It as just a quick pick, even those media outlets need to recognize valid data when it kick them in the behind.
General / Off-Topic Recycle or Die! (the elite environmental thread)
- Thread starter Zak Gordon
- Start date
- Status
yknow what i find a little amusing.... both about this Thread and the cited scientific worded arguments used to support the Climate change Hoax... is the continual use of "Anthropogenic" and its coupled use to attempt to deceive and support the climate change argument!!
The concensus that has been derived and cited continually by the scientific community is merely answering the Question...
Do Humans contribute to polluting the enviroment... (This requires no scientific debate.. it is a common-sense answer and requires no science background or basis for argument)
the deception occurs when the coupling of Anthropogenic with heating up of the global weather changes.. are suggested as scientific fact.. it really spells out the laziness of Scientists to cut corners.. and use deceptive terminology.. to the uneducated public.. who are so easily fooled!!
Add to this the easily fooled dumb-dumbs who go about perpetuating the non-sense..
and you wonder why this Climate change hoax has become mainstream talk!!
And then they speak "science has all the answers" pffffttt
The concensus that has been derived and cited continually by the scientific community is merely answering the Question...
Do Humans contribute to polluting the enviroment... (This requires no scientific debate.. it is a common-sense answer and requires no science background or basis for argument)
the deception occurs when the coupling of Anthropogenic with heating up of the global weather changes.. are suggested as scientific fact.. it really spells out the laziness of Scientists to cut corners.. and use deceptive terminology.. to the uneducated public.. who are so easily fooled!!
Add to this the easily fooled dumb-dumbs who go about perpetuating the non-sense..
and you wonder why this Climate change hoax has become mainstream talk!!
And then they speak "science has all the answers" pffffttt
Last edited:
Here's a troubling report:
https://www.audubon.org/news/will-w...an estimated,threatening form of green energy.
https://www.audubon.org/news/will-w...an estimated,threatening form of green energy.
This is just a strawman.
And what is valid data?
I pick nuclear fission and geothermal, then again, it's not like emmiting CO2 is free of environmental consecuences.
yknow what i find a little amusing.... both about this Thread and the cited scientific worded arguments used to support the Climate change Hoax... is the continual use of "Anthropogenic" and its coupled use to attempt to deceive and support the climate change argument!!
The concensus that has been derived and cited continually by the scientific community is merely answering the Question...
Do Humans contribute to polluting the enviroment... (This requires no scientific debate.. it is a common-sense answer and requires no science background or basis for argument)
the deception occurs when the coupling of Anthropogenic with heating up of the global weather changes.. are suggested as scientific fact.. it really spells out the laziness of Scientists to cut corners.. and use deceptive terminology.. to the uneducated public.. who are so easily fooled!!
Add to this the easily fooled dumb-dumbs who go about perpetuating the non-sense..
and you wonder why this Climate change hoax has become mainstream talk!!
And then they speak "science has all the answers" pffffttt
Whoever told you that doesn't understand science, no wonder you are so wrong about it. If you are going to complain about scientists, there're better alternatives.
and this is the best response you can come up with??
"This is just a strawman."
Either you have been backed into a corner in which you refuse to conceed.. that humans contribution to global warming is minimalistic at best!! thus the hysteria you and science perpetuate amount to nothing but fear mongering to move the public into yr small little controlled bubble!!
or the pretense of your scientific expertise amount to diddly squat.. choosing to cite continually a deceptive argument .. of 99% of anthropological...blah blah blah
Gimme a break...
Last edited:
The people living in cities shouldn't commute in a car, but if you live in the countryside, and spend an hour getting to work in your car, then you will have a problem. In the long run it's going to be the people in the cities who really end up having problems, once the system collapses, but no one seems to have realized that yet. Once the supermarkets food shelves are empty, that's gonna change, and then the people in the countryside will have invaluable knowledge. Nobody living in a city knows how to produce food for themselves, and they have covered the potential "farmland" with concrete, glass and metal. The expensive apartments in the city will surely see a decline in a not too distant future, but no one seems to care.
On a different note: Did any of you read about the attack on a Saudi oil production facility earlier today?
Saudi Arabia's oil supply disrupted after drone attacks: sources
Saudi Arabia's oil production and exports have been disrupted, said three sources familiar with the matter, after drone attacks on two Aramco plants on Saturday, including the world's biggest oil processing facility.www.reuters.com
If the news are correct, 5 million barrels a day is a considerable part of the global production, being almost half the daily production from Saudi Arabia. Look at the oil prices when the market opens monday. That might also give an indication of what will happen when oil production peaks, and supply no longer can keep up with demand.
Completely OT : Do yourself a favor and watch the new amazon series called "Undone". Do yourself another favor, not spoiling it by reading about it before you see it. Highly recommended!
Indeed no cars should be allowed in the cities (medium and large cities to start). With a big public transport development policy.
With the exception of all the professional vehicles. And except in cases of justifiable force majeure
Regarding oil, I am always very happy when the owners of big cars and SUVs, pay their fill of gas, at a high price
. They should be taxed heavily in addition to the increase in market prices.For the people with modest incomes, heating aids in winter should be increased, and also for the travel of people who live in the countryside and have to go to work in the city.
Last edited:
Obviously this would not concern the professional vehicles.
Last edited:
yknow what i find a little amusing.... both about this Thread and the cited scientific worded arguments used to support the Climate change Hoax... is the continual use of "Anthropogenic" and its coupled use to attempt to deceive and support the climate change argument!!
The concensus that has been derived and cited continually by the scientific community is merely answering the Question...
Do Humans contribute to polluting the enviroment... (This requires no scientific debate.. it is a common-sense answer and requires no science background or basis for argument)
the deception occurs when the coupling of Anthropogenic with heating up of the global weather changes.. are suggested as scientific fact.. it really spells out the laziness of Scientists to cut corners.. and use deceptive terminology.. to the uneducated public.. who are so easily fooled!!
Add to this the easily fooled dumb-dumbs who go about perpetuating the non-sense..
and you wonder why this Climate change hoax has become mainstream talk!!
And then they speak "science has all the answers" pffffttt
Hoax ? Frankly, what I see around the world and caused by the human activities does not really make me laugh.
Last edited:
The cats kill millions of birds every month.
Pollution, logging, hunting and urbanization are responsible for the mass extinction of birds.
But the human activity destroying most birds is the intensification of agriculture, which represents no less than 74% of endangered species. "This overactivity and the use of pesticides on cultivated land make the number of birds decline (I pity the birds in the Amazon).
For the wind turbines, it is not possible to make a formwork system insulating the blades ?
the eyes of the Emoji you posted last... clearly shows my post went way over your head!!Hoax ? Frankly, what I see around the world and caused by the human activities does not really make me laugh.
and yes!!! it is a Hoax....
and your short sighted reply.. added nothing to the table!!
and.... just so you and your echo chamber buddies... understand my previous posts..
The Sun, pole shift movement the resultant mountains and ranges out of alignment, cause ocean currents wind variances to such a degree.. that the major contributor to climate is... is not HUMANS as you lot perpetuate!!
in fact the SUN itself is the biggest influential factor upon which we literally have no control over!!
yet the answer from the scientists... is humans can change the global affects of weather!! by contributing to the climate change paris accord!!
the worst part is alot of dummies believe it!! and perpetuate the lying scientists arguments... who of course wouldnt have any political agenda or monetary involvement... YEA RIGHT!!!!!
Birds would likely crash into anything porous enough to allow wind to reach the turbines without interference.
Best mitigation to a rather mild problem--as you note, plenty of things kill far more birds, and even wind turbines don't kill many relative to other power generation methods (per GWh coal kills at least ten times as many birds)--seems to be turbine placement and not letting the turbines operate during periods of low wind speed when birds are migrating through the area.
The debate will never start for those who cannot be reached by even the most basic and well established of facts.
I do not dispute that the climate is managed by factors external to the human activities.
However, the harmful human activities accelerate and aggravate the climate change and the destruction of our poor planet.
Yes a good solution here.
And also, in airports, I believe they also use sound systems to keep birds away.
As much as I like birds, the numbers in the article doesn't seem alarming. Even the high number of 328.000 should be compared to a population of roughly 10 billion birds in North America. Combining those two numbers you get that wind turbines kills 0.003% of the bird population per year.
It's not that we don't kill the birds though. From 1970 until now, the bird population in North America went from 11.5 billion to 10 billion. The main reason being that we have killed the insects birds prey upon, by using pesticides. On the other hand, without pesticides we wouldn't be 7.8 billion humans.
Bird populations in steep decline in North America, study finds
Survey also finds 86 species of birds threatened by populations drops, habitat destruction and climate change
www.theglobeandmail.com
@6xes
You're simply too paranoid when it comes to scientists. Have you ever met some? Go to your local university and ask to speak to some of them. They are a little nerdy but they are generally nice people.
Mad scientist - Wikipedia
Last edited:
while we can both accept that humans both contribute positively and pollute negatively to the enviroment albeit Climate... it is a miniscule affect on the global scale of things......
thus the need for a global change initiative which is a politically charged motivation.. heavily backed by the U.N... E.U and many other western nations.. in order to fleece money and keep people chained under a enviromentally correct enslaved mentality
- Status