myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Socialism
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 13309

PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 8:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I talk several times each year with wind energy technicians, engineers, and "suits" inside and outside of the wind industry, and have yet to find any who expect wind energy to become viable in the U.S.. The turbines are too expensive and the infrastructure and integration are far too complex, for starters. Turbines are all over the PacNW, and their output is too often rejected from the power grid for numerous reasons. I've not read enough about it to form any firm opinions, but then mac has refused right here to read ANY GW books beyond maybe "An Imbecelic Truth" -- if that -- so I'm not inclined to accept his opinion on wind (or solar) energy, either.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5476

PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 9:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Come on isobars, you're acting like a total child. One has to work to gain trust. Just whining, ranting and complaining about others out there doesn't win that support.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coyotewindsurf



Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 1257
Location: SF Bay

PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler wrote:
Come on isobars, you're acting like a total child. One has to work to gain trust. Just whining, ranting and complaining about others out there doesn't win that support.





Shocked

_________________
mo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3030

PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Iso
Try not to respond to mac like that. You say you can't read these guys posts so it makes you look bad when you respond by insulting them and telling us what they read or don't.
Can't read his posts or can?
Still lecturing us because we don't act like adults?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 13309

PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

keycocker wrote:
Try not to respond to mac like that. ...
you respond by insulting them and telling us what they read or don't.


Now you're telling me what I can or can't type? Good luck wid dat.

On the contrary, it was mac who told us, before I PLONKed him, what he would or would not read about GW. How else would I know? If his refusal to study the issue objectively is an insult, it's self-inflicted. Fortunately, the movie version of Lomborg's book "Cool It" opens Friday for people who want their GW information spoon fed.

And if ANY of You People think I have ANY remaining guilt about insulting you after your thousands of actionable libels and plain old shitty comments against me ... you've got to be kidding. You People truly don't get it. My only remaining constraint is self-respect, and it has gotten tainted from being dipped in this cesspool.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 3625

PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevenbard wrote:
mac wrote:
Ah, but that is one of the silver linings. While I strongly support investing in infrastructure that makes sense, I am not convinced that high speed rail makes economic or environmental sense. And in California, the Democrats that are in are neither fiscally responsible, nor independent enough, to stand up to the pro-fail unions.


Mac, I finally agree with you! The question is, do you admit that tearing up millions of acres of chaparal and desert for solar and windmills make sense as a cure for global warming?


Meanwhile China, Russia, India, and Brazil are scooping up oil and commodity properties while we're destroying our deserts and chaparal like Don Quixote on his foolish quest. Obama is risking American domination in energy with unproven government subsidized foolishness.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 4671

PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

little stevie, you're doing it again. The standard right wing strategy of attributing an absurd position to someone you don't agree with to ridicule them instead of actually surfacing an argument. Your position that we have no choices but to continue to subsidize oil, and fight wars wherever necessary to assure a supply, unless we want to plow up our deserts for solar power is simply absurd. What I said very simply is that efficiency is the best choice for right now, along with investment in technological advances. Those who can't respond to an argument do what you just did, misrepresent my position--usually with right wing talking points.

Isobars, on the other hand, is a liar. Plain and simple. I've posted dozens of scientific references here on global warming, independent of the IPPC, and have been following the debate for about 30 years. My earliest reference is a 1976 National Academy of Sciences publication on the state of the science. Iso cited a book by 2 right wing flacks which has no credibility. I've read enough of their articles and critiques of their work to know they are not credible. If memory serves, one was Margaret Thatcher's economist. Now there is a fine scientific source.

Iso "plonked" me when I checked out an interview one of the deniers had with PBS. I actually quoted the pertinent sections of the article, where Singer acknowledged the solid theoretical basis for global warming, the upward trend in temperatures, and kind of said--well plants will grow faster. Don't worry, be happy. Caught in his lie about what Singer had actually said, Iso called me a liar and plonked me. As I will continue to say, people start screaming and calling names when they don't have a real response.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 3625

PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is the globe warmer today than 300 years ago? Yes. 400 years ago, it was as warm as it is today. What does that prove?

Nothing....We had a mini ice age 300 years ago, and millions died. Look up the Maunder minimum.

The Maunder Minimum coincided with the middle — and coldest part — of the Little Ice Age, during which Europe and North America were subjected to bitterly cold winters. Whether there is a causal connection between low sunspot activity and cold winters is the subject of ongoing debate, though it is believed that there was another factor which amplified the cooling effects of the Maunder Minimum on northern Europe.[3] The winter of 1708-09 was extremely cold,[4] which contributed to widespread starvation and the lengthy emigration of Germans from the Palatine. These people are referred to as the Poor Palatines. WIKI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
windoggie



Joined: 22 Feb 2002
Posts: 2210

PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Clinical insomnia. That's how that sucker gets in thousands of hours sailing each season. Whoda thought.
_________________
/w\
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 4671

PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So I am wondering what your point is stevenbard? There was clearly an anomalous period of unusual warmth and cold, see this article: http://www.grisda.org/origins/10051.htm
But it is unclear whether you are arguing that global warming is not occurring and we have another anomaly that accounts for the apparent rise in temperatures, or that warming is occurring but due to other factors, or something else. It’s good you have a few facts, try assembling them into a coherent line of reasoning and pretty soon you’ll be thinking.

Now if you want to ask what it might mean, try this site: http://www.skepticalscience.com/What-ended-the-Little-Ice-Age.html. I find it ironic that deniers shift their approach. Some argue that temperatures aren’t going up, and I have seen them use erroneous, uncorrected satellite data to make this point, long after the scientific debate was settled on how to derive accurate temperature histories from the data collected. Others argue that warming is occurring, but it can be accounted for by “natural” trends, despite the impossibility of deriving anything natural in the current world. The more credible scientists argue that warming is clearly occurring, and it probably has both a normal cyclical element and a human-induced element. This is the version that I find compelling.

Turning to the little ice age and causes. (But first, I have to laugh that deniers who have argued against using glacier core samples to estimate past temperature trends and CO2 levels are using those techniques to try to show previous warming occurred.) Nobody really knows. There weren’t enough people to generate an amount of CO2 that would support warming from that source. Some have speculated that volcanic activity left high concentrations of atmospheric dust, reflecting some of the sun energy and leading to cooling. This theory has the warming period being the eventual response. Others have speculated that a greater use of coal and wood as fuels left more dark ash and absorption of heat. As far as I understand, there is no overall compelling theory that accounts for the hot and cold cycle, the data we have shows clear changes in crops—important ones like German wines!—but aren’t of sufficient fidelity to tease out much more.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 6 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group