|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
 Posted - 05/03/2007 : 05:45:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
No, you're being "convicted" for reposting comments like those of "John" and "Carol" as if they have merit in a serious discussion of global warming.
Relax. I posted a link to a article and some of the article with a few of the readers comments attached. Your the one who zeroed in on the comments and become obsessed with them.
quote:
Just like you bring up Al Gore as if he's the Moses of climate change and you're the atheist.
Well, he was thrown out some wild and extreme prophecies that are yet to pass or have failed to pass. Such as his hurricane prediction of 06. And he is the poster boy for the MMGW movement, so why not comment on him? He is the one on MTV, CNN, GAC, blah, blah, blah. The funniest and most comedic of the MMGW evangelists, however, is John Travolta.
quote:
Just like you bring up China and India as if their polluting means that we cannot do anything.
When did I say that we could not do anything? I told dude that the race was on between afordable FF energy and afordable green energy. When I say that currently FF is wining you mis-interpret that to say that I think we can't do anything.
quote:
The fact is that while China's increases in pollution may cancel out our own decreases, at this point in time stasis in greenhouse gas levels is better than a constant increase. In fact, a smaller increase is better than a larger increase. So the behavior of China, India and all other developing nations is actually irrelevant to any discussion of what we can do to improve things.
Irrelevant my eye. Last I knew we all lived on the same planet. China has just passed the US as the #1 emitter of GHGs and so you say everything is canceled out? What you fail to consider is China did not just pass us and now they are going to hold steady. They just passed with only a few of their 544 future coal fired power plants up and burning. Is everything going to be canceled out when these 544 are all up and burning. China has not even peeked yet! This does not even take into consideration India and others who are going down the same path as China.
quote:
And because you've already conceded that we can improve things,
Again, when did I ever say that we could not improve things? My point was that the changes we are making here in the states with CFLs and the like is in all reality a superficial response when you consider the global coal proliferation rate. I say our main focus, at this point, needs to be a strong push for that green alternative to producing vast amounts of electricity. The reality is that while trying to get the most you can out of 1 watt may be a noble cause, it is not going to amount to a hill of beans in the race to out pace global coal proliferation, and that is the key to victory.
quote:
you've brought nothing to this discussion except for bizarre logic about Mars and comments from people more ignorant than yourself, Bill. Please, though, continue to praise Dude for doing what you don't seem to be capable of. We don't see enough of that around here.
I say our main focus, at this point, needs to be a strong push for that green alternative to producing vast amounts of electricity. The reality is that while trying to get the most you can out of 1 watt may be noble, it is not going to amount to a hill of beans in the race to out pace global coal proliferation, and that is the key to victory.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 05/03/2007 05:48:49 |
 |
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 05:58:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Bill liar-from-mars scott said:
quote:
Either way I would shot you first.
I know a guy who, within 25 feet or so, would wreck anyone with a gun... and his weapon of choice is a knife.
Hell, from 5 feet or so anyone with some training can defeat a gunman with a knife or club.
So your analogy is still flawed.
You do what you can, and in any matter of life or death, you fight like mad to survive with the tools you have at hand.
It is possible as an individual to make a difference. It is also possible for our government to assume a leadership role on this issue and, through diplomacy and negotiation, get developing nations onboard as well.
But the first thing you have to do, bill, is educate yourself on the actual science, stop being so willing to lie and spread other people's lies, and acknowlege the facts. MMGW is a fact. We are contributing to warming, and CO2 pollution is the primary source of our contribution.
Honestly dude, you should seek some professional help. It is rather obvious that you are caring around some unresolved issues that are eating away at you. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 06:24:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill
Relax. I posted a link to a article and some of the article with a few of the readers comments attached. Your the one who zeroed in on the comments and become obsessed with them.
No, you used quotes from know-nothing rubes who happen to believe what you believe, and paraded them as "evidence" that MMGW is some liberal conspiracy to control our lives and our minds.
While you're here, why don't you cast a critical eye upon these links that Kil so thoughtfully provided upon your request:
quote:
Originally posted by Fripp
Hey Bill, I was wondering if you ever going to get around to responding to this post from Kil waaayyyy back on April 6th?
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7832&whichpage=2#116431
You said that you were going to discuss Kil's facts "shortly". Does 25 days count as shortly?
It's alright. I understand why you might want to stick to silly little tactics like skewering Al Gore because you don't like him vs. actually debating the facts.
You know, it's now been 27 days. Does 27 days count as getting back to it shortly?
Of course, I know that you'll pretend to not see this.
|
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 06:34:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Fripp
You know, it's now been 27 days. Does 27 days count as getting back to it shortly?
Of course, I know that you'll pretend to not see this.
What's the point? So we argue for days over Kil's provided data while the real environmental issue we face is coal proliferation, whether you subscribe to MMGW of not. I already said I would give dude MMGW if it meant we could move the thread forward. Please try to stay current if your going to post along with us.
My biggest concern at this point is the bankrupt state the search for a green alternative to FFs apears to be in at this point. Just look here |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 05/03/2007 06:50:45 |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 05/03/2007 : 06:58:28 [Permalink]
|
Ok, coal proliferation is a bummer. We all know that one; what we don't know is what to do about it. It is all well and good to shout it from the rooftops, but until a solution is proposed, that shouting soon becomes little more than raw noise.
The problem, one of them anyway, has been defined; now put forth the/a solution, preferably a practical one; one that has a chance of being implemented. Me, as it would have to be at least in part political, I don't have one. Gore might, but he, like the rest of us, has no authority to force anything through. All he can practically do is try and sway opinion to the point where those with that authority might act.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 07:09:07 [Permalink]
|
"What's the point?" You asked for sources. Kil provided sources. You ignore the sources because your argument is empty, bankrupt.
So, to deflect the argument in order to "win", you bring up coal proliferation, which I do not argue. Though I will state that the use of anthracite, aka "hard", coal is 'supposedly' a cleaner, more viable source. Now, I say "cleaner", not truly clean. If someone wants to argue that I am incorrect, I will accept that that is a possibility. If someone convinces me with data and facts, I will change my position.
You, on the other hand, fixate on topics that fit within your right-wing philosophy. That is not an opinion. It is a fact.
"Please try to stay current if your going to post along with us."
Don't try to set the rules here. You are the contrarian (a not-very- accomplished-one, I might add). Nor do you own or run this site in any way, shape, or form. And your use of "us" is laughable. Who here, with the odd exception of the infrequently visiting loon, agrees with you?
Might I remind you that this thread is titled "Climate Change on Mars"? What exactly does coal proliferation or FF industry hegemony have to do with a thread on Mars?
"My biggest concern at this point is the bankrupt state the search for a green alternative to FFs apears to be in at this point."
Commendable, as well as a point with which I agree. Still, it is a diversion. Again, Kil provided facts to support his claim, at your request. Additionally, you claimed that you would be "getting back these points shortly".
But, as a typical tactic exhibited frequently by others of your ilk, your debate tactics consist flinging out questions, and then running. Of course, I expect you now to deflect further by asking "examples,please?" or by using the old "I know you are but what am I?" tactic.
So, are you going to continue to avoid answering the facts presented by Kil? |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 07:43:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
I say our main focus, at this point, needs to be a strong push for that green alternative to producing vast amounts of electricity.
Then why in the world did you post the OP and the comments from the incognoscenti?
I think it's because you personally do not want to focus on what you say "our main focus" should be, but instead are still focused on trying to absolve humans from blame for the climate change. When called on that issue, though, you wave your hands frantically and say, "we should all be looking at this other issue!" just to try to get out from under the burden you create for yourself. That's why you're blowing off the challenge you set for yourself 27 days ago.
And still, the fact of the matter is that whether or not China is the leading polluter in the world, "our main focus" should be finding cheap, green energy. Whether China pollutes 1% more than we do or 5000% more than we do, "our main focus" will not change. China is irrelevant to "our main focus." But China is an easy way for you to distract from the actual problems, so you keep trying to force China into some sort of relevancy regarding "our main focus." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 07:50:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Ok, coal proliferation is a bummer. We all know that one; what we don't know is what to do about it. It is all well and good to shout it from the rooftops, but until a solution is proposed, that shouting soon becomes little more than raw noise.
No one on this forum was talking about it. They were stuck on CLFs and electric scooters, which I pointed out, while maybe noble, it is a superficial gesture at best.
quote:
The problem, one of them anyway, has been defined; now put forth the/a solution, preferably a practical one; one that has a chance of being implemented. Me, as it would have to be at least in part political, I don't have one.
Which is one reason I put this under politics.
quote:
Gore might, but he, like the rest of us, has no authority to force anything through. All he can practically do is try and sway opinion to the point where those with that authority might act.
The problem we are facing is simple to see. People all around the world want cheap electricity to improve their standard of living. We take that for granted here in the states because most of us have had that our whole lives. Coal can make cheep electricity and we have plenty of coal. We can make green electricity but we can't make it cheep and practical and there end lies the problem and solution. The solution being affordable green energy but it has proven anything but simple to make.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 07:57:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Fripp
quote:
"What's the point?" You asked for sources. Kil provided sources. You ignore the sources because your argument is empty, bankrupt.
I told dude I would give him MMGW just to keep the thread moving forward. I suppose you will not except that I am just giving dude MMGW, but would rather insist that I accept MMGW, before moving forward in the discussion on coal proliferation, just so you can claim some kind of win. Get off your soap box.
quote:
So, to deflect the argument in order to "win", you bring up coal proliferation,
That is rich. I brought up coal proliferation because it appears to be public enemy number one for clean air and clean water.
quote:
which I do not argue.
But yet you claim I have secret motives for presenting the facts.
quote:
Though I will state that the use of anthracite, aka "hard", coal is 'supposedly' a cleaner, more viable source. Now, I say "cleaner", not truly clean. If someone wants to argue that I am incorrect, I will accept that that is a possibility. If someone convinces me with data and facts, I will change my position.
How much cleaner?
quote:
You, on the other hand, fixate on topics that fit within your right-wing philosophy. That is not an opinion. It is a fact.
If the alarming rate that our planet is proliferating coal and being concerned about it is a right-wing philosophy then so be it
quote:
lease try to stay current if your going to post along with us.
I told dude I would just give him MMGW, free of charge, if it meant we could move the thread forward. Your the one who refuses to acknowledge this.
quote:
Don't try to set the rules here. You are the contrarian (a not-very- accomplished-one, I might add). Nor do you own or run this site in any way, shape, or form. And your use of "us" is laughable. Who here, with the odd exception of the infrequently visiting loon, agrees with you?
Well, to name one, you. You just agreed with me about two sentences up and two sentences down.
quote:
Might I remind you that this thread is titled "Climate Change on Mars"? What exactly does coal proliferation or FF industry hegemony have to do with a thread on Mars?
Let it be a reminder to any Martians who have coal proliferation in mind as an affordable electricity source.
quote:
quote:
"My biggest concern at this point is the bankrupt state the search for a green alternative to FFs apears to be in at this point."
Commendable, as well as a point with which I agree. Still, it is a diversion. Again, Kil provided facts to support his claim, at your request. Additionally, you claimed that you would be "getting back these points shortly".
For the 3rd or 4th time now, I give you MMGW, free of charge and void of any lengthy debate. Now accept that. And you just agreed with me again.
quote:
But, as a typical tactic exhibited frequently by others of your ilk, your debate tactics consist flinging out questions, and then running. Of course, I expect you now to deflect further by asking "examples,please?" or by using the old "I know you are but what am I?" tactic.
What are you in the 3rd grade here?
quote:
So, are you going to continue to avoid answering the facts presented by Kil?
Yes.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 08:24:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Then why in the world did you post the OP and the comments from the incognoscenti?
Your a mind reader now?
quote:
I think it's because you personally do not want to focus on what you say "our main focus" should be, but instead are still focused on trying to absolve humans from blame for the climate change.
Yep, you've read my mind again, Dave. The only reason I brought up coal proliferation and China and India's rise in their use of it was because secretly I am all for coal proliferation and the pollution it brings with it. Shoot, looking at the air pollution and water standards they have over there who would not want more of that going on around the globe?
quote:
When called on that issue, though, you wave your hands frantically and say, "we should all be looking at this other issue!" just to try to get out from under the burden you create for yourself. That's why you're blowing off the challenge you set for yourself 27 days ago.
Please try to follow here, Dave. I give you MMGW for the sake of moving this topic forward. What is the point of debating it for days on end when it does nothing to address the real problem of coal proliferation? If you simply are looking for your satisfaction of a "win" then you can have that too.
quote:
And still, the fact of the matter is that whether or not China is the leading polluter in the world, "our main focus" should be finding cheap, green energy.
Ecept for the coal proliferation rate that China and others are now undergoing causes that focus to be needed much faster then the "solutions" page shows that it is. China is building one new coal fired power plant every week to 10 days! The race is on.
quote:
Whether China pollutes 1% more than we do or 5000% more than we do, "our main focus" will not change. China is irrelevant to "our main focus."
Since they became the #1 emitter not only is China not irrelavant, but they now are the #1 reason for the "main focus." We all live on the same planet.
quote:
But China is an easy way for you to distract from the actual problems, so you keep trying to force China into some sort of relevancy regarding "our main focus."
Again with the "Bill is trying to use facts as a distraction" theory. (sigh)
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 09:12:10 [Permalink]
|
Let me preface this by saying that I have some time now, but I cannot be assured of having time later to adequately respond to your posts. Thus, if I do not reply, do not claim that you have silenced me with your facts.
"Get off your soap box."
Kettle? This is Pot. You're black.
"I brought up coal proliferation because it appears to be public enemy number one for clean air and clean water."
You brought up coal proliferation when people destroyed your MMGW myths as well as your use of no-name rubes as anti-Global-Warming "experts". This, to me, reeks of deflection and desperation.
"But yet you claim I have secret motives for presenting the facts."
No. I claim that you're deflecting because you are severly outgunned in your original post. Remember? "Mars is suffering from climate change, ergo, the Earth is suffering from MMGW theory is bunk".
[my quote]"Though I will state that the use of anthracite, aka "hard", coal is 'supposedly' a cleaner, more viable source. Now, I say "cleaner", not truly clean. If someone wants to argue that I am incorrect, I will accept that that is a possibility. If someone convinces me with data and facts, I will change my position.[end my quote]
"How much cleaner?"
Personally, I do not know. I haven't had the time to adequately research it. Admittedly, I read it from one source: a review of a book that postulates anthracite as an answer to our oil woes. Read my quote again. If you cannot see the many provisos, the many qualifiers, that I wrote, admitting that I could be completely wrong (regarding anthracite), then you have a problem with comprehension.
Since reading that review, I haven't found one independent source that corroborates, or that postulates, anthracite as either a "green" or even a "greener than soft coal" alternative. Thus, I have an open-minded but skeptical view of it.
Additionally, I was watching a special on "green" energy and a leading head of an environmental organization endorses nuclear as a "green" source of energy. Why did he change his mind? Because he recognized the demands that developing economies such as China and India would want, and only nuclear could adequately cover them. There was also a point-by-point comparison of waste removal/energy production/etc. of coal vs. nuclear. In short, he made me reconsider nuclear.
But, as with anthracite, I'm not sold. I am open to the option.
Read this: I am not committed to either anthracite nor nuclear as options to reduce Global Warming. I am merely open to these options. I present them because many, if not all, would consider neither as a "green" option, and maybe we should explore these to see if viable.
"I told dude I would just give him MMGW, free of charge, if it meant we could move the thread forward. Your the one who refuses to acknowledge this."
Then I can assume that you won't be spouting the name of a certain former ex-VP as a debate tactic?
"Well, to name one, you. You just agreed with me about two sentences up and two sentences down."
Even a broken clock is right two times a day. Instead of attacking people for choosing to believe what 90-95% of the scientific consensus has discovered, why don't you try to find a common belief and work towards positive change? Are you now going to claim you've never been antagonistic towards people here?
"Let it be a reminder to any Martians who have coal proliferation in mind as an affordable electricity source."
A clear indication that you're original post had no basis in reality, nor did you ever intend on defending it.
"For the 3rd or 4th time now, I give you MMGW, free of charge and void of any lengthy debate. Now accept that. And you just agreed with me again."
Yes, I did. I don't have a problem acknowledging the truth when I see it.
quote:
...or by using the old "I know you are but what am I?" tactic.
"What are you in the 3rd grade here?"
So now you resort to insults, yet you complain about posters here who insult you? Perhaps you didn't notice that I was describing you, thus it is you that is placing yourself in 3rd grade.
quote:
So, are you going to continue to avoid answering the facts presented by Kil?
"Yes."
Thanks for admitting it. |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 11:54:40 [Permalink]
|
bill "energy-shill" scott said:
quote:
My biggest concern at this point is the bankrupt state the search for a green alternative to FFs apears to be in at this point.
If that were actually true, then you'd have to admit the failure is due to republican politicians. FFS RIGHT GDAMN NOW a republican can't get a fucking seat on the senate committee that deals with this issue UNLESS THEY PUBLICLY STATE THAT THEY DO NOT BELIEVE HUMANS ARE CONTRIBUTING TO GLOBAL WARMING.
So when are you changing your party affiliation to dem or green, and when are you going to stop voting for republicans Bill?
Because the ONLY way to solve these issues on the scale they need to be solved on is via action from the federal government.
quote:
No one on this forum was talking about it. They were stuck on CLFs and electric scooters, which I pointed out, while maybe noble, it is a superficial gesture at best.
No Bill. What you are doing is throwing china and other developing nations out there as an excuse for the US to do nothing. Why bother at all since these guys are out-polluting us?
Well, Bill, who the hell else CAN fix the problem? The US has the wealth to solve the problem, but thanks to people like you and the reality denying politicians you vote for, we lack the political will to even try to solve the problems.
Which is fucked up beyond all comprehension, because we already have the technology to solve CO2 pollution. If we took the money that has been spent, to date, on our fake terror war in Iraq we could probably eliminate most US CO2 pollution (bring our net close to zero) from a combination of wind, coal with CO2 sequestration, and cellulosic ethanol production for E85.
All you are doing Bill is looking for a justification to do nothing, as evidenced by your continuous implication that nothing we can do will actually mean anything in the big picture.
You couldn't be more wrong.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 14:12:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Then why in the world did you post the OP and the comments from the incognoscenti?
Your a mind reader now?
Why would you think I'm a mind reader for asking you a question? The question remains unanswered: why, if you think "our main focus" should be finding cheap green energy, would you distract from that by posting about Mars' climate change and copying anti-MMGW nonsense from nobodies?quote:
quote:
I think it's because you personally do not want to focus on what you say "our main focus" should be, but instead are still focused on trying to absolve humans from blame for the climate change.
Yep, you've read my mind again, Dave. The only reason I brought up coal proliferation and China and India's rise in their use of it was because secretly I am all for coal proliferation and the pollution it brings with it.
No, that's not at all what I said. You can try to absolute humans of blame for global warming while still being alarmed by China's pollution, as you've made clear.quote:
Please try to follow here, Dave. I give you MMGW for the sake of moving this topic forward. What is the point of debating it for days on end when it does nothing to address the real problem of coal proliferation? If you simply are looking for your satisfaction of a "win" then you can have that too.
Coal proliferation isn't the only problem either, Bill. "Our main focus" cannot just be coal proliferation, or we'll be unsuccessful in finding a solution.quote:
Ecept for the coal proliferation rate that China and others are now undergoing causes that focus to be needed much faster then the "solutions" page shows that it is. China is building one new coal fired power plant every week to 10 days! The race is on.
The rate of coal proliferation doesn't make a difference to the fact that "our main focus" should be finding cheap green energy, Bill. It only makes a difference to how many of our resources we should devote to "our main focus," but doesn't change the fact that it should be "our main focus."quote:
Since they became the #1 emitter not only is China not irrelavant, but they now are the #1 reason for the "main focus." We all live on the same planet.
The problems which should be "our main focus" have been the result of 200 years of poor stewardship of the planet. Who's the worst offender isn't at all relevant to what should be "our main focus." Pointing fingers doesn't help solve the problems, Bill, and only distracts from "our main focus."quote:
Again with the "Bill is trying to use facts as a distraction" theory. (sigh)
Because those facts are irrelevant to the argument you are putting forth, Bill. I think everyone agrees upon what "our main focus" should be, so you could have simply said so and received lots of agreement. The discussion could have moved forward with us talking about possible solutions, how to persuade the government to put forth effort, etc. Instead, you posted the OP for this thread and started yapping about China again. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2007 : 15:50:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Fripp
quote:
Let me preface this by saying that I have some time now, but I cannot be assured of having time later to adequately respond to your posts. Thus, if I do not reply, do not claim that you have silenced me with your facts.
I understand.
quote:
quote:
"Get off your soap box."
Kettle? This is Pot. You're black.
Ok?
quote:
quote:
"I brought up coal proliferation because it appears to be public enemy number one for clean air and clean water."
You brought up coal proliferation when people destroyed your MMGW myths as well as your use of no-name rubes as anti-Global-Warming "experts". This, to me, reeks of deflection and desperation.
Lies, lies, and yet more lies. I brought up coal proliferation when I did a search on CFL bulbs and their main genesis. I was completely shocked when I came face to face with the numbers that China is pumping out in relation to coal. If you go back and reread all of my posts you will see that this is the case.
quote:
quote:
"But yet you claim I have secret motives for presenting the facts."
No. I claim that you're deflecting because you are severly outgunned in your original post. Remember? "Mars is suffering from climate change, ergo, the Earth is suffering from MMGW theory is bunk".
The only point that I made of the whole article was that climate change was not limited to Earth and Earth alone. I never made a Mars to Earth direct correlation. Those are your words.
quote:
quote:
quote:
[my quote]"Though I will state that the use of anthracite, aka "hard", coal is 'supposedly' a cleaner, more viable source. Now, I say "cleaner", not truly clean. If someone wants to argue that I am incorrect, I will accept that that is a possibility. If someone convinces me with data and facts, I will change my position.[end my quote]
"How much cleaner?"
Personally, I do not know. I haven't had the time to adequately research it. Admittedly, I read it from one source: a review of a book that postulates anthracite as an answer to our oil woes. Read my quote again. If you cannot see the many provisos, the many qualifiers, that I wrote, admitting that I could be completely wrong (regarding anthracite), then you have a problem with comprehension.
I am looking at this serious problem of coal proliferation with a realist attitude. Right now I see a stock pile of coal for the consumption and no serious alternative on the distant horizon. I do not like it as much as you do. Right now I am looking for a serious solution to this problem and I am concerned by the void I am finding.
quote:
Since reading that review, I haven't found one independent source that corroborates, or that postulates, anthracite as either a "green" or even a "greener than soft coal" alternative. Thus, I have an open-minded but skeptical view of it.
Fine.
quote:
Additionally, I was watching a special on "green" energy and a leading head of an environmental organization endorses nuclear as a "green" source of energy. Why did he change his mind? Because he recognized the demands that developing economies such as China and India would want, and only nuclear could adequately cover them. There was also a point-by-point comparison of waste removal/energy production/etc. of coal vs. nuclear. In short, he made me reconsider nuclear.
I have been doing the same.
quote:
But, as with anthracite, I'm not sold. I am open to the option.
Same with me. I need to hear more.
quote:
Read this: I am not committed to either anthracite nor nuclear as options to reduce Global Warming. I am merely open to these options. I present them because many, if not all, would consider neither as a "green" option, and maybe we should explore these to see if viable.
Right now I see anything as greener then burning metric ton after metric ton of coal.
quote:
quote:
"I told dude I would just give him MMGW, free of charge, if it meant we could move the thread forward. Your the one who refuses to acknowledge this."
Then I can assume that you won't be spouting the name of a certain former ex-VP as a debate tactic?
Deal.
quote:
quote:
"Well, to name one, you. You just agreed with me about two sentences up and two sentences down."
Even a broken clock is right two times a day. Instead of attacking people for choosing to believe what 90-95% of the scientific consensus has discovered, why don't you try to find a common belief and work towards positive change? Are you now going to claim you've never been antagonistic towards people here?
I see your point.
quote:
quote:
"Let it be a reminder to any Martians who have coal proliferation in mind as an affordable electricity source."
A clear indication that you're original post had no basis in reality, nor did you ever intend on defending it.
My only point was that climate change goes on all over the solar system. I never made a direct correlation between Mars and Earth.
quote:
quote:
"For the 3rd or 4th time now, I give you MMGW, free of charge and void of any lengthy debate. Now accept that. And you just agreed with me again."
Yes, I did. I don't have a problem acknowledging the truth when I see it.
Same.
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
...or by using the old "I know you are but what am I?" tactic.
"What are you in the 3rd grade here?"
So now you resort to insults, yet you complain about posters here who insult you? Perhaps you didn't notice that I was describing you, thus it is you that is placing yourself in 3rd grade.
I apologize.
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
So, are you going to continue to avoid answering the facts presented by Kil?
"Yes."
Thanks for admitting it.
Your Welcome.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 05/03/2007 15:53:01 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
 Posted - 05/03/2007 : 17:49:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Bill Scott:
The only point that I made of the whole article was that climate change was not limited to Earth and Earth alone. I never made a Mars to Earth direct correlation.
Oh that Bill. What a card he is. Had me fooled. His OP was meant as nothing more than a fun fact! I love fun facts!!!
 |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Climate change hits Mars
