Climate Change

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by tucker6

I went into your profile to add you as my second ignored person (HCAP is the other), and had to laugh when I saw you had not made any friends yet. Obvious is obvious.

Thanks for the heads up. I've looked for the ignore before but couldn't find it. You inspired me to look again. If it'd been a snake, you know the rest. So glad that I can put DaNonce on ignore. Makes my day!

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by tucker6

I went into your profile to add you as my second ignored person (HCAP is the other), and had to laugh when I saw you had not made any friends yet. Obvious is obvious.

I guess you didn't like that I presented my case in this thread with facts...to which you had no response.

The friends stuff is hilarious. Ive got more friends here than you'd think but I wasn't aware we were supposed to "make friends" on our profile. Seems like something a pre teen would care about.

What's your favorite Justin Bieber song?

[Dahoss9698]

I'd like to announce I now have a friend. I feel so much better.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

I guess you didn't like that I presented my case in this thread with facts...to which you had no response.

The friends stuff is hilarious. Ive got more friends here than you'd think but I wasn't aware we were supposed to "make friends" on our profile. Seems like something a pre teen would care about.

What's your favorite Justin Bieber song?

Actually, your posts muck up threads, so I'm simply thinning the herd. Worked wonders with Cappy, so am thinking the same will apply to you.

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Actually, your posts muck up threads, so I'm simply thinning the herd. Worked wonders with Cappy, so am thinking the same will apply to you.

Muck up threads? You like looking at the same 10-15 guys all saying the same thing?

I thought I was going on ignore. Hmmm....

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

Muck up threads? You like looking at the same 10-15 guys all saying the same thing?

No, I think he means like the same 2 guys carrying on their online bromance while hijacking threads like this one about climate.

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by Clocker

No, I think he means like the same 2 guys carrying on their online bromance while hijacking threads like this one about climate.

Yeah it's really taking away from the splitting of the atom that usually goes on here.

But point taken. I've stopped engaging him. I can't help if people like Tucker (and you) keep it going.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Jess Hawsen Arown

All organizations beholding to government to make a living.

However these American scientists don't.

http://www.petitionproject.org/

That's 31,487 scientists who signed their names!

Then there are those who claimed this petition is easily debunked. Right? Not one of these easy debunkers have ever contacted anyone on the list to check if they are who they are say they are. They just engage in character defamation without knowing anything about them -- aka, standard liberal logic.

NEXT!

Bull ! There are many issues casting doubt on the validity of this petition. There are several claims that large numbers of scientists do not agree with the theory of climate change, the best known of which is a petition organized by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (the OISM petition). This petition now appears to be signed by over 32,000 people with a BSc or higher qualification.


Howeverthe 'OISM petition' was signed by only a few climatologists.
Actually .1% of Signers Have a Background in Climatology

32,000 May sound Like A Lot.....

In fact, OISM signatories represent a tiny fraction (~0.3%) of all US science graduates (petition cards were only sent to individuals within the U.S)

According to figures from the US Department of Education Digest of Education Statistics: 2008, 10.6 million science graduates have gained qualifications consistent with the OISM polling criteria since the 1970-71 school year. 32,000 out of 10 million is not a very compelling figure, but a tiny minority - approximately 0.3 per cent.

On investigation, attempts to undermine the scientific consensus on climate change often appear to have ideological roots, vested business interests or political sponsors. The claims made for the OISM petition do not withstand objective scrutiny, and the assertions made in the petition are not supported by evidence, data or scientific research. And the organizers have never revealed how many people they canvassed (so the response rate is unknown) nor have they revealed the sampling methodology, an ironic omission considering how much fuss is made about scientists being candid and making public their methods and data.
The petition is, in terms of climate change science, rather out of date. (1998)

Also.....

The 30,000 Global Warming Petition Is Easily-Debunked Propaganda
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-..._b_243092.html

And....

https://www.desmogblog.com/oregon-petition

And.....

Snopes is not impressed

http://www.snopes.com/30000-scientis...limate-change/


NEXT!

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

Originally Posted by hcap

Howeverthe 'OISM petition' was signed by only a few climatologists.
Actually .1% of Signers Have a Background in Climatology

32,000 May sound Like A Lot.....

In fact, OISM signatories represent a tiny fraction (~0.3%) of all US science graduates (petition cards were only sent to individuals within the U.S)


The 30,000 Global Warming Petition Is Easily-Debunked Propaganda

NEXT!

That's the biggest laugh at all. They deny the validity of the list BECAUSE of the lack of climatologists. Yet the biggest mouthpieces FOR man-made climate change are not climatologists.

So don't forget to disregard and ignore Neil degrasse Tyson because he is not a climatologist. And don't forget to ignore all of the NASA scientists who are not climatologists.

Now how about that long list of science groups you produced where only a fraction of which had climate backgrounds. But since they believe man is a factor, they are more important.

So we find out that scientists who debunk man-made climate change who are not climatologists are not as relevant as scientists who believe in man-made climate change regardless of their scientific background.

Then you make it a point how small a number 32,000 is and consider it the TOTAL OF ALL SCIENTISTS who doubt the relevance man has in climate change instead of considering all the people who rejected getting involved (i.e., fear for their jobs) instead of considering it a poll and a sample -- which would make the number incredibly huge.

As far as international scientists who debunk this man-made claim, the list is long. In fact they descended on the UN about 10 years ago. It got two days coverage from the liberal media.

Most important -- George Carlin got it right.

Hey, but I can't match the size of your fonts, so I guess you win.

[woodtoo]

Originally Posted by Jess Hawsen Arown

That's the biggest laugh at all. They deny the validity of the list BECAUSE of the lack of climatologists. Yet the biggest mouthpieces FOR man-made climate change are not climatologists.

So don't forget to disregard and ignore Neil degrasse Tyson because he is not a climatologist. And don't forget to ignore all of the NASA scientists who are not climatologists.

Now how about that long list of science groups you produced where only a fraction of which had climate backgrounds. But since they believe man is a factor, they are more important.

So we find out that scientists who debunk man-made climate change who are not climatologists are not as relevant as scientists who believe in man-made climate change regardless of their scientific background.

Then you make it a point how small a number 32,000 is and consider it the TOTAL OF ALL SCIENTISTS who doubt the relevance man has in climate change instead of considering all the people who rejected getting involved (i.e., fear for their jobs) instead of considering it a poll and a sample -- which would make the number incredibly huge.

As far as international scientists who debunk this man-made claim, the list is long. In fact they descended on the UN about 10 years ago. It got two days coverage from the liberal media.

Most important -- George Carlin got it right.

Hey, but I can't match the size of your fonts, so I guess you win.

Without the big color graphs I lose all context.

[highnote]

Originally Posted by incoming

Nothing like a little hyperbole to sweeten the pot....

Which part of my post was hyperbole?

The graph I posted was from Wikipedia for Cobalt mining. It seems reasonable that cobalt mining has increased due to the fact it is needed to make Lithium batteries.

Electric cars require at least 100 pounds of copper -- probably closer to 150 -- if the sources I checked with are correct.

Hell, a regular gas powered car takes 50 pounds of copper.

I think there is money to be made from buying stocks of high quality copper miners. The challenge is knowing the industry well enough to know which stocks to buy.

https://www.ft.com/content/0e091ff8-...5-070dca6d0a0d

Originally Posted by Financial Times

Robert Friedland, billionaire founder of Ivanhoe Mines,
showed a picture of a Tesla vehicle at the annual copper conference in Santiago this week,
saying it will consume 65 kg of copper (143 pounds) per car.
Friedland’s HPX exploration company is working “very closely” with Tesla, he said.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

I'd like to announce I now have a friend. I feel so much better.

Give me that poor sucker's name. I'll put him on my prayer list.

[incoming]

Originally Posted by highnote

Which part of my post was hyperbole?

The graph I posted was from Wikipedia for Cobalt mining. It seems reasonable that cobalt mining has increased due to the fact it is needed to make Lithium batteries.

Electric cars require at least 100 pounds of copper -- probably closer to 150 -- if the sources I checked with are correct.

Hell, a regular gas powered car takes 50 pounds of copper.

I think there is money to be made from buying stocks of high quality copper miners. The challenge is knowing the industry well enough to know which stocks to buy.

https://www.ft.com/content/0e091ff8-...5-070dca6d0a0d

[quote=incoming;2222259]

Originally Posted by highnote

There is money to be made. That is certain.

However, China is going to ban the sale of petroleum powered vehicles because pollution there is horrible.

Germany is also going to stop manufacturing petroleum powered vehicles, but for a different reason -- national security. They don't want to rely on Russia, the middle east, and the U.S. for their oil.

The money to be made is in copper, cobalt, and lithium. You need cobalt to make lithium batteries. An electric car requires 100 pounds of copper.

Nothing like a little hyperbole to sweeten the pot....

The embolden is the text I consider to be hyperbole.

Our whole power grid would need a huge upgrade to accommadate all of the additional charging stations needed....electric powered vehicles don't have the compacity to haul heavy loads....there would need to be a huge leap in technology to make electric vehicles viable...lastly, where is the benefit...batteries need charging

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Give me that poor sucker's name. I'll put him on my prayer list.

That's no way to talk about a guy's mom.

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by Clocker

That's no way to talk about a guy's mom.

That's not very nice.

I didn't realize talking about Mom's was okay. Is it?