Global Warming is over.

[marshallnoise]

I feel like Nuclear isn't actually hated by the majority of Americans, Its really fear-mongering by those in the spotlight telling them to be afraid. I'd bet strong money that fossil fuel industries have it in their best interests to lobby against them and take advantage of the situation too.

The way you type marshall its like Musk is this big bad business man, but Fossil fuel industries are our saviors who will switch energy 'when the time is right'.

I don't get where you get your math either, its been done, it can be done, dont pull the 'doesnt work in bigger countries' either.

So there is a conspiracy theory there. Big oil is issuing a public campaign against nuclear. Interesting.

No, Musk isn't a big bad business man at all. He just sucks the teat of government, that's all. He loves adulation above everything.

Fossil fuel companies aren't saviors, but the work they do is critical for every single part of our lives. When the wells dry up, they will be forced to do something different. If you could get the EPA and states to green light nuclear power plants again, then cheap electricity would be a viable option, then all the dominoes fall from there. But if its all a giant conspiracy then I don't know what to tell you.

This is a cool link with tons of info. Just a simple google. http://www.world-nuclear.org/informa...ear-power.aspx

"What" has been done? The only way changes to energy happen is either by government regulation or the free market. So if you are ok with the government forcing industry to do it's will, then so be it. Yes, it will work under threat of a gun. But it is the definition of socialism.

[estoguy]

"What" has been done? The only way changes to energy happen is either by government regulation or the free market. So if you are ok with the government forcing industry to do it's will, then so be it. Yes, it will work under threat of a gun. But it is the definition of socialism.

This exactly... carbon taxes, cap and trade, etc are all BS. Money needs to be spent on R&D, not BS gov't programs or taxes.

[Wschnitz]

Just like they had been innovating and doing R&D before the government stepped on their feet and prevented them from doing so for customers around the states when it comes to Internet access.

Oh wait.

[marshallnoise]

Just like they had been innovating and doing R&D before the government stepped on their feet and prevented them from doing so for customers around the states when it comes to Internet access.

Oh wait.

Apples and oranges just slightly? My internets doesn't project my death via greenhouse gasses based on manipulated data shoved into a computer with a pre-planned outcome.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[Schnitzer318is]

Apples and oranges just slightly? My internets doesn't project my death via greenhouse gasses based on manipulated data shoved into a computer with a pre-planned outcome.

The comparison is apples to oranges, but the energy industry is using the same tactic of non-innovation as the telecoms because of lack of motivation (no competition). Instead of trying to deliver a better product to consumers, they just continue to deliver the only product.

I'm not big on government subsidies, but I understand that in some situations it's a necessary evil. In order to spur the innovation and investment in infrastructure the government is "picking winners," to use a term from the opponents vernacular. The amount of money we are talking is still a drop in the bucket in terms of the national budget. Well, budget is more of an oxymoron for what the executive and legislative branches end up passing over the last 3 decades.

[gwb72tii]

well, one of many criticisms of anyone that questions the belief that man is the reason for and CO2 is the cause of global warming is the lack of peer reviewed studies that question that belief.

That has now changed, and the results are not good for the anthropogenic crowd. There is now a peer reviewed that basically says the vast majority of warming that NASA and others tell us about are in reality from adjustments to the world data bases on global temperatures.

If you care, here's the links:

http://manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2017/7/8/the-greatest-scientific-fraud-of-all-time-part-xv

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062817.pdf

in before being flamed for questioning government funded scientists

[Wschnitz]

George I can't even formulate what you are trying to argue from that paragraph. Let alone make an argument about your wordpress blogs.

[Massive Lee]

well, one of many criticisms of anyone that questions the belief that man is the reason for and CO2 is the cause of global warming is the lack of peer reviewed studies that question that belief.

That has now changed, and the results are not good for the anthropogenic crowd. There is now a peer reviewed that basically says the vast majority of warming that NASA and others tell us about are in reality from adjustments to the world data bases on global temperatures.

If you care, here's the links:

http://manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2017/7/8/the-greatest-scientific-fraud-of-all-time-part-xv

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062817.pdf

in before being flamed for questioning government funded scientists

The endoctrinement in your church is strong, but it seems the rest of the world disagrees. 175 states.

[Schnitzer318is]

in before being flamed for questioning government funded scientists

As opposed to corporate funded scientists?

People have already made up their minds one way or the other as to global warming and will cite data from one scientific source or another. Convincing someone in either camp is usually an exercise in futility.

I tend to agree with the majority of scientists rather than the minority... but that's me. Now, do I think we are going to all cook in 100 years... no. Do I think there is a natural amount of global warming occurring... yes. Are we contributing to it... yes.

BTW, Merchants of Doubt should be required viewing by all high school students.

[BraveUlysses]

i love that the comments on the blog could all pass as gwb posts about al gore, global conspiracies and pauses in temperature change since the late 90s.

[gwb72tii]

George I can't even formulate what you are trying to argue from that paragraph. Let alone make an argument about your wordpress blogs.

People like yourself in the past have criticized anyone who doesn't agree with the catastrophic global warming argument because of the lack of peer reviewed studies. That they lacked credibility because their studies had not been peer reviewed.

This is in fact a peer reviewed study.

So, in all fairness, you cannot dismiss this study or it's conclusions. Unless you believe in "settled" science.

[Wschnitz]

People like yourself in the past have criticized anyone who doesn't agree with the catastrophic global warming argument because of the lack of peer reviewed studies. That they lacked credibility because their studies had not been peer reviewed.

This is in fact a peer reviewed study.

So, in all fairness, you cannot dismiss this study or it's conclusions. Unless you believe in "settled" science.

If its truly a peer reviewed study it wouldn't be on a wordpress blog it would be a .pdf download from a database.

George please.

[gwb72tii]

If its truly a peer reviewed study it wouldn't be on a wordpress blog it would be a .pdf download from a database.

George please.

sorry I don't understand your point?

[BraveUlysses]

google "peer reviewed"


namaste

[gwb72tii]

ok, per google

Peer-reviewed (refereed or scholarly) journals - Articles are written by experts and are reviewed by several other experts in the field before the article is published in the journal in order to insure the article's quality.

the article referred to is by 3 people and peer reviewed by 7 other people, all scientists or experts in climate science.

or are you saying the study needs to published in some journal of your approval?