And those were peer-reviewed, accredited..." - #38 | Posted by humtake at 2018-12-12 12:56 PM

Welcome to the world of scientific studies, reviews and theories.

Things change when new evidence is introduced.

"...scientific results that they don't agree with."

No such thing.

#39 | Posted by Hans at 2018-12-12 01:07 PM | Reply

for every study that shows climate change is "real"... I can find 2 or 3 that says it's not... so it's pretty much a ------ contest...

#37 | Posted by Pegasus

No you can't.

If studies AGAINST man made climate change outnumbered studies supporting man made climate change by 3 to 1, there would be no scientific consensus.

And guess what? It's actually 97% that agree its man made.

And that other 3%?

qz.com

"Those 3% of scientific papers that deny climate change? A review found them all flawed"

#40 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 01:18 PM | Reply

"How does everyone feel about adding a Carbon Tax to Aviation Jet fuel and Maritime(bunker grade) diesel? Because if you have a McYacht or McMansion you should be paying a Carbon Tax to use them..."

Sounds good to me.

You think people shouldn't have to pay extra to live a ------ fake McLife?

#41 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-12 01:27 PM | Reply

"Uh oh, now there is a new group of scientists who are even challenging everything other scientists have ever released about the ice ages and warming periods in between."

Uh oh, you sound like you didn't graduate high school.

#42 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-12 01:29 PM | Reply

A 'clock' is not as good a representation as a pendulum would be, as our climate over time, swings back and fourth between ice ages and hot ages.

#43 | Posted by MSgt at 2018-12-12 02:02 PM | Reply

"It's not CO2 that will kill us... it's Corporate Greed
#33 | POSTED BY PEGASUS"

Holy sniz, this guy figured it out. Wow.

Corporate greed will kill us... with CO2 and a host of other manmade toxins to boot.

Visit Bhopal or Love Canal for more details!

#44 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-12 02:05 PM | Reply

A 'clock' is not as good a representation as a pendulum would be, as our climate over time, swings back and fourth between ice ages and hot ages.

#43 | Posted by MSgt

Yeah. Until humans came along and burned a ton of carbon resulting in the most rapid change in climate on record.

Funny how you always leave that part out.

#45 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 02:35 PM | Reply

"as our climate over time, swings back and fourth between ice ages and hot ages."

That's just like, recent history, man. Only goes back like 500,000 years on a planet that's 4,600,000,000 years old. You've got to think big to be a good little Denier!

#46 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-12 02:40 PM | Reply

Yea, pretty much... science is full of counter claims... for every study that shows climate change is "real"... I can find 2 or 3 that says it's not... so it's pretty much a ------ contest...

Than do it! This thread has the study you asked for, now go find 2 or 3 that refute it!

#47 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-12-12 03:13 PM | Reply

*Then

For you grammar nazis.

#48 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-12-12 03:14 PM | Reply

#43 | POSTED BY MSGT

I agree. And according to this study, that pendulum is being artificially influence in the opposite direction with unprecedented quickness.

#49 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-12-12 03:16 PM | Reply

You're the one taking the position of "I'm not going to do anything that evil lobbyists don't have to do."

Speakwithforkedtongue

That's not what I said but carry on.

You're a moron.

#36 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 11:25 AMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

Translation = I don't agree with you.
Nice, that'll get people eager to have an adult conversation with you.

#50 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-12-12 04:42 PM | Reply

That's not what I said but carry on.

#50 | Posted by lfthndthrds

IOW - "I didn't say that thing that I said!"

IF it's ok for me to live in a 1000 sq ft house with solar panels and ride my bike as transportation then that should be good enough for everyone. AND, I'm willing to do that as soon as the lobbyist whores follow suit...

#25 | Posted by lfthndthrds

#51 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 05:26 PM | Reply

You're a cherry picker. Address the rest of my responses, speakwithforked tongue.

What's a carbon tax?

#52 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-12-12 06:26 PM | Reply

What's a carbon tax?

#52 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Use google.

#53 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 06:34 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

--What's a carbon tax?

A dream of elitist, radical environmentalists who want to shove it down our throats, but is meeting with resistance by us peasants.

#54 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-12-12 06:37 PM | Reply

A dream of elitist, radical environmentalists who want to shove it down our throats, but is meeting with resistance by us peasants.

#54 | Posted by nullifidian

Letting the earth fry to protect oil profits is far more radical than trying to save it.

#55 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 07:03 PM | Reply

"-What's a carbon tax?
A dream of elitist, radical environmentalists who want to shove it down our throats, but is meeting with resistance by us peasants.
#54 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN"

Oh I see. So it's no different than how you view any tax, when the day is done.

#56 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-12 07:09 PM | Reply

--Letting the earth fry to protect oil profits is far more radical than trying to save it.

I know you want to use the Alinsky tactic to narrow the target to oil companies, but your real problem is 7+ billion people who want more, not less, economic growth. Those are the people you have to convince to lower their living standards with your goofy carbon taxes. Good luck with that.

#58 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-12-12 07:13 PM | Reply

#59 | POSTED BY TK421

Why aren't you at your post?

#60 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-12-12 07:18 PM | Reply

WTF happened?

Corky started spraying THC oil on everyone and mayhem ensued.

Oh, and Hans has an afro now.

#61 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-12-12 07:20 PM | Reply

Nulli's a Bircher.

WTF is a Bircher?

#62 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-12 07:20 PM | Reply

Except taxing the particular behaviours and activities snowflakes don't like isn't going to save the earth.

Or have any impact whatsoever on macroclimate cycles.

At all.

#57 | Posted by TK421

You'd make a hell of a doctor.

"Quitting smoking really isn't going to help you. You're already got cancer so might as well live it up!"

#63 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 07:20 PM | Reply

I guess Larry's a drag queen.
#59 | POSTED BY TK421

Your return to the DR isn't going to last long.

#65 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-12 07:28 PM | Reply

That's kinda the justification for weed legalization, isn't it?

Nope.

I'd say there's a bit more direct causation between smoking and cancer than there is modern civilization and weather patterns.

Sweet. Another Trumpublican joins the DR to display his vast ignorance.

#68 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-12 07:33 PM | Reply

I didn't intend for it to.
My phone's dead.
#67 | POSTED BY TK421

Well. If you're here for nostalgia. You should put the petal to the metal and really let loose.

Balls out TK!

#69 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-12 07:35 PM | Reply

Peddle...

#70 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-12 07:36 PM | Reply

#64

One and the same (but just kidding about the Fro, he is still bald as a walnut.)

In other news, Corky is still stupid, Danni is still gay, Boyduhh is on his 4th or 5th new name and Jeff, Chair and I are still shills for The Man.

#71 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-12-12 07:36 PM | Reply

Jeff, Chair and I are still shills for The Man.

Chair? He's usually here for comedic relief.

You on the other hand. Are just here to display how far your head fits up Trump's Rump.

#72 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-12 07:38 PM | Reply

But to your point, I'd say there's a bit more direct causation between smoking and cancer than there is modern civilization and weather patterns.

#66 | Posted by TK421

I'd say you're doing that typical pollution puppet strategy of intentionally swapping "climate" for "weather".

Unless Co2 stops being a greenhouse gas, humans have massive influence over C02 levels, which have a massive effect on climate.

Did C02 stop being a greenhouse gas?

Go google it.

#73 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 07:39 PM | Reply

"Quitting smoking really isn't going to help you. You're already got cancer so might as well live it up!"

That's what a good doctor would say. That's kinda the justification for weed legalization, isn't it?"

^
Funny, because that's the current Denialist approach to climate change. We've passed the tipping point, no sense taxing the rich since we're all doomed regardless... and Happy Extinction!

#74 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-12 07:39 PM | Reply

Figures that young adult Clownshack doesn't know what a bircher is. It must be difficult to follow conversations when various cultural allusions fly right over your head.

#75 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-12-12 07:47 PM | Reply

Figures that young adult Clownshack doesn't know what a bircher is.

Well. Unless you're referring to: "Maximilian Oskar Bircher-Benner, M.D. was a Swiss physician and a pioneer nutritionist credited for popularizing muesli."

Then google doesn't know what a Bircher is either.

#77 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-12 07:56 PM | Reply

I know what a Bircher is.
Heck, it's even referenced in "Uneasy Rider."
Who doesn't like that song???
Russians. That's who.

#79 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-12 08:03 PM | Reply

If nothing else, that made the trip worthwhile...

I aim to please.

#80 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-12 08:04 PM | Reply

--Then google doesn't know what a Bircher is either.

That's the problem with you young kids. You think google is a substitute for knowledge and experience.

#82 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-12-12 08:12 PM | Reply

The problem for people like yourself is that you've become emotionally invested in an ideological religion. It demands humanity to buy into the notion that only left-wing public policy will alter macroclimate cycles to the point where we never have to hear about a drought, a hurricane, a cold winter, hot summer or bad thunderstorm on CNN again.

That's awfully arrogant, don't you think?

Reminds me of 16th Century Spaniards.

#76 | Posted by TK421

You're so brainwashed you can't see it.

Religions require faith. Science has evidence.

Polluters saw the writing on the wall so their strategy to keep their profits was to MAKE saving the planet ideological. They knew if they could get you to see this problem as something only the OTHER team wants to do, that your team would resist it. And you fell for it.

You now actively promote and defend the destruction of YOUR home simply because the other side wants to save it.

#83 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 08:16 PM | Reply

You think google is a substitute for knowledge and experience.

I hope you've put your knowledge and experience to good use.

#85 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-12 08:18 PM | Reply

What is always amazing to me is how Shreek manages to access the internet without using any petroleum based products whatsoever, merely by using the power of his own sense of self satisfaction.

#86 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-12-12 08:21 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Do they have a website with a charter or something?

#87 | Posted by TK421

Nice of you to pop in, act smarter to everyone, then say that you need proof that polluters fight environmentalism with propaganda, because that just isn't believable to your highly advanced impartial brain.

www.scientificamerican.com
Exxon Knew about Climate Change almost 40 years ago
A new investigation shows the oil company understood the science before it became a public issue and spent millions to promote misinformation

#88 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 08:40 PM | Reply

What is always amazing to me is how Shreek manages to access the internet without using any petroleum based products whatsoever, merely by using the power of his own sense of self satisfaction.

#86 | Posted by Rightocenter

Not as amazing as how unoriginal you pollution puppets are in your pollution defending talking points.

Talking point #412 - You can't advocate environmentalism unless you use zero fossil fuels and live outside modern society like ted kazinksy.

Of course this is a tu quoque fallacy that wouldn't pass 6th grade debate class.
en.wikipedia.org

#89 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 08:42 PM | Reply

--oil company

I know you want to use the Alinsky tactic to narrow the target to oil companies, but your real problem is 7+ billion people who want more, not less, economic growth. Those are the people you have to convince to lower their living standards with your goofy carbon taxes. Good luck with that.

#58 | Posted by nullifidian

#90 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-12-12 08:44 PM | Reply

I know you want to use the Alinsky tactic to narrow the target to oil companies, but your real problem is 7+ billion people who want more, not less, economic growth. Those are the people you have to convince to lower their living standards with your goofy carbon taxes. Good luck with that.

#58 | Posted by nullifidian

#90 | Posted by nullifidian

Polluter talking point #132: You can't have environmentally cautious economic growth.

Those people can have economic growth without trashing the planet.

Solar is now cheaper than coal. And getting cheaper.

#91 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-12 09:05 PM | Reply

www.youtube.com

That should open your eyes.... to "climatism"

-Sez "Frosty" The climate control polar bear spokesbear/logo...

#92 | Posted by Pegasus at 2018-12-12 11:27 PM | Reply

Solar is now cheaper than coal. And getting cheaper.

#91 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2018-12-12 09:05 PM

Doubling down on the stupid, as usual:

Largest Solar Plant in the World-Noor Complex Solar Power Plant, Morocco, 160MW, (2.5 acres/MW)

Largest Coal Power Plant in the World-Datang Tuoketuo power station, China, 6.720MW (10.5 acres/5000 MW)

Right now, to build an equivalent solar power plant to the Datang Tucketuo plant, you would need 14,784 acres, to put it in perspective, the island of Manhattan is 14,478 acres.

#93 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-12-13 12:31 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

- 14,478 acres.

In other words, a minor ranch in Texas.

#94 | Posted by Corky at 2018-12-13 12:45 AM | Reply

www.youtube.com

#95 | Posted by Pegasus at 2018-12-13 12:47 AM | Reply

Doubling down on the stupid, as usual:

Largest Solar Plant in the World-Noor Complex Solar Power Plant, Morocco, 160MW, (2.5 acres/MW)

Largest Coal Power Plant in the World-Datang Tuoketuo power station, China, 6.720MW (10.5 acres/5000 MW)

Right now, to build an equivalent solar power plant to the Datang Tucketuo plant, you would need 14,784 acres, to put it in perspective, the island of Manhattan is 14,478 acres.

#93 | Posted by Rightocenter

You're gonna call others stupid, while pretending real estate is the only cost that matters in the equation.

I suggest you visit the southwest sometime.

www.good.is
"The Amount Of Land Required To Run America On Solar Power Is Shockingly Small
It only takes 0.6% of the country's land to provide electricity to the United States. "

#96 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-13 01:09 PM | Reply

--www.good.is
"The Amount Of Land Required To Run America On Solar Power Is Shockingly Small
It only takes 0.6% of the country's land to provide electricity to the United States. "

Did you even read your own article, or just the headline?

#97 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-12-13 01:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Did you even read your own article, or just the headline?

#97 | Posted by nullifidian

Are you gonna make a point or just ask a question?

#98 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-13 01:28 PM | Reply

#90 Saul Alinsky? Haven't played that drinking game in a long time.

How old is your newest talking point? A decade?

#99 | Posted by jpw at 2018-12-13 01:28 PM | Reply

What is the correct temperature for the earth, Nullifidian?

#100 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-13 01:28 PM | Reply

#93 you'll have to pardon my ignorance, but what the conversion from acres to USD?

#101 | Posted by jpw at 2018-12-13 01:30 PM | Reply

Are you gonna make a point or just ask a question?

The old dog is learning new tricks.

He's finally figured out that if he doesn't make a point he won't get his nose rubbed in the pile.

#102 | Posted by jpw at 2018-12-13 01:31 PM | Reply

"You'll have to pardon my ignorance"

Ok, now you're making this a habit.

#103 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-12-13 06:49 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#90 Saul Alinsky? Haven't played that drinking game in a long time.

How old is your newest talking point? A decade?

#99 | Posted by jpw

Yes, yes, I know you think having a tree stump's knowledge of 20th century political history is a virtue, and you prove it every day.

#104 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-12-13 06:59 PM | Reply

In other words, a minor ranch in Texas.

For one powerplant that couldn't power a small city.

Did you even read your own article, or just the headline?

Of course Shreek didn't read the article, that would require comprehension.

you'll have to pardon my ignorance, but what the conversion from acres to USD?

Depends on where you are buying the land, of course...and that is just a fraction of the cost for building a solar farm.

Maybe you should read and comprehend the link that Shreek posted, he obviously didn't.

I will help you: Conservative estimates predict that it will take 12-14,000,000 acres of solar panels to power the US, which is a space roughly the size of New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island and Long Island combined on the low end or West Virginia on the high end.

Good luck with that.

#105 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-12-13 07:20 PM | Reply

For one powerplant that couldn't power a small city.

Did you even read your own article, or just the headline?

Of course Shreek didn't read the article, that would require comprehension.

you'll have to pardon my ignorance, but what the conversion from acres to USD?

Depends on where you are buying the land, of course...and that is just a fraction of the cost for building a solar farm.

Maybe you should read and comprehend the link that Shreek posted, he obviously didn't.

I will help you: Conservative estimates predict that it will take 12-14,000,000 acres of solar panels to power the US, which is a space roughly the size of New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island and Long Island combined on the low end or West Virginia on the high end.

Good luck with that.

#105 | Posted by Rightocenter

You're the dumbass who said solar can't compete with coal because the problem was real estate.

The article proves it's nonsense. Want more?

splinternews.com

"In 2009, they calculated that we'd only only have to cover an area a bit bigger than California with solar panels to power the entire world with solar energy. And just to power the United States? A few counties in Texas."

#106 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-13 07:34 PM | Reply

You're the dumbass who said solar can't compete with coal because the problem was real estate.

No, you are the mouthbreather that thought that was my sole point, it is only one obstacle. Taking all things into consideration, coal is still more cost effective, and no number of links from fringe news sites is going to change the basic math.

Your new link just reinforces my point. A few counties in Texas = West Virginia. Power the whole World = California. Your splinter news article also points out it would need 16,000,000 Powerwalls to store the energy collected for distribution. You would need a million miles of new transmission systems, thousands of miles of service roads and tens of billions in infrastructure.

Keep it up, I got you covered.

#107 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-12-13 07:43 PM | Reply

--coal is still more cost effective, and no number of links from fringe news sites is going to change the basic math.

Vastly more cost effective

www.aei.org

#108 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-12-13 07:52 PM | Reply

"Taking all things into consideration, coal is still more cost effective"

Let's see your math.
Especially the part where you took CO2 into consideration.

#109 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-13 07:56 PM | Reply

--coal is still more cost effective, and no number of links from fringe news sites is going to change the basic math.

Vastly more cost effective

www.aei.org

Posted by nullifidian at 2018-12-13 07:52 PM | Reply

AEI?????!!!!!!???? Nullifidian certifying his right right creds. LMAO

#110 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-12-13 07:57 PM | Reply

I hate the winter. Bring on the warming.

#111 | Posted by byrdman at 2018-12-13 08:02 PM | Reply

Your new link just reinforces my point. A few counties in Texas = West Virginia. Power the whole World = California. Your splinter news article also points out it would need 16,000,000 Powerwalls to store the energy collected for distribution. You would need a million miles of new transmission systems, thousands of miles of service roads and tens of billions in infrastructure.

Keep it up, I got you covered.

#107 | Posted by Rightocenter

Haha you think they were proposing to put all the solar panels in ONE location and you'd have to run wires all over the world from there? Jesus you're dumb.

The california reference was about SIZE not LOCATION.

#112 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-13 08:05 PM | Reply

I hate the winter. Burn down the planet.
#111 | POSTED BY BYRDMAN

#113 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-13 08:05 PM | Reply

Haha, you were dumb enough to think that is what I meant?

Words fail me.

#114 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-12-13 08:55 PM | Reply

Haha, you were dumb enough to think that is what I meant?

Words fail me.

#114 | Posted by Rightocenter

Tell us what your millions of miles of new wires were for if not running them to the one big solar center.

#115 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-13 09:00 PM | Reply

LOL

You were the one to post truly splinter sites to somehow "prove" me wrong. Figure it out yourself, Tesla.

#116 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-12-13 09:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Hey now
Rightoecentre does have a sister who is an assistant tribble handler to the Klingon High Council and she just gave rightoecentre a sticky note with all the answers

So you know he knows what he is talking about

#117 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-12-13 09:32 PM | Reply

Okay, I will take pity on you...to get to 4B Mwh, you need 21,875 sq. miles of panels. The largest, by far, solar site in the world is roughly 1/2 sq mile, so you need 43,750 such plants, or one half sq/mi plant every 71 sq miles in the continental US. They then need to be connected to the grid and to storage facilities (remember the 16M powerwalls?), so yes, there would be at least a million miles of wiring and tens of billions of dollars of infrastructure to connect all those plants to storage and the grid.

#118 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-12-13 09:38 PM | Reply

Okay, I will take pity on you...to get to 4B Mwh, you need 21,875 sq. miles of panels. The largest, by far, solar site in the world is roughly 1/2 sq mile, so you need 43,750 such plants, or one half sq/mi plant every 71 sq miles in the continental US. They then need to be connected to the grid and to storage facilities (remember the 16M powerwalls?), so yes, there would be at least a million miles of wiring and tens of billions of dollars of infrastructure to connect all those plants to storage and the grid.

#118 | Posted by Rightocenter

Yeah if only there were somewhere to put solar panels besides a solar site!

Nope! They all need to be put far away from homes and businesses because the sun only shines on a few little places.

#119 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-12-13 09:42 PM | Reply

"... because the sun only shines on a few little places." - #119 | Posted by sheepleschism at 2018-12-13 09:42 PM

#120 | Posted by Hans at 2018-12-13 10:40 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort