New paper by prominent scientists suggests ocean levels will rise much faster than predicted

July 24, 2015 by Bob Yirka, Phys.org report
ocean

A group of 17 scientists with varied backgrounds, including noted climatologist James Hansen has written a paper describing a scenario where the world's oceans rise much faster than other models have predicted—they have uploaded it to Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics—an open access site created to allow for public peer review of researcher ideas.

At issue is the degree to which the world's ocean levels will rise if global atmospheric temperatures rise by 2 C, a standard that has been set as a seemingly acceptable level. The authors argue that such a rise will result in much faster ice melting than other models have suggested, resulting in a rise of the world's oceans to dangerous levels. They suggest it likely will occur even if atmospheric levels are somehow kept below that benchmark.

To come to these conclusions, the team looked at what happened before—back during the Eemian period (prior to the last Ice Age), when atmospheric temperatures were approximately 1 C warmer than they are now. They found that were higher than they should have been based on modern models. That finding sent them looking for an explanation—after much work they came up with the idea that a small amount of atmospheric warming led to a small amount of sheet ice melt, which led to a change in ocean current patterns, which created a feedback loop—the more the ice sheet melted the faster it began to melt due to trapped warm water below. They conclude that adhering to the 2 C rise will lead to a very dangerous situation, where coastal areas and island countries will face dire consequences.

The paper has already been met with some criticism by other climatologists, though most appear to agree that politicians voting on an acceptable degree of atmospheric rise is likely not in the world's best interest. Also, it appears, because the paper is addressed to policymakers, that the researchers are hoping their work will cause more than just a change in the standards that have been set—that it might also wake the human race to the cataclysmic changes that really are coming and cause us to change our ways before it is too late—if it is not already.

Explore further: Global sea levels have risen six meters or more with just slight global warming

More information: Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 15, 20059-20179, 2015 DOI: 10.5194/acpd-15-20059-2015

Related Stories

Sun's activity controls Greenland temperatures

July 16, 2015

The sun's activity could be affecting a key ocean circulation mechanism that plays an important role in regulating Greenland's climate, according to a new study. The phenomenon could be partially responsible for cool temperatures ...

Risk of major sea level rise in Northern Europe

June 18, 2015

Global warming leads to the ice sheets on land melting and flowing into the sea, which consequently rises. New calculations by researchers from the Niels Bohr Institute show that the sea level in Northern Europe may rise ...

Recommended for you

New study brings Antarctic ice loss into sharper focus

February 21, 2018

A NASA study based on an innovative technique for crunching torrents of satellite data provides the clearest picture yet of changes in Antarctic ice flow into the ocean. The findings confirm accelerating ice losses from the ...

'Chameleon' ocean bacteria can shift their colors

February 21, 2018

Cyanobacteria - which propel the ocean engine and help sustain marine life - can shift their colour like chameleons to match different coloured light across the world's seas, according to research by an international collaboration ...

Stable gas hydrates can trigger landslides

February 21, 2018

Like avalanches onshore,many processes cause submarine landslides. One very widespread assumption is that they are associated with dissociating gas hydrates in the seafloor. However, scientists at GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre ...

294 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Doug_Huffman
2 / 5 (25) Jul 24, 2015
LOL Noted and impeached James Hansen.
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
4.2 / 5 (20) Jul 24, 2015
"There is evidence of ice melt, sea level rise to +5–9 m, and extreme storms in the prior interglacial period that was less than 1 °C warmer than today. ... Doubling times of 10, 20 or 40 years yield sea level rise of several meters in 50, 100 or 200 years. ... Recent ice sheet melt rates have a doubling time near the lower end of the 10–40 year range."
[ http://www.atmos-...015.html ]

In other words, New York is screwed in 2060. Yet the current US administration, after earlier administrations have obstructed coping with the changes we make, claim that they may teach (implicitly 'lead') this work at the next round of attempts to do even a little effort. [The Daily Show, July 21 IIRC.] The Sanctimony is high in this one.
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
4.3 / 5 (24) Jul 24, 2015
@Doug: Yes, the US gobernators are dumb bunch.

Luckily Hansen has successfully fought back to make science less independent of the US penchant to 'decide' science by political rule. Only in the nation of 'freedom' ... I assume the outcome will be a Nobel Prize for Hansen, as a push back from the international science community against the climate "axis of evil" (political and economical interest aligned with religious and ignorance interests).
denglish
2 / 5 (25) Jul 24, 2015
Also, it appears, because the paper is addressed to policymakers, that the researchers are hoping their work will cause more than just a change in the standards that have been set—that it might also wake the human race to the cataclysmic changes that really are coming and cause us to change our ways before it is too late—if it is not already.

Suggestions...to policy makers...based on models already falsified by observation.

A new dark age is upon us. The liberal elite may very well see their New World Order. Once the evil is discovered, I fear our only hope for escape will be through violence. I would say the liberal plebs will join with humanity in the struggle, but they will be the first ones purged by their now-masters.

denglish
1.8 / 5 (24) Jul 24, 2015
No one denies that climate is changing, and with it, things will happen, like a rise in sea level.

Remember your learning? The Berring Strait was a land bridge back in the times of the ice age when the seas receded.

No one argues against a clean planet. However, causation of climate change is a huge issue. AGW has not been proven to the extent that justifies policies that crate moral and economic chaos.

Anthropocentrism is at play here. And again, it leads us down a path of darkness.
Doug_Huffman
1.6 / 5 (13) Jul 24, 2015
@Doug: Yes, the US gobernators are dumb bunch.

Luckily Hansen has successfully fought back to make science less independent of the US penchant to 'decide' science by political rule. Only in the nation of 'freedom' ... I assume the outcome will be a Nobel Prize for Hansen, as a push back from the international science community against the climate "axis of evil" (political and economical interest aligned with religious and ignorance interests).
That's OK, I understand that American English is not your milk tongue.

Det er OK, jeg forstår at engelsk ikke er ditt morsmål.
MR166
1.7 / 5 (17) Jul 24, 2015
I predict that we will see a lot more papers such as this. There will be one last big final push to pass their agenda before the cooling starts, people wake up and it becomes politically impossible to accomplish.
gkam
2.1 / 5 (37) Jul 24, 2015
" The liberal elite may very well see their New World Order. "
-----------------------------------

Perhaps you "forgot" we got that, . . plus the Great Republican Economic Meltdown and the Republican Police State, from the Bush Crime Family.
gkam
2.4 / 5 (40) Jul 24, 2015
Yeah, 166, all those "hottest days ever" we are having will just magically go away and it will get cold, . . because of your political prejudice.
MR166
1.8 / 5 (15) Jul 24, 2015
"Perhaps you "forgot" we got that, . . plus the Great Republican Economic Meltdown and the Republican Police State, from the Bush Crime Family."

Gkam you are always good for a chuckle. You are completely ignoring the $115 million an HOUR that this administration is spending over income.
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (19) Jul 24, 2015
" the paper is addressed to policymakers"

It's political then, not science.

Great Republican Economic Meltdown

Which was caused by the democrats promoting the securitization of mortgages, and threats to banks, to push mortgages on those who could not afford them.
gkam
1.7 / 5 (35) Jul 24, 2015
Ryggy wants to PAY for the Bush Wars.
gkam
2.2 / 5 (39) Jul 24, 2015
" You are completely ignoring the $115 million an HOUR that this administration is spending over income."
----------------------------

No, I'm not. That was coming up next, reminding you of the Bush Tax Give-aways for the rich, the very rich, and those who really own us. They guaranteed we would be in debt essentially forever, paying interest to the 0.1%.

It is time we stopped coddling the rich, and made them PAY for their wars, depressions, recessions, and scams.
antigoracle
1.8 / 5 (19) Jul 24, 2015
The AGW Cult have rewritten history; viz. the disappearance of the MWP and the cooling of the 1930's.
Now they are redefining the english language; viz. PROPAGANDIST = prominent and DOGMA = science.
rgw
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 24, 2015
Ryggy wants to PAY for the Bush Wars.


Sadly, millions of Africans are being exterminated in inter-tribal 'bush wars' in Africa. These tragic conflicts do not get enough notice. I appreciated Mr. G'Kam bringing this issue to the fore. I would guess from his name that he is probably one or other of the Aka (Mbenga), Baka, Mbuti, or Twa tribes.
gkam
1.4 / 5 (29) Jul 24, 2015
I am from tribes of Bulgarians and Hungarians.
viko_mx
2 / 5 (12) Jul 24, 2015
After prominent scientists said that you can not doubt in their theories and to ask unnecessary questions. It is not polite somehow.
nevermark
4.2 / 5 (18) Jul 24, 2015
After prominent scientists said that you can not doubt in their theories and to ask unnecessary questions. It is not polite somehow.


What isn't polite is making up strawman views and knocking them down, then pretending you have actually said anything.

Scientists publish so their conclusions can be questioned. The article notes some scientists viewed the above paper critically, so the jury is out on this one.

Nobody should accept any conclusion until it is corroborated.

But I supposed if science, despite trillions of dollars available from energy companies to fund contrary studies, keeps concluding what you don't want to hear then all you have left is to bash scientists.
viko_mx
1.9 / 5 (9) Jul 24, 2015
I doubt in certain theories and presented as scientific methods, but not in true science which relies on pure scientific methods. You put the emphasis where it should not be. Why? For manipulation purpose?
denglish
2 / 5 (16) Jul 24, 2015
" The liberal elite may very well see their New World Order. "
-----------------------------------

Perhaps you "forgot" we got that, . . plus the Great Republican Economic Meltdown and the Republican Police State, from the Bush Crime Family.

No Credibility, AKA: False Master's Degree & Stolen Valor.

Tell us more stories, its much more entertaining than your extremism.

btw, I was in Alaska massacring fish. Yes, I make money that allows me vacations. Let that keep ya up at night.
denglish
2.1 / 5 (15) Jul 24, 2015
And in case anyone is interested in the facts, here's a graph that shows that the sea levels have been going up for thousands of years:

https://en.wikipe...evel.png

A more local (temporally) graph:

https://en.wikipe...2013.png

What do we see here? That the sea levels have been going up; perhaps as a result of the Earth leaving an Ice-Age era...I don't know, its not my field of study. However, the point stands: the sea does what it wants regardless of what we do.

So, are societal policies that blame our technological progress for climate change and wreck our economies justified by the observations? No.
Returners
1.6 / 5 (13) Jul 24, 2015
The above claims of the paper are contradictory, because the standard claim of the AGW alarmists are that atmospheric warming is 6 times faster in the polar regions as compared to the global average. Therefore a cooling of arctic and antarctic waters (enhancing the north/south temperature gradient in sea and atmosphere) is unrealistic.

A greenhouse effect (a real one) causes a planet's atmospheric condition to move closer and closer to isothermal equilibrium with respect to the same scenario without greenhouse effect. Which is to say, you would in fact expect the poles, both land and sea, to warm much faster than the rest of the planet.
Returners
1.4 / 5 (11) Jul 24, 2015
The scenario described in that paper is actually what you would expect if most of the warming was being caused by something other than a greenhouse gas, because warming caused by a direct source of energy would heat it's primary location, for example the equator or the temperate zones, and leave the poles to melt out gradually as a side-effect. This would perhaps produce a greater temperature gradient, if the warming was centered on the equator and temperate zones and spread from there.

Greenhouse gases trap heat and distribute it to cooler locations, which has the effect of evening out temperature gradients, making the gradient smaller (Venus).
Shootist
1.9 / 5 (17) Jul 24, 2015
Yes! And the arctic is ice free by 2015.

silly gits.
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (11) Jul 24, 2015
Nobody should accept any conclusion until it is corroborated.


That's what makes AGWism so great, no corroboration for decades.
Bongstar420
3.4 / 5 (5) Jul 24, 2015
The ocean rose very fast after the last ice age...it should go without saying
gkam
1.8 / 5 (31) Jul 24, 2015
"No Credibility, AKA: False Master's Degree & Stolen Valor."

I already identified myself as George Kamburoff, and offered to send you the pdf I was sent recently from the Air Force Flight Test Center, a copy of the front page of the base newspaper with my picture on it.

Then, you can look me up at the websites for the 553rd Reconnaissance Wing, (Igloo White, "1stwave.com", and others), if you ask.

Want the pdf of me testing carbon fiber composites for NASA? My presentations and lectures in Energy Management and Power Quality?

And who are you, hiding behind your pseudonym? Another otto?

Who?
philstacy9
2.3 / 5 (14) Jul 24, 2015
Why not set up a separate political website for global warming advocacy since it is off topic in a physics website?
denglish
1.9 / 5 (13) Jul 24, 2015
Cool story bro. Considering how great you are, imagine the surprise when it was discovered you can't summarize passages in academic papers correctly?

Who?

What does that have to do with rising ocean levels, the fact that the oceans have been rising for thousands of yeas, and that the same rising is commensurate with the climate epoch the earth is currently in?
Returners
1.9 / 5 (14) Jul 24, 2015
Jim Henson has been watching "Water World" again.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (30) Jul 24, 2015
Wow, you really ARE otto.

Why can't you lightweights learn from others? Is it because of your silly little ego?

If you want to give up and let the Earth get into a condition not amenable for life, go ahead, but get out of the way of the Decent Folk. The rest of us want to make sure our kids will be okay.
leetennant
4.1 / 5 (18) Jul 24, 2015
"...came up with the idea that a small amount of atmospheric warming led to a small amount of sheet ice melt, which led to a change in ocean current patterns, which created a feedback loop—the more the ice sheet melted the faster it began to melt due to trapped warm water below."

Which is actually what we're already seeing a version of in the Antarctic where warmer waters are melting ice from below and the currents and winds are changing as a result
bluehigh
2.7 / 5 (7) Jul 25, 2015
Meanwhile 20,000 people every day starve to death.
Egleton
4.5 / 5 (13) Jul 25, 2015
For Those who would frame the climate debate in terms of the Republican movement's ideals, might I remind you that the rest of the world does not give a flying fig about the Republicans of the USA.
I do not care about your ideals, I do not care about your fate, I certainly do not think that we should be taking your views into consideration when securing our daily bread. And that is what is at stake, our ability to procure enough food for ourselves and our children.
So why don't you take your ideals and shove them where the sun don't shine?

This a a forum to discuss the climate and not a platform to entertain your delusions. For that service please pay a psychiatrist.
NiteSkyGerl
1.4 / 5 (11) Jul 25, 2015
"they have uploaded it to Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics—an open access site created to allow for public peer review of researcher ideas."

Any spewing wisdumb availed themselves of that option? THEN STFU!!!
NiteSkyGerl
1.9 / 5 (13) Jul 25, 2015
Meanwhile 20,000 people every day starve to death.


Stop! You'll turn me into a denier. I guess every dark cloud...
Zzzzzzzz
2.2 / 5 (20) Jul 25, 2015
And so the spineless deniers scramble for another shred of illusion behind which to quickly re-insert their rotting heads into the sand........
bluehigh
2 / 5 (4) Jul 25, 2015
... has a silver lining.

> Go ahead. Make a difference.

No barefoot tribes to walk the land
civilised we bleed them into sand

and the tallest poppies fall from grace
hollow men take power and take their place.

The atom splits black holes are born
into this chaos science warns ..

Truth is written down in shifting sands.

ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (9) Jul 25, 2015
Meanwhile 20,000 people every day starve to death.

AGWites are disciples of Paul Ehrlich who assert fewer people is better for Gaia.
bluehigh
2.3 / 5 (9) Jul 25, 2015
Yeah sure, there must be a euphemism for 'kill all the poor people'.

How about AGW mitigation?

Sounds righteous. Quality over quantity?

Austerity is good, right?

gkam
1.4 / 5 (28) Jul 25, 2015
"What does that have to do with rising ocean levels, the fact that the oceans have been rising for thousands of yeas, and that the same rising is commensurate with the climate epoch the earth is currently in?"
--------------------------------

It was in response to your allegations of "Stolen Valor", and I want you to GO LOOK me up, Goober. Those of you too scared to enlist are dirt compared to those who served.
denglish
2.3 / 5 (9) Jul 25, 2015
It was in response to your allegations of "Stolen Valor", and I want you to GO LOOK me up, Goober. Those of you too scared to enlist are dirt compared to those who served.

"What does that have to do with rising ocean levels, the fact that the oceans have been rising for thousands of yeas, and that the same rising is commensurate with the climate epoch the earth is currently in?"

Your propensity to change the subject is interesting. Either you have no faith in your position re: the topic, or do not know what the topic is.

Tell us more stories. Tell the one about killing ten guys with one handgrenade. That's my favorite.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (28) Jul 25, 2015
"Tell the one about killing ten guys with one handgrenade. That's my favorite."
-------------------------------------

Yes, adolescents are fascinated by "action". You see it in their little games, with their flying fingers, substituting for a real life.

The stay-ay-home folk get their idea of the military from Hollywood. Many think John Wayne and Sylvester Stallone actually served, instead of hiding from their wars. This goober denglish is eager to accuse others of poor character, while he hid at home, cowering like Dubya and Cheney in their Undisclosed Locations, screaming "Bring 'em on!".
denglish
2 / 5 (8) Jul 25, 2015
This goober denglish is eager to accuse others of poor character, while he hid at home, cowering like Dubya and Cheney in their Undisclosed Locations, screaming "Bring 'em on!".


"What does that have to do with rising ocean levels, the fact that the oceans have been rising for thousands of yeas, and that the same rising is commensurate with the climate epoch the earth is currently in?"

Your propensity to change the subject is interesting. Either you have no faith in your position re: the topic, do not know what the topic is, or are so wrapped in political hate that you are blinded to what is going on.

Tell us more stories. Tell the one about being a spy with James Bond. That's my second-favorite.

gkam
1.4 / 5 (27) Jul 25, 2015
"Tell us more stories. Tell the one about being a spy with James Bond. That's my second-favorite."
----------------------------------

Yeah, you stay-at-home "patriots" have no idea whatever how the military works.

But the topic is the sudden rise of the sea levels from AGW. How are you going to stop it?
HeloMenelo
3.3 / 5 (12) Jul 25, 2015
"But the topic is the sudden rise of the sea levels from AGW. How are you going to stop it?"

They have no intention of even trying, DONGlish and his clown puppets paid dipshit by big oil to be as dumb as they can utterly be are fully intending to raze the planet to the ground, and after that will keep screaming from their graves the earth is not warming while turning a blind eye towards billions upon billions upon billions of waste poured into the atmosphere and ocean by the oil industry....
denglish
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 25, 2015
But the topic is the sudden rise of the sea levels from AGW.

Wrong. The article is about a scenario, not reality. The scenario is based on climate models that have already been falsified.

So, there is nothing to stop.

DONGlish and his clown puppets

Stopped there. Insult is the last refuge of an exhausted intellect.
HeloMenelo
3.5 / 5 (13) Jul 25, 2015
No one argues against a clean planet. However, causation of climate change is a huge issue. AGW has not been proven to the extent that justifies policies that crate moral and economic chaos.

Anthropocentrism is at play here. And again, it leads us down a path of darkness.


This must be the dumbest post ebver from this clown, look at this moron, "no one argues against a clean planet" Yet he argues against all attempots to stop the relentless pollution from happening, yet he fiercly jumps up and down denying the very best emperical evidence thathuman induced climate change is destroying the earth. O yes my faith in a dumber word that uttely dumb does exist, the anti science troll clan right here on physorg.
gkam
1.6 / 5 (28) Jul 25, 2015
"Insult is the last refuge of an exhausted intellect."
-----------------------------------

Such as allegations of "Stolen Valor"?? Those of us who served have no patience with you stay-at-home hiders.

So, . . how are you going to stop the rising sea levels?
HeloMenelo
3.2 / 5 (11) Jul 25, 2015
But the topic is the sudden rise of the sea levels from AGW.

Wrong. The article is about a scenario, not reality. The scenario is based on climate models that have already been falsified.

So, there is nothing to stop.

DONGlish and his clown puppets

Stopped there. Insult is the last refuge of an exhausted intellect.


What a moron, this clown posts this no brainer one liner on every second post on physorg, are you a bot ? being far beyond past exhausting his intellect like him and his trolls, all that's left is insult to flame on the embarrasment he causes to himself and his utterly dumb superiors.
AGreatWhopper
1.8 / 5 (10) Jul 25, 2015
"they have uploaded it to Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics—an open access site created to allow for public peer review of researcher ideas."

Any spewing wisdumb availed themselves of that option? THEN STFU!!!


Those who can't do, troll.
HeloMenelo
3 / 5 (10) Jul 25, 2015
Why not set up a separate political website for global warming advocacy since it is off topic in a physics website?


O don't you worry there's plenty of taxpayers money being wasted on BS propaganda caimpaign's and websites, (including bogus science websites) the stupidity being spread limited only by your taxpaying pockets which is basically unlimted) of course they will never tell you that ;)
denglish
2.7 / 5 (7) Jul 25, 2015
Such as allegations of "Stolen Valor"??

An allegation is not an insult.

Those of us who served have no patience with you stay-at-home hiders.

Those of us that have served do not hate our country, as you do. In fact, by what you do on these forums, you disgrace those of us that served.

So, . . how are you going to stop the rising sea levels?

I am going to start an ice age. You see, during ice ages, the seas go down. After ice ages (where the earth currently is), seas rise.

I need to point out again: this article does not say the sea levels are rising. It is an article presenting a scenario (based on falsified models) that says the seas will rise to a greater extent than they currently are.

This article is nonsense designed to create an argument amongst powerless people that will result in hits...resulting in website revenue.
denglish
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 25, 2015
What a moron

Stopped there. Insult is the last refuge of an exhausted intellect.

Sorry, the nonsense you spew requires an ignore. Nothing personal. I'll check back in after an arbitrary time period to see if your posting anything worth paying attention to.

Why do these people not stay on topic? Do they know they can't defend the topic, or are they that lacking in the skills required to stay on topic?
gkam
1.7 / 5 (27) Jul 25, 2015
I am waiting for your Ice Age.

But it seems to be getting hotter.
HeloMenelo
3.2 / 5 (11) Jul 25, 2015
What a moron

Stopped there. Insult is the last refuge of an exhausted intellect.

Sorry, the nonsense you spew requires an ignore. Nothing personal. I'll check back in after an arbitrary time period to see if your posting anything worth paying attention to.

Why do these people not stay on topic? Do they know they can't defend the topic, or are they that lacking in the skills required to stay on topic?


little monkey or is it bot repeating yourself to yourself again, as if we all give a rats as to what you and your confined little clan ignores or not ignore, the scientific community as well as the general public is witnessing your utter stupidity word by word so keep beating your head against that wall we know you're so utterly in love with stupid... ;)
denglish
2 / 5 (8) Jul 25, 2015
I am waiting for your Ice Age.

But it seems to be getting hotter.

Sorry, I forgot you need /sarcasm.

Of course its getting hotter. The earth goes through cycles where it gets hotter and colder. It always has, and it always will. Life on earth is better off for it, despite Anthropocentric arrogance and exploitative cannibalistic predation.
HeloMenelo
3.5 / 5 (13) Jul 25, 2015
I am waiting for your Ice Age.

But it seems to be getting hotter.


Indeed, and far quicker than naturally possible as have been proven for years, well said Gkam
Returners
1 / 5 (6) Jul 25, 2015
"Tell us more stories. Tell the one about being a spy with James Bond. That's my second-favorite."
----------------------------------

Yeah, you stay-at-home "patriots" have no idea whatever how the military works.

But the topic is the sudden rise of the sea levels from AGW. How are you going to stop it?


The rate of sea level rise, the best indicator of overall warming, has been about the same for the past 8000 years.

It may be "GW", but it is by and large not "AGW", and even if it is, CO2 isn't the main culprit.
Caliban
3.4 / 5 (10) Jul 25, 2015
"No Credibility, AKA: False Master's Degree & Stolen Valor."

I already identified myself as George Kamburoff, and offered to send you the pdf I was sent recently from the Air Force Flight Test Center, a copy of the front page of the base newspaper with my picture on it.

[...]

And who are you, hiding behind your pseudonym? Another otto?

Who?


gkam,

The braying ass currently twitching under the nick "denglish" or "dongleash" if you prefer, is none other than the crap artist formerly known as "CornholeScanty".

In the words of Moe Howard: "What a revoltin" development!"

gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 25, 2015
Wasn't that William Bendix?
qquax
3.9 / 5 (7) Jul 25, 2015
@gkam, appreciate your efforts, but you are wasting your time on trolls, which is ultimately all they want to accomplish.
Caliban
3.3 / 5 (12) Jul 25, 2015
Such as allegations of "Stolen Valor"??

An allegation is not an insult.

Those of us who served have no patience with you stay-at-home hiders.

Those of us that have served do not hate our country, as you do. In fact, by what you do on these forums, you disgrace those of us that served.

So, . . how are you going to stop the rising sea levels?

I am going to start an ice age. You see, during ice ages, the seas go down. After ice ages (where the earth currently is), seas rise.

I need to point out again: this article does not say the sea levels are rising. It is an article presenting a scenario (based on falsified models) that says the seas will rise to a greater extent than they currently are.


It is your sanctimony, false equivalence, misrepresentation, strawmen and a complete lack of critical analysis which is leaving you high'n'dry, dongleash --not a new ice age.

The Sea is coming back.

Prepare yourself.
Caliban
2.5 / 5 (8) Jul 25, 2015
Such as allegations of "Stolen Valor"??
An allegation is not an insult.

Those of us who served have no patience with you stay-at-home hiders.
Those of us that have served do not hate our country, as you do. In fact, by what you do on these forums, you disgrace those of us that served.

So, . . how are you going to stop the rising sea levels?
I am going to start an ice age. You see, during ice ages, the seas go down. After ice ages (where the earth currently is), seas rise.

I need to point out again: this article does not say the sea levels are rising. It is an article presenting a scenario (based on falsified models) that says the seas will rise to a greater extent than they currently are.


TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (21) Jul 25, 2015
The stay-ay-home folk get their idea of the military from Hollywood. Many think John Wayne and Sylvester Stallone actually served, instead of hiding from their wars. This goober denglish is eager to accuse others of poor character, while he hid at home, cowering like Dubya and Cheney in their Undisclosed Locations, screaming "Bring 'em on!"
-In contrast to 20yo noncom tech tube changers and board solderers who spent their evenings in a nice hotel in Thailand.

Speaking of insaniacs, check out gkams performance in this current thread
http://phys.org/n...sts.html

a copy of the front page of the base newspaper with my picture on it
I think I also got a cc of your picture on the cover of Psychology Today.

But that doesnt prove that youre insane does it? Only the lies and fabrications you post and the claims that theyre true because of your obviously bogus past, can prove that.

And they do.
abecedarian
3 / 5 (4) Jul 25, 2015
gkam sniped:
... get out of the way of the Decent Folk. The rest of us want to make sure our kids will be okay.

I go out of my way to get out of the way, but there's always yet another asshat that isn't so considerate as I.
denglish
2.3 / 5 (6) Jul 25, 2015
In the words of Moe Howard: "What a revoltin" development!"

The methods by which the anthropocentrists defend their position is odd. Instead of employing an elenctic method of dialogue, they seek to censure via humiliation. One can't help but wonder of several motives; the primary ones being the topic not being defensible, inability to stay on topic, inability to grasp the topic, or political hatred born of a desire to adhere to a lifestyle governed by a fascination with the lowest common denominator.

One cannot blame them for the former motive. The article is indefensible. None of the other motives suggests any credibility.
Returners
1 / 5 (4) Jul 25, 2015
the rate of acceleration in the melting of greenland land ice is approximately 20cukm per year. GRACE gives an estimate of 17 to 19cukm per year of acceleration, while manual measurements suggest a number closer to 20.

This is actually a very tiny value compared to the amount already melting, although because the melt rate had been temporarily lower following Pinatubo, it gave the appearance of the rate of melting "doubling" every 5 to 10 years. This was an artifact in the data, as the rate of increase of melt of greenland land ice turns out to be approximately linear.

That's okay though, because a self-reinforcing albedo feedback on a flat surface would grow exponentially, but because the Earth is curved, obviously, this increases the angle from the normal, so that the net radiation hitting newly exposed soil is less the farther north it happens to be. Thus the feedback cannot grow exponentially, because the negative reinforcement cancels the positive reinforcement.
Returners
1 / 5 (4) Jul 25, 2015
On the other hand, speaking of solar incidence angles, the urban heat island effect is greatly enhanced by high-rise buildings, often a thousand feet higher than the tree line, being struck by early morning and late evening sunlight which is actually below the the would-be horizon with respect to ground level. Were these structures not there, this sunlight would pass through the atmosphere and out the other side, but because these sky scrapers exist, a rectangle 100yards or so wide and 900 feet high recieves an extra half-hour of sunlight every morning and every evening which would otherwise miss the surface of the Earth.

For a 1000ft high building, 900ft above the tree liine, this gives around 30 gigajoules per day of extra sunlight captured for every 100feet of width. If you multiply that by a year, it comes to 11 Terrajoules of forcing per year per 100ft by1000ft sky scraper being 900ft above the tree line.

So much for CO2 being the main driver of GW.
Vietvet
5 / 5 (11) Jul 25, 2015
I've sentenced myself to twenty lashes for inadvertently giving deng a "5"

If it were possible my rating of his comments would be in negative numbers.
Returners
1 / 5 (4) Jul 25, 2015
Now as you consider that last post,do keep in mind that there are God-only-knows how many sky scrapers and other tall structures (taller than the tree line and certainly much taller than the horizon) around the world in all cities.

For example, if there were 1,000 sky scrapers on Earth, they would provide 11 petajoules of forcing per year.

Apparently there are only around 650 such structures in the U.S., however, to be called a "skyscraper" it must be 150 meters tall or greater. A building 149 meters is still nearly 400 feet above the tree line, and there are far, far more of such buildings around which range from 100 to 500 feet to make up the difference.

Then you have to consider mega-cities in other nations, like European nations, China and Japan which also host skyscrapers.

We can see that the increased forcing simply by providing a higher artificial landscape to intercept the Sun provides enormous forcing each and every day, regardless of CO2.
denglish
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 25, 2015
I've sentenced myself to twenty lashes for inadvertently giving deng a "5"

If it were possible my rating of his comments would be in negative numbers.

LOL! Don't worry. :-)

Populism has long been an evil in my book, and votes up or down have no impact on my worldview.

We can see that the increased forcing simply by providing a higher artificial landscape to intercept the Sun provides enormous forcing each and every day, regardless of CO2.

Nonsense

Returners
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 25, 2015
Then you have to figure the roofs of structures, including houses, the roads, the bridges, the parking lots at shopping centers, stadiums, and hospitals, etc.

Roads and Parking lots are almost an ideal solar collector. The temperature is tens of degrees higher standing in a big parking lot than it is standing in the middle of a grassy field on the same day.
greenonions
4.5 / 5 (11) Jul 25, 2015
denglish -
they seek to censure via humiliation


A behavior you of course would never engage in (sarcasm). Look at how you keep going after gkam.
denglish
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 25, 2015
denglish -
they seek to censure via humiliation


A behavior you of course would never engage in (sarcasm). Look at how you keep going after gkam.

gkam has attempted to create a false real-life persona in order to attain internet credibility, and has been exposed by their own behavior.

Seeking to humiliate someone, and self-humiliation are very different. As a trained communicator (in the spirit of your vote-buddies gkam and Capt Stumpy) you should('nt) know this.
Water_Prophet
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 25, 2015
So, why is this a story? As surface area increases, melting increases. There are other effects, such as increased duration of exposure to heat, but hardly controversial.
gkam
1.8 / 5 (30) Jul 25, 2015
"gkam has attempted to create a false real-life persona in order to attain internet credibility, and has been exposed by their own behavior."
---------------------------------

Nope. No excuse for your boorish behavior except poor character. I gave out my name, email address, references to my name and picture on military sites, and still this goober wants to accuse me of being the liar.

You know, you really are beginning to sound like otto.
lengould100
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 25, 2015
It is hard to believe that the denier idiots are still operating. Learn to read, people.
howhot2
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 25, 2015
James Hansen is riight on the money. You deniers just don't get how bad all of this is going to be. Imagine the worst scenario and that is what is going to happen with global warming.
antigoracle
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 25, 2015
I've sentenced myself to twenty lashes for inadvertently giving deng a "5"

If it were possible my rating of his comments would be in negative numbers.

Negative numbers eh!
Still higher than your IQ though.
denglish
2 / 5 (8) Jul 25, 2015
You know, you really are beginning to sound like otto.

That's because Otto and I figured you out. Not that its difficult.

Back to the topic, scenarios based on falsified theories are moot.

Imagine the worst scenario and that is what is going to happen with global warming.

Yes, imagination overrules observation. #selfpwnt
Rockguy
5 / 5 (4) Jul 25, 2015
I wonder how the configuration of the continents plays into this scenario. Before the last ice age there was not a connection between N. America and South America. Not having the west to east ocean current played a part in huge changes to our climate. So I am curious as to what difference that would make now in comparison to when there was a west to east (Pacific to Atlantic) current.
Egleton
5 / 5 (6) Jul 25, 2015
What I got from the article (remember that?) Was that there is a greater runoff of fresh water from the melting pack, which forces the denser, saltier water at the grounding line of of the glaciers, causing them to retreat faster.

I am going to press the ignore button more. Trolls are successful at what they do, distracting from the substance of the science.
If you answer the trolls you too will be ignored.
abecedarian
1 / 5 (3) Jul 26, 2015
Egleton mused:
... Trolls are successful at what they do, distracting from the substance of the science.
If you answer the trolls you too will be ignored.

There are trolls on both sides.
greenonions
5 / 5 (8) Jul 26, 2015
Denglish
Seeking to humiliate someone, and self-humiliation are very different.


But here is just one example - off this thread - of you seeking to humiliate someone.

Cool story bro. Considering how great you are, imagine the surprise when it was discovered you can't summarize passages in academic papers correctly?


Just pointing out your blatant contradictions.
zz5555
5 / 5 (8) Jul 26, 2015
Not having the west to east ocean current played a part in huge changes to our climate. So I am curious as to what difference that would make now in comparison to when there was a west to east (Pacific to Atlantic) current.

I think that's interesting. I'm sure I don't know the answer but a quick search turned up this paper: http://people.rse.../232.pdf . When discussing the isthmus, it says:
The timing of the final stages of closure between about 3.6 and 2.7 Myr ago is sufficiently close to the onset of Northern Hemispheric glaciation to make an attractive hypothesis: that the tectonically driven change in the Atlantic circulation leads to increased moisture transport to high latitudes and to the development of the northern ice sheets.

So, at the very least, the closure seems to have led to warmer water going north. I don't know if this helps you, but it does point out that the closure was long before the period discussed in this article.
zz5555
5 / 5 (6) Jul 26, 2015
The braying ass currently twitching under the nick "denglish" or "dongleash" if you prefer, is none other than the crap artist formerly known as "CornholeScanty".

Is there a basis for the claim that denglish is really ConfoundedSociety? I admit that both are incapable of understanding pretty simple science or logic, but I don't recall ConfoundedSociety being all consumed with politics like denglish is.

It would be interesting, if true, though. I mean ConfoundedSociety trashed reputation with idiotic claims such that his name was synonymous with being wrong. If that pseudonym was abandoned for denglish, then it's apparent no lesson was learned. He immediately trashed his own character so that, once again, denglish is synonymous with being wrong. But now he's added dishonesty to his character. (My apologies to ConfoundedSociety if this is wrong).
Water_Prophet
1 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
It is hard to believe that the denier idiots are still operating. Learn to read, people.

Excellent and ironic quote.
Because 20 years ago AGWers were the idiots.
In even a few years it will change again I'm afraid. All because AGWers are focusing on the wrong variables.
Temperature and CO2. Neither are good indicators of climate changes.
CO2 would have to change by more than 0.012% to have any heating impact, but indeed on Earth, where Infrared effects are dominated anywhere beneath Mt Everest by the effects of water vapor, and above Mt Everest CO2 still works, but blocks the majority of incoming heat from the Sun, so on Earth, Unlike Mars or Venus, CO2 works in reverse.

And of course temperature, AIR temperature. Ice absorbs 30,000x more heat as it melts than the air does, water absorbs 90x more heat than air does, and air changes rapidly. By the time air temperature changes significantly, we're all very dead (exaggeration).
Water_Prophet
1 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
But look at what HAS happened-The poles HAVE melted, oceans have warmed, more importantly currents HAVE changed, especially in the Bering Straight, and other nexus of the oceans.

Air, which is regulated overwhelmingly by these has changed very little.
It can't change much really.

Pretty clear now isn't it?

So what IS causing change?
Heat, mankind releases about 1/1000th of the Sun's energy in waste heat. Not much you say?
It takes 100% of the Sun's energy to make things pleasant on Earth, every little bit after that, counts.

So notice your skylines, they are dimmed at night (less energy), more solar, more wind (a double reduction in released heat, not fuels burned AND solar is used), more fuel efficient/electric cars. The Sun is headed toward a minimum.

What does this spell, cold wet winters, but not very brutal.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Jul 26, 2015
It takes 100% of the Sun's energy to make things pleasant on Earth,


Most of the sun's energy radiates into space.

100% would fry the earth to a crisp.

A Dyson sphere would capture 100% of the sun's energy.
gkam
1.8 / 5 (29) Jul 26, 2015
"A Dyson sphere would capture 100% of the sun's energy."
-----------------------------------

Yeah, and a wormhole can provide us with an exotic vacation.

What's stopping us?

Reality?
denglish
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
Just pointing out your blatant contradictions.

Let me help you understand what you perceive as contradiction.

Claiming to have an advanced degree and then not being able to decipher a passage in an academic article is self humiliation. Pointing it out as a way to demonstrate lack of authority is an argumentative tactic designed to express to the other side that they are not credible.

As a trained communicator (unless you aren't), you should have recognized that.

But again, I ask...what does any of that have to do with a scenario founded on falsified climatic theories?
gkam
1.5 / 5 (26) Jul 26, 2015
"Claiming to have an advanced degree and then not being able to decipher a passage in an academic article is self humiliation."
-----------------------------

Oh, have you given up screaming "Stolen Valor" since I sent you to military websites with my name and picture on them?

What did that have to do with AGW killing us?
denglish
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
Oh, have you given up screaming "Stolen Valor" since I sent you to military websites with my name and picture on them?

No, you are a liar; about your (1)education, (2)your experience, and (3)military service.

1. You are unable to decipher a simple passage in an academic paper.
2. You are unable to tell the difference between a Mwh and a Kwh.
3. You denigrate the country, and its service people.

What did that have to do with AGW killing us?

Nothing. There is no such thing. Let's look at this specific article by first understanding some basic definitions:

Scenario: a postulated sequence or development of events.

Reality: The conjectured state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or might be imagined.

Understanding the difference between these two things is the first challenge facing the AGW pleb.

rgw
not rated yet Jul 26, 2015
I am from tribes of Bulgarians and Hungarians.


Those countries are not in Africa! You are obviously a shill.
denglish
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
Anyone interested in the response to this scenario may find this interesting:

http://wattsupwit...wn-mind/

Some early Feedback:

Warmist AP climate reporter Seth Borenstein said he 'would not cover' Hansen's paper.

UN IPCC Lead Author Kevin Trenberth calls Hansen's study 'rife with speculation and 'what if' scenarios' and based on 'flimsy evidence.'

NYT's Andrew Revkin: "Associated Press, The New York Times, the BBC and The Guardian..among those who steered clear of [Hansen] study"

Even Michael Mann admits Hansen's sea level rise estimates are 'prone to a very large 'extrapolation error'

Gosh, and we have the usual suspects on this site defending it! What gives?
denglish
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 26, 2015
Heat, mankind releases about 1/1000th of the Sun's energy in waste heat.

Where do you get this figure Prophet? It seems very high given the sun's output.
greenonions
5 / 5 (7) Jul 26, 2015
denglish
Let me help you understand what you perceive as contradiction.


Not a perceived contradiction - an actual contradiction. Berating others for humiliating commenters, while at the same time humiliating commenters is an actual contradiction. Just as calling for civility, at the same time as using the word cunt towards another commenter - is an actual contradiction.
denglish
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
Not a perceived contradiction - an actual contradiction. Berating others for humiliating commenters, while at the same time humiliating commenters is an actual contradiction. Just as calling for civility, at the same time as using the word cunt towards another commenter - is an actual contradiction.

Wow. You are reeling. Are you sure you have a Master's Degree in Community Counseling?

Let's assume you are a trained communicator. You are then producing Red-Herrings into this discussion in order to conceal the fact that this "paper" is a baseless alarmist call to arms, and a rather poor one at that.

Or, lets go with what I suspect. You've learned from gkam how to create a persona on the internet. That's a mistake btw, psychic transparency is transparent. Then per your mentor's MO, you can only engage in personal attack.

But, again, what does any of this have to do with the article?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (24) Jul 26, 2015
Oh, have you given up screaming "Stolen Valor" since I sent you to military websites with my name and picture on them?

What did that have to do with AGW killing us?
??? What does your contrived mil service have to do with AGW you fucking addlebrain?

Your insanity is staring you right in the face old man.

You have nothing of value to offer here. You have proven yourself incapable of being honest.
greenonions
5 / 5 (7) Jul 26, 2015
Wow. You are reeling. Are you sure you have a Master's Degree in Community Counseling?


Funny thing isn't it. You are the one saying things like this
what does any of this have to do with the article?


But then you are the one bringing up irrelevant issues like if someone has a masters degree or not. See your contradictory nonsense.
denglish
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
Wow. You are reeling. Are you sure you have a Master's Degree in Community Counseling?


Funny thing isn't it. You are the one saying things like this
what does any of this have to do with the article?


But then you are the one bringing up irrelevant issues like if someone has a masters degree or not. See your contradictory nonsense.

What does this have to do with a paper on the way to academic ruin and a false claim re: AGW causing ocean sea level increase?

Are you sure you're a trained communicator? You are not demonstrating an ability to stay on topic.
Caliban
3.5 / 5 (11) Jul 26, 2015
denglish
Let me help you understand what you perceive as contradiction.


Not a perceived contradiction - an actual contradiction. Berating others for humiliating commenters, while at the same time humiliating commenters is an actual contradiction. Just as calling for civility, at the same time as using the word cunt towards another commenter - is an actual contradiction.


greenonions,

Please allow me to make one slight correction to this observation: what dongleash engages in is not mere contradiction --but rather naked hypocrisy.

One of many execrable qualities routinely exhibited by the troll.

It has yet to exhibit even a single admirable one.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (26) Jul 26, 2015
"You are not demonstrating an ability to stay on topic. "
--------------------------------

- Squeals the little boy who formerly screamed "Stolen Valor!".
Caliban
3.4 / 5 (10) Jul 26, 2015
It would be interesting, if true, though. I mean ConfoundedSociety trashed reputation with idiotic claims such that his name was synonymous with being wrong.[...]it's apparent no lesson was learned. He immediately trashed his own character so that, once again, denglish is synonymous with being wrong. But now he's added dishonesty to his character. (My apologies to ConfoundedSociety if this is wrong).


Oh, you can be certain of it, zzz. You will note the same stilted, poorly constructed and syntactically-challenged prose, designed to impress others as "educated" or "smart-sounding", but instead sound merely "self-educated"(and poorly, at that!) or "half-smart".
You'll also note the same use of citations that contradict assertions put forth in comments, the same hypocritical insistence upon fair play, the same narrow interest in subject matters commented upon.

I'm not sure how you missed the LibertaRandite misanthropy in the crap artist formerly known as CornholeScanty.
Caliban
3.2 / 5 (9) Jul 26, 2015
I wonder how the configuration of the continents plays into this scenario. Before the last ice age there was not a connection between N. America and South America. Not having the west to east ocean current played a part in huge changes to our climate. So I am curious as to what difference that would make now in comparison to when there was a west to east (Pacific to Atlantic) current.


Rockguy,

This is a hypothesis that would be easy to latch onto, but --in addition to what zzzzz already pointed out-- it should be remembered that the Earth has already undergone several epochs of profound glaciation in the absence of this Pacific-Atlantic barrier, namely, as "Snowball Earth" --and not only more than once, but also for far longer time periods.

All dongleash's trollblatt aside, though --you may be sure that the cause of our current difficulties is, in fact, none other than the thrice-denied AGW.
zz5555
5 / 5 (6) Jul 26, 2015
I'm not sure how you missed the LibertaRandite misanthropy in the crap artist formerly known as CornholeScanty.

You could be right. I put ConfoundedSociety on ignore early on when I figured out that he/she had nothing to contribute to any conversation. Come to think of it, the same can be said for denglish.
denglish
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
One of many execrable qualities routinely exhibited by the troll.

It has yet to exhibit even a single admirable one.

Censorship via humiliation is a transparent tactic, and far from a credible one. Reliance on populism, while being glorified by the media and politics, is extremely weak; that weakness exponentially multiplied by the number of its supporters.

- Squeals the little boy who formerly screamed "Stolen Valor!".

What does your alleged military service have to do with an alarmist article based on a rapidly dis-credited paper? Answer the question.

All dongleash's trollblatt aside, though --you may be sure that the cause of our current difficulties is, in fact, none other than the thrice-denied AGW.

Yep, all the models agree. the observations are wrong!
http://www.drroys...2013.png

Caliban
3.4 / 5 (10) Jul 26, 2015
Meanwhile 20,000 people every day starve to death.


Really, bluehigh --what do you think the consequences will be for the global poor if AGW continues unchecked?

You think 20,000 a day is high, crybaby?

Funny that this is the very first time that you've ever voiced any concern --much less compassion-- for the less fortunate of this world.

Which leads us to suspect mere hypocrisy.

Suspect, hell!

We know it.

Go piss your crokotroll tears up a rope.
denglish
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
I'm not sure how you missed the LibertaRandite misanthropy in the crap artist formerly known as CornholeScanty.

You could be right. I put ConfoundedSociety on ignore early on when I figured out that he/she had nothing to contribute to any conversation. Come to think of it, the same can be said for denglish.


Perhaps, or perhaps it is intellectual dishonesty. Perhaps you are unwilling to face up to the argument being that regarding AGW, humanity is innocent until proven guilty without a reasonable doubt. There is plenty of reasonable doubt, thus instituting moral and economic ruin as a global -or worse- local policy is very poor judgement.

Perhaps your desire to mute the other side is your complete buy-in to anthropocentrism.

gkam
1.5 / 5 (26) Jul 26, 2015
"Censorship via humiliation is a transparent tactic, and far from a credible one."
---------------------------------------

Such as screaming "stolen valor" repeatedly, even after being proven wrong? Just to smear others?

Hmmmm?
AGreatWhopper
2.3 / 5 (9) Jul 26, 2015
Besides invoices and account summaries, I snagged IP logs of posts during my little operation. Benni and Returners have the same IP address. A bit surprising where it is, but it's definitely not a proxy server.

lol He's not just an unemployed jerk idiot, he's one with fantasies of being a woman. Or his that your brain damaged idea of being cunning? Baldrick. lol If you're going to be A COMPLETE HORSES ASS and respond to him, maybe you should address him that way.

Perhaps your desire to mute the other side is your complete buy-in to anthropocentrism.


That means humans are the core meaning of everything. Returners, ryggeson, otto et al. are solipsists. The cornerstone of their mental illness is the belief that only their consciousness is real. It is the whole world; everything else is as insubstantial as a video game character. They have less than no respect for your life of the environment. Technically, to them, they don't exist.
Caliban
3 / 5 (8) Jul 26, 2015
One of many execrable qualities routinely exhibited by the troll.

It has yet to exhibit even a single admirable one.

Censorship via humiliation is a transparent tactic, and far from a credible one. Reliance on populism, while being glorified by the media and politics, is extremely weak; that weakness exponentially multiplied by the number of its supporters.


ha. ha-ha. hahaHah. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

WTF is that word salad even supposed to mean, dongleash? "dis-credited"? Really?

You are obviously incapable of feeling shame for your half-smart buffoonery.
Caliban
2.7 / 5 (7) Jul 26, 2015
One of many execrable qualities routinely exhibited by the troll:

- Squeals the little boy who formerly screamed "Stolen Valor!".

What does your alleged military service have to do with an alarmist article based on a rapidly dis-credited paper? Answer the question.


Nah, dongleash --you are the one who has made the assertion of a false claim of military service. so you are therefore the one required to provide proof of the allegation.

Shouldn't be any problem at all for a genius like the crap artist formerly known as CornholeScanty.

denglish
2.3 / 5 (6) Jul 26, 2015
You are obviously incapable of feeling shame for your half-smart buffoonery.

If I did, it would certainly make it easier for you to censor via humiliation, wouldn't it?

Yes, the paper being represented in this article is very rapidly being dis-credited.

Returners, ryggeson, otto et al. are solipsists.

This is a reach. Saying that a paper presenting a bogus scenario is being solipsistic? No, it is being skeptical of a BS proposition.

Such as screaming "stolen valor" repeatedly, even after being proven wrong?

You seek to create a false real-life persona in order to gain internet credibility. After being revealed (by your own action), you exploit internet anonymity to double down endlessly on the lies you have fabricated. You are a sad, sad, person.

So much smoke being blown in defense of a failed attempt at alarmism. wtf is up with this place? Its like watching an AGW trainwreck!

greenonions
5 / 5 (6) Jul 26, 2015
Denglish
What does this have to do with a paper on the way to academic ruin and a false claim re: AGW causing ocean sea level increase?


Nothing at all denglish - so why are you bringing up irrelevant issues like people's military service, or if someone has a masters degree or not? It is you who is constantly contradictory - demanding that we stay on topic - but then bringing up irrelevant issues.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (25) Jul 26, 2015
"You seek to create a false real-life persona in order to gain internet credibility."
------------------------------------
Really? Do you believe I created those military websites with all the pictures and words and stories and contacts? Did I rack up the front page of the base newspaper, with those stories and pics on just to fool you?? Did I seed the internet with some of my reviews, . . on the websites of others?

You got fooled, all right, . . by your own pathetic little ego.
Caliban
2.8 / 5 (9) Jul 26, 2015
One of many execrable qualities routinely exhibited by the troll:

Yep, all the models agree. the observations are wrong!

http://www.drroys...2013.png



Inane, yet incomprehensible.

And obviously, it escapes the crap artist formerly known as CornholeScanty that we are well aware DrRoySpencer's publication has exactly zero meaning, and that the spotty-bottomed troll is pointedly ignoring the fact.

All for the sake of (not)proving a point.

How droll.

I mean --troll.

Caliban
2.8 / 5 (9) Jul 26, 2015
You are obviously incapable of feeling shame for your half-smart buffoonery.

If I did, it would certainly make it easier for you to censor via humiliation, wouldn't it?


Why, yes, dongleash --yes it would.

Of course, for one such as you, being incapable of feeling shame --and far much less, humiliation-- makes this irrelevant.

Thus my point.

Yes, the paper being represented in this article is very rapidly being dis-credited


And you still haven't figured out that "dis-credited" is improper construction?

Incapable, irrelevant, improper moron.

denglish
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 26, 2015
or if someone has a masters degree or not

Because the truth will set you, gkam, and now zzz555, free. Except zzz555 showed more courage and bumped his character up to a PhD.

I feel sorry for you guys. You have bound yourselves in this need to be something that you aren't in order to gain internet credibility, and after being called on it, can muster nothing else but a defense of the fabrication. What a nightmare for you. It is very sad to watch.

You got fooled, all right

No, i didn't. you are a fraud, fixated on saving face at every turn.

Inane, yet incomprehensible.

You don't know what inane means.

Incomprehensible: I'm sorry, its very simple. I explained it to zzz555 in another thread.

demanding that we stay on topic

That would be nice, but it isn't expected. There's no meat there for you guys.
denglish
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
Why, yes, dongleash --yes it would.

I already knew that, but thanks for confirming.

Of course, for one such as you, being incapable of feeling shame --and far much less, humiliation-- makes this irrelevant.

Then why do you insist on it. The AGWites seem to have a peculiar predilection for employing unsound tactics.

"dis-credited" is improper construction?

Thank you for pointing out that you can deal with proper grammatical constructs.

The paper that this article refers to is rapidly becoming discredited.

There you go.

Incapable, irrelevant, improper moron.

That's an odd signature.

gkam
1.6 / 5 (29) Jul 26, 2015
Dinkle-ish is back on Ignore, where he makes more sense, . . . and less of an offensive nuisance.
denglish
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 26, 2015
Dinkle-ish is back on Ignore, where he makes more sense, . . . and less of an offensive nuisance.

So you took your ball and went home after you found out that the rules you play by are not the real rules.

Good bye. Your ridiculousness will not be shielded by your cowardice.
greenonions
5 / 5 (7) Jul 26, 2015
denglish
Because the truth will set you free


Except that is not the point. The point is that you are demanding that folks stay on topic - and then when it suits your purpose - you bring up irrelevant issues like people's military service. So stop going around in circles - and be consistent. It is just the same with the rudeness issue. Either demand civility - and then practice it yourself, or leave the issue alone. Stop being a hypocrite.
denglish
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 26, 2015
Stop being a hypocrite.

By hypocrite, do you mean liar?

Why should a liar not be opposed as a person who by virtue of lack of credibility, has no input to the topic that holds any value?

Again, I ask. Why are you focused on red-herring subjects thus obfuscating the weakness of the article? It seems that you are caught up in the same self-created trap that gkam is in. You've created a false persona, and are now in a position where (in your mind) the only viable option is to defend.

I say it because I feel compassion for you. Release yourself from this nightmare. Be satisfied by what you are, not what anonymity affords you the opportunity to claim.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.1 / 5 (27) Jul 26, 2015
Dinkle-ish is back on Ignore, where he makes more sense, . . . and less of an offensive nuisance
More cowardice from the great war hero who lived in thailand.
greenonions
4.6 / 5 (10) Jul 26, 2015
denglish
By hypocrite, do you mean liar?


No - I mean hypocrite. My position has been very clear.

Why should a liar not be opposed as a person who by virtue of lack of credibility, has no input to the topic that holds any value?


That sentence makes no sense. Do you not proof your comments?
gkam
1.7 / 5 (28) Jul 26, 2015
"More cowardice from the great war hero who lived in thailand."
--------------------------------

otto,you idiot, all of our 22 technicians we lost flying out of Thailand. Most of the Prisoners of War in Vietnam were those who flew out of Thailand.

You owe me and the others who served an apology. Or perhaps we'll have to out you to everybody? I'm tired of your single-minded little personal screeds.
denglish
2.3 / 5 (9) Jul 26, 2015
denglish
By hypocrite, do you mean liar?


No - I mean hypocrite. My position has been very clear.

Why should a liar not be opposed as a person who by virtue of lack of credibility, has no input to the topic that holds any value?


That sentence makes no sense. Do you not proof your comments?

You need to work on your definitions and reading comprehension.

Sorry, its true. The Master's Degree you claimed to have is falsified by every post you make. I say this not to be mean, but to help you get back to reality.
denglish
2 / 5 (8) Jul 26, 2015
"More cowardice from the great war hero who lived in thailand."
--------------------------------

otto,you idiot, all of our 22 technicians we lost flying out of Thailand. Most of the Prisoners of War in Vietnam were those who flew out of Thailand.

You owe me and the others who served an apology. Or perhaps we'll have to out you to everybody? I'm tired of your single-minded little personal screeds.

This person continues to double down on their lies. Making it worse and worse for them, while defiling the service that was truly rendered. It is disgusting to witness, but that same disgust re-strengthens the desire to oppose such grotesque behavior.

The AGW crowd is a weak lot. I wonder if the IPCC knows how they're being represented on this website.
greenonions
4.6 / 5 (11) Jul 26, 2015
Denglish
Why should a liar not be opposed as a person who by virtue of lack of credibility, has no input to the topic that holds any value?


Do you really not realize that this sentence makes no sense?
howhot2
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 26, 2015
Cataclysmic changes are really coming soon to the human race. Deniers like the @dinglberry above are so clueless on climate change, global warming and developing mass extinction from mankind's assault on his environment. CO2 is now 402.80 and climbing, and the easy to understand greenhouse effect is becoming large everyday. Science has June 2015 as the hottest month EVER in recorded history,

https://www.ncdc....1506.gif

It'[s deniers like @dingleberry (aka: denglish) that are such cowards to the rightwing that they won't even stand up, get a spine and admit they are wrong wrong wrong on AGW and that action needs to be done stop CO2 generation from combustion of fossil fuels (GAS, OIL and COAL).

denglish
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 26, 2015
Denglish
Why should a liar not be opposed as a person who by virtue of lack of credibility, has no input to the topic that holds any value?


Do you really not realize that this sentence makes no sense?

If you cannot understand a complex sentence, then you are not a trained communicator.

How about you break free from the lie that you have a Master's in Community Counseling now?

that action needs to be done stop CO2 generation from combustion of fossil fuels

What is your solution?
Returners
2 / 5 (12) Jul 26, 2015
James Hansen is riight on the money. You deniers just don't get how bad all of this is going to be. Imagine the worst scenario and that is what is going to happen with global warming.


I hear life was doing just fine during the Triassic, when CO2 was some 4 times higher than today and temperatures were supposedly around 10 degrees higher.
Uncle Ira
4.6 / 5 (28) Jul 26, 2015
I hear life was doing just fine during the Triassic, when CO2 was some 4 times higher than today and temperatures were supposedly around 10 degrees higher.


Well golly gee Returnering-Skippy. You might have a point there. I wonder though, Cher, how fine they would have been doing with 7 billions Skippys all competing with each other for the shady spots?
Rockguy
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 26, 2015
Caliban, z555 I was questioning how accurate of a comparison it was when the locations of the continents were not the same as they are today. I am aware of other past glaciations, although caused by many factors, I believe the arrangement of continents plays a large process on what kind of climate the earth has. I seem to recall that one of the prior glaciations occured when most of the continental land mass was located in the southern hemisphere. Granted that is an oversimplification as not all mechanisms involved for glaciation ars 100% understood. Also z555 if I read your quote correctly it seems that more moisture was in the North causing cooling. It seems to me that while not the cause of the start of the last glaciation 30mya it had some serious implacations on the advance of some the later glaciers.
verkle
Jul 27, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
howhot2
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 27, 2015
Denglish
Why should a liar not be opposed as a person who by virtue of lack of credibility, has no input to the topic that holds any value?


Do you really not realize that this sentence makes no sense?

If you cannot understand a complex sentence, then you are not a trained communicator.

How about you break free from the lie that you have a Master's in Community Counseling now?

that action needs to be done stop CO2 generation from combustion of fossil fuels

What is your solution?


I already told you the SOLUTION idiot. Stop combustion of FOSSIL fuels and the problem is solved! But it had better be very quick as this green house gas problem is coming at planet Earth like a freight train from hell. In 50 years or less, we could kill most of life on Earth, not by war, but by slothfulness. You would be a moron to not be concerned at mankind's folly.
ThomasQuinn
2.5 / 5 (21) Jul 27, 2015


DONGlish and his clown puppets

Stopped there. Insult is the last refuge of an exhausted intellect.


Indeed it is, and you rarely offer anything other than insults and bullying. You are among the most vile, dishonest, EVIL 'people' I have ever encountered. I am very glad that I do not share a single aspect of your world-view, as anything becomes tainted the moment you touch it. You are completely devoid of integrity, morality and basic human decency - essentially, you are a monster.
ThomasQuinn
2.6 / 5 (20) Jul 27, 2015
Stop being a hypocrite.


I say it because I feel compassion for you. Release yourself from this nightmare. Be satisfied by what you are, not what anonymity affords you the opportunity to claim.


You know damn well that you are lying. You don't even know what compassion is - you are so consumed by hate, obsessed with propaganda and pre-occupied with spreading misinformation that any humanity you might've had was lost years ago. You are a moral void, and you know it - therefore, the above is a clear example of a barefaced lie.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 27, 2015
insults and bullying


What is fascinating are the emotions elicited, especially in in the AGW 'discussions'.

Such emotions are usually reserved for political and religious topics, not science, supporting the proposition that AGW is less about science and more about religion and politics.

I wouldn't blame science as the real science is quite challenging. The basics are straightforward, but applying the physics to such a large, emergent system as a planet's climate, with inputs from the planet core to super nova is beyond most of today's science abilities to model and predict.
greenonions
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 27, 2015
ryggy
Such emotions are usually reserved for political and religious topics,


And shows that you have no understanding - of what many of us perceive as the stakes regarding this subject. As always - we are very much in a cultural transition. Science is how we are prying open the secrets of our universe. Science is of course therefore a great threat to established world views (such as religionists). Science is therefore attacked by those threatened (see antigoracle etc.) - and yes - the emotions run strong.

the real science is quite challenging.


And given that reality - it makes sense to listen to those who have spent their lives studying the subject - as opposed to weekend internet warriors - who claim some superior insight - over the whole community of climate scientists.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 27, 2015
perceive as the stakes regarding this subject


Of course I do.
The stakes are losing control of the world.
gkam
1.4 / 5 (27) Jul 27, 2015
"The stakes are losing control of the world."
----------------------------------

You do not control the world.
runrig
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 27, 2015
Denglish
Why should a liar not be opposed as a person who by virtue of lack of credibility, has no input to the topic that holds any value?


Do you really not realize that this sentence makes no sense?

Double Dutch to me too.
runrig
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 27, 2015
I hear life was doing just fine during the Triassic, when CO2 was some 4 times higher than today and temperatures were supposedly around 10 degrees higher.


Well golly gee Returnering-Skippy. You might have a point there. I wonder though, Cher, how fine they would have been doing with 7 billions Skippys all competing with each other for the shady spots?

LOL:
Not to mention places to retreat to when the tide comes in.
runrig
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 27, 2015
Well I sure hope they are right this time, as almost every prediction by prominent weather scientists in the past .


Ah, that one again.
I would be fascinated to learn of any prediction, let alone "almost every prediction" that "have not panned out as expected" with regard to AGW. Disregarding the easily debunked "arctic ice gone by 2013"
This, for the simple (and bl**dy obvious) reason that we aren't anywhere near when they will happen.
FFS
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (24) Jul 27, 2015
"More cowardice from the great war hero who lived in thailand."
--------------------------------

otto,you idiot, all of our 22 technicians we lost flying out of Thailand. Most of the Prisoners of War in Vietnam were those who flew out of Thailand.

You owe me and the others who served an apology. Or perhaps we'll have to out you to everybody? I'm tired of your single-minded little personal screeds.
If you were an honest decent kind of person I would apologize.

But you are a self-centered, lying egomaniac, according to all the evidence.

For instance you were a 20yo noncom tech when you claimed to be designing, installing, and operating spy equipt directly for macnamara.

This is obviously a lie.

And as such you have nothing in common with the vets whom I typically admire. You have no business pretending to be one of them.
we'll have to out you to everybody?
Out me... are you threatening me gutless?
greenonions
5 / 5 (8) Jul 27, 2015
Ryggy
The stakes are losing control of the world.


You'll have to splain that one to me Ryggy. Who do you think controls the world? Who is going to take this control away from them?

The stakes I talk of - are the possibility that we tip the climate - and cause runaway warming. I am not saying this is going to happen. I am saying it is a possibility. So - who do we look to to inform us about the climate - as the situation unfolds - one year at a time? I think that the smart money - is to look to the community of scientists - who have spent their lives studying this stuff. I am in favor of looking towards win/win responses - such as the development of technologies - that will eliminate green house gas emissions, and provide cheap renewable power and transport into the future. Yes - I think it is OK to get upset - when carnival barkers like goracle - attack the science.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (24) Jul 27, 2015
all of our 22 technicians we lost flying out of Thailand
Are you claiming now that you werent a 20yo noncom technician as well at the time? Perhaps you were commandant or something.

More lies uncovered.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (26) Jul 27, 2015
Otto, stop it!

You have gone too far, demeaning the lives of those we lost in the war you dodged. You are sickening.

The rest of you can go to 1stwave.com or look up the 553 Reconnaissance Wing or the Electronic Battlefield to see we orbited the battlefields and the Trail and Khe Sanh simultaneously, 24/7/365 for years, unarmed, in aircraft stuffed with electronics, technicians and operators. It is dangerous business, otto. Before we lost our 22, another group of us lost 33, most of whose bodies were never recovered.

What did YOU do, otto? It's time for YOU to tell us what YOU were doing while the rest of us served.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (26) Jul 27, 2015
"For instance you were a 20yo noncom tech when you claimed to be designing, installing, and operating spy equipt directly for macnamara."
-----------------------------
He was SecDef McNamara. Those of you who were too scared to enlist usually are ignorant of that. Actually, I was 22 and not yet a noncom when I got classified orders to leave Edwards and report a month later for a group which didn't exist.

We put it together, invented our own mock-ups and test setups, built everything we would need, worked the bugs out of the special aircraft and systems in Field Four at Eglin, then deployed to Korat to start Igloo White. And yes, I did develop some systems for the shop.

Yeah, we were McNamara's idea, and got the Presidential Priority for parts and anything else we wanted. And we earned two "Outstanding Unit Citations with Combat "V" Device" while I was in the group.

Look us up, just so you can be embarrassed.
ThomasQuinn
2 / 5 (16) Jul 27, 2015
gkam, I am on your side as far as trolling Otto is concerned, but I find "too scared to enlist" a rather offensive remark re the Vietnam War. An undeclared, illegal, immoral, pointless war that killed thousands of Americans and millions of Vietnamese for no good reason, under orders from a leadership that did not understand what it was doing or who it was backing up. The Diem-regime was evil, dictatorial and oppressive, and the fear that Vietnam would become a vassal to China or the SU was a complete delusion that any expert on Indo-Chinese history could have (and DID) blow holes in at the time - China and Russia were seen as colonizing imperialists just as much as the French and the Americans.

Avoiding the draft, a draft that should not have existed for an UNDECLARED war, is not a matter of being scared or of cowardice, but of refusing to do evil. Many people went to jail over it. Many more had to leave their country for it. McNamera admitted that war was wrong. Why won't you?
denglish
2.1 / 5 (7) Jul 27, 2015
Stop combustion of FOSSIL fuels and the problem is solved!

What do you propose to replace it with? Keep in mind that currently, there are no viable alternatives, and the very thing you stand against is the only power source capable of seeing us through to viable alternatives.

You would be a moron to not be concerned at mankind's folly.

Great point. Here's what our folly said would happen vs. what is actually happening:
http://www.drroys...2013.png
Re: our folly, I am very concerned. We are using falsified science to institute moral and economically chaotic social policies.

Look us up, just so you can be embarrassed.

This is the same person that said the US sold nuclear weapons to N Korea and Pakistan. Yeah, its embarrassing.

And we earned two "Outstanding Unit Citations with Combat "V" Device" while I was in the group.

Stolen valor is stolen.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 27, 2015
You'll have to splain that one to me Ryggy

Not surprised.
The whole point of the IPCC is to control the world's economy.
Global socialism.

I am saying it is a possibility.


It's also possible and quite likely the earth will be hit by a large asteroid at any time.
The stakes there are quite significant and well documented. But no chicken little hysteria from Gaia worshipers. Why?
Maybe because the solution does not involve controlling the lives of others as all the AGWite 'solutions' do.
such as the development of technologies

Who will develop technologies when the economy is bankrupt and destroyed by the state?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (25) Jul 27, 2015
look up the 553 Reconnaissance Wing or the Electronic Battlefield to see we orbited the battlefields and the Trail and Khe Sanh simultaneously, 24/7/365 for years, unarmed, in aircraft stuffed with electronics, technicians and operators. It is dangerous business, otto. Before we lost our 22, another group of us lost 33, most of whose bodies were never recovered
This has nothing to do with the lies you post. It lends NO credence to the facts you make up, whether some or all of it is a lie.

WHAT YOUVE DONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT YOU POST. Your facts need to pass scrutiny and they rarely do.

You are reminded of this daily. The fact that you continue to insist that it does is PATHETIC. It means you are quite obviously INSANE.

"No matter how much suffering they cause others and no matter how much they, themselves, get into trouble as a result of their lies, psychopaths remain pathological liars and frauds throughout their lives."
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (25) Jul 27, 2015
We put it together, invented our own mock-ups and test setups, built everything we would need, worked the bugs out of the special aircraft and systems in Field Four at Eglin, then deployed to Korat to start Igloo White. And yes, I did develop some systems for the shop
WHO GIVES A SHIT???

You never fail to take advantage of an opportunity to talk about yourself, as if the world is just waiting to hear.

WHAT YOUVE DONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT YOU POST. Your facts need to pass scrutiny and they rarely do.

Your lies are lies no matter what you may have done in your past.

"Psychopaths lie pathologically to others about pretty much everything: their past, their present and their future..."

-You like to talk about your VA psycho ward experiences. Exactly what is it youre being treated for? Be honest now.

Otto, stop it!
Not ever. Myself and others will continue to expose you daily.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (26) Jul 27, 2015
"Many more had to leave their country for it. McNamera admitted that war was wrong. Why won't you?"
----------------------------------

I came home in a delirium in November because of my loud opposition to the war in June of '68, with five months left to go.

I am against wars, which is why I am against those who wave the biggest flags while screaming "Bring 'em on!", while hiding from it themselves. This clown otto has denigrated my service while having no character of his own, and no service. You know to whom I was talking, not those who had genuine opposition to that war, . . which I had as well.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (24) Jul 27, 2015
I am against wars, which is why I am against those who wave the biggest flags while screaming "Bring 'em on!", while hiding from it themselves
Again, who cares?
This clown otto has denigrated my service
I denigrate your lies and fabrications. I denigrate your attempts to verify them by citing your failed career and your obvious lack of relevant education and experience.

I only assume that most of what you claim re your service is a lie, because thats what you do isnt it?

Lie?
I came home in a delirium in November because of my loud opposition to the war in June of '68
-So was this a dishonorable discharge or only a medical/psycho discharge?
gkam
1.3 / 5 (26) Jul 27, 2015
"So was this a dishonorable discharge or only a medical/psycho discharge?"
-------------------------------------

More adolescent nonsense, from somebody who hid when it was his time to serve. So he turns bully, trying to scream loud enough and continuously enough to make someone believe him and me to go away. He was so sure he had caught another liar, lurker/sniper like his own admission about himself, but found a real person this time.

And he can't get over it.

Go through his posts and see how many are regarding the issues and how many are evidence of his bizarre fixation.

Look at his filthy words in all caps, his never-ending confusions over who said what, anything to salve his little bruised ego. His silly games got trumped by reality.
greenonions
4.7 / 5 (12) Jul 27, 2015
Ryggy
The whole point of the IPCC is to control the world's economy.


Well - not surprised that we disagree on that one. I am sure you can scurry off and find some misquotes from a novel somewhere to support that one.

Who will develop technologies when the economy is bankrupt and destroyed by the state?


Well Greece just went bankrupt - not sure you can blame the IPCC for that. Otherwise - I see the development of cheap, clean, non polluting energy sources as a very definite net plus for economies. Oil is killing us at the moment. If oil goes up - oh my god - the economy crashes. If oil goes down - oh my god - the economy crashes. We will be will rid of that roller coaster. I think that Europe will be will served by cutting their dependence on Putin.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 27, 2015
we disagree on that one


Yet you claim to support the data, regardless of where it takes.

Greece just went bankrupt -

Blame the socialist govt and people of Greece who believed they could live off other people's money.

What new technology has Greece invented lately?

I see the development of cheap, clean, non polluting energy sources as a very definite net plus for economies.


And the watermelons, green socialists, are opposed to nuclear power which is the closest technology for the unicorn you just described.

TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (24) Jul 27, 2015
Go through his posts and see how many are regarding the issues and how many are evidence of his bizarre fixation
Go through georges posts and see how many of them are about him. Each thread offers an excuse for george to talk about himself.

See how he tries to claim that his dozen or so failed temp jobs give him the right to post lies and make up facts.

George is a liar, a bullshit artist, and an egomaniac. He exhibits all the symptoms of a psychopath.

Tell us what you are under long-term treatment for down at the VA.

After all, YOU brought it up.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (27) Jul 27, 2015
Once again:
otto, you are developing a really intense fixation on me since I showed the folks your bragging about hiding behind pseudonyms playing your "games" here.

You thought you had found another phony like yourself, and could not wait to "out" him. But after you screamed I was lying about being in the Air Force, then in the 553rd, then doing contract research, then at PG&E, then a consultant, you got madder and more emotional until it became your all-encompassing mania, dominating your tiny little life.

Work done, I guess I can go now.
Uncle Ira
4.6 / 5 (27) Jul 27, 2015
Once again:
otto, you are developing a really intense fixation on me since I showed the folks your bragging about hiding behind pseudonyms playing your "games" here.

You thought you had found another phony like yourself, and could not wait to "out" him. But after you screamed I was lying about being in the Air Force, then in the 553rd, then doing contract research, then at PG&E, then a consultant, you got madder and more emotional until it became your all-encompassing mania, dominating your tiny little life.

Work done, I guess I can go now.


@ glam-Skippy. I am sure you know that what you say there is not really so, but hope other Skippys reading it will think is so. But otto-Skippy has been serving up your head on a platter for days and weeks now. And all you are doing is proving his point. Real peoples who has got all the accomplishments like you claim don't act like you.They don't even take part in that sort of thing.

And I will P.S. for you for the rest.
Uncle Ira
4.7 / 5 (26) Jul 27, 2015
since I showed the folks your bragging about hiding behind pseudonyms playing your "games" here.

You thought you had found another phony like yourself, and could not wait to "out" him. But after you screamed I was lying about being in the Air Force, then in the 553rd, then doing contract research, then at PG&E, then a consultant, you got madder and more emotional until it became your all-encompassing mania, dominating your tiny little life.

Work done, I guess I can go now.


P.S. for you glam-Skippy. That thing is just the sort of thing that Really-Skippy writes all the time. That is how I know he not the "Rreal-Scientist-Since-He-Was-9-years-Old-And-Now-Is-65." And real accomplished peoples don't talk like you two do in your postums.

You do like most of the peoples here do when telling about how special everything they ever done is.You over play your hand and double and triple down.

Advice Cher, you don't have what it takes to beat otto-Skippy at this game.
howhot2
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 27, 2015
Stop combustion of FOSSIL fuels and the problem is solved!

What do you propose to replace it with?

I don't know. Why don't you don't you figure it out? I already have and there isn't much of a future for mankind if we depend on fossil fuel. We need to change the world for the LONG TERM. That means we have to start with energy. The Sun pumps in multi-terrawatts of energy per year, so use it! Fossil fuels will run out, cause a global financial melt down and likely will cause a world annihilation war. Solve it now, or solve it with your kids.

At issue is mankind's future and I'm shocked at how stupid deniers are in general.

greenonions
4.6 / 5 (10) Jul 27, 2015
Ryggy
Yet you claim to support the data, regardless of where it takes


But I don't see that the data supports your OPINION that the IPCC is trying to take over the world.

And the watermelons, green socialists, are opposed to nuclear power which is the closest technology for the unicorn you just described.


Well you just keep your head shoved firmly up your ass Ryggy . Mean time - renewable energy is gaining ground - and you aint seen nothing yet. For the record - I support nuclear - but don't think it will compete on economic grounds with wind and solar. Happy to be proved wrong on that - guess I am not a watermelon eh?

howhot2
4 / 5 (8) Jul 27, 2015
Bottom line: Here is what we all (you too R2) have to deal with;

https://www.ncdc....1506.gif
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 27, 2015
"Advice Cher, you don't have what it takes to beat otto-Skippy at this game."
---------------------------------------

What is it with you silly folk and your games? Are you here to play games?

I divulged my name website, sites to prove my experiences, and you can't deal with it?

Boo-hoo.

Who are you, Toots?

Uncle Ira
4.7 / 5 (25) Jul 27, 2015
I divulged my name website, sites to prove my experiences, and you can't deal with it?

There was not one thing on any of those sites that proves any experiences Skippy. And because you insist hard that the proofs are in there, it causes peoples to look that much harder and harder. Skippy it just is not there non.

Boo-hoo.


Non Cher, not me never.

Who are you, Toots?


Me I am Ira, no more and no less. But then I do not make a bunch claims to make myself more expert than the experts. I am just the average sort of guy who never done nothing that would interest anybody except my family and neighbors.

But hooyeei Skippy. If you think there is one person on this place that believes all that Commander McBragg doo-doo, carry right on and laissez les bons temps rouler Skippy.

antigoracle
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 28, 2015
Stop combustion of FOSSIL fuels and the problem is solved!

What do you propose to replace it with?

I don't know. Why don't you don't you figure it out? I already have and there isn't much of a future for mankind if we depend on fossil fuel. We need to change the world for the LONG TERM. That means we have to start with energy. The Sun pumps in multi-terrawatts of energy per year, so use it! Fossil fuels will run out, cause a global financial melt down and likely will cause a world annihilation war. Solve it now, or solve it with your kids.

At issue is mankind's future and I'm shocked at how stupid deniers are in general.


This coming from the moron who rode into NYC burning, you guessed it, fossil fuel, all so that he could have a block party with his man-crush, Al. He's now indignant because he couldn't get within sniffing distance of Al's anus.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 28, 2015
OPINION that the IPCC is trying to take over the world.


It's not an opinion that the IPCC desires to control the world.

renewable energy is gaining ground


So? Wind and solar will never be substitutes for hydrocarbon fuels and nuclear. Not enough energy density or duration.
When you destroy coal, oil, gas and nuclear, where will the energy come from to mine and manufacture all the hardware needed for 'renewables'?
ThomasQuinn
2.6 / 5 (22) Jul 28, 2015
OPINION that the IPCC is trying to take over the world.


It's not an opinion that the IPCC desires to control the world.



It's not just an opinion, it's a conspiracy theory.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 28, 2015
"Sustainable development and equity provide a basis for assessing climate policies"
"Climate change has the characteristics of a collective action problem at the global scale,"
"Issues of equity, justice, and fairness arise with respect to mitigation and adaptation"
"The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is the main multilateral forum
focused on addressing climate change, with nearly universal participation"
IPCC, 2014: Summary for Policymakers,

The entire report is geared toward govts and what they must control to 'save the planet'.

greenonions
5 / 5 (7) Jul 28, 2015
Ryggy.
So? Wind and solar will never be substitutes for hydrocarbon fuels and nuclear. Not enough energy density or duration. When you destroy coal, oil, gas and nuclear, where will the energy come from to mine and manufacture all the hardware needed for 'renewables'


There is more than enough energy coming from the sun - to run an advanced technological world. Now add to that - wind, geothermal, wave, tidal, otec, biofuels, hydro - and personally I am good with nukes - although we will probably not use them - as they are too expensive. You have just shown that you are taking totally out of you ass.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
Ira, I am not going to send you anywhere. Your little mind is made up, and you feel fat and secure in your little game. Just sit in them-there swamps and think you are smarter than those of us who don't.

Ain't been in Loooziana since I did the job in the GM plant in Fayetteville, for SWEPCO. When lightning strikes the transmission line in Texass, the sub-cycle drop would stop the Fanuc robots.

I was surprised you folk had electricity, until I saw Grand Gulf, the Disaster-in-Waiting.
denglish
2.1 / 5 (7) Jul 28, 2015
Here's an interesting tidbit going out over the internet today:

The measured US temperature data from USHCN shows that the US is on a long-term cooling trend. But the reported temperatures from NOAA show a strong warming trend.

https://stevengod...at-noaa/

I wonder which data set the rising sea scenario used.

Anyway, this thread is kaput. See ya in the next one.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Jul 28, 2015
Ryggy.
So? Wind and solar will never be substitutes for hydrocarbon fuels and nuclear. Not enough energy density or duration. When you destroy coal, oil, gas and nuclear, where will the energy come from to mine and manufacture all the hardware needed for 'renewables'


There is more than enough energy coming from the sun - to run an advanced technological world. Now add to that - wind, geothermal, wave, tidal, otec, biofuels, hydro - and personally I am good with nukes - although we will probably not use them - as they are too expensive. You have just shown that you are taking totally out of you ass.


How are you going to get their with both energy hands tide behind your back by the state?

All your unicorns require capital: energy, money, wealth to create.
Wishing for unicorn won't make them appear.
Want them faster? Untie the hands of capitalism.
You won't because control is most important to the socialist.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (26) Jul 28, 2015
Capitalism? The kind which needed us to guarantee the loans for $8,300,000,000 so Georgia Power could build two new untested nukes? How far behind are they? How far over budget?

Look outside: You're losing.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (22) Jul 28, 2015
Once again:
otto, you are developing a really intense fixation on me since I showed the folks your bragging about hiding behind pseudonyms playing your "games" here
Yes it's true, you are a particularly egregious example of the sort of lying, posturing abusers who I hate.

In this thread we've uncovered the lie that you were a tech in nam because, as you stated, all the techs in your unit were killed.

So you were merely a fetcher, a grunt, who by your own estimation had gained special insight into the nature of war just by being there. While sleeping in thailand.

Again you insult the memories of those techs who died by pretending to be one (if indeed it's not one of your lies).

You owe them an apology for abusing their memory for your own selfish ends.
Uncle Ira
4.6 / 5 (21) Jul 28, 2015
Ira, I am not going to send you anywhere. Your little mind is made up, and you feel fat and secure in your little game. Just sit in them-there swamps and think you are smarter than those of us who don't.


Well thank you Skippy, I think I will do that thing and be happy doing it.

Ain't been in Loooziana since I did the job in the GM plant in Fayetteville, for SWEPCO. When lightning strikes the transmission line in Texass, the sub-cycle drop would stop the Fanuc robots.


Well Skippy that sure does sound like engineer talk. How long ago you were not in Fayetteville Looosiana?

I was surprised you folk had electricity, until I saw Grand Gulf, the Disaster-in-Waiting.


How did you get from Fayetteville Looosiana all the way to Grand Gulf to see the Disaster-in-Waiting? You take the boat down the river or did you ride on the car?

Seems to me like you still "ain't been to Looosiana" because none of those places are in Louisiana.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Jul 28, 2015
There's not one thing on any of those sites which proves that gkam is a messiah
-What? What about this obviously valid testimony from just some of the millions of engineers that george delivered unto salvation?

"You are the best!"

"I've been an electrical engineer for over 15 years, . . . and this is the first time I really understood it!"

" Excellent! This was one of the most fruitful and educational workshops that I've had the privilege to attend"

"Mr. George Kamburoff was one of the most captivating speakers I've ever witnessed."

"Course should have been longer."

"Couldn't be better."

"Excellent seminar! So was the instructor."

"The big factor for me was the practical, down to earth level which he presented the info."

"The guy was great! Bring him back."

" This guy has answered the right calling..."

-I'm sure they can't ALL be hallucination.

What was that scene in I Claudius when the senile old emperor hallucinated the cheering masses?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
Oops, the GM plant making the pickups was in Shreveport. "Fed'ville" was a different job in another state. Most affected was the Urethane Robot, which puts the sealant on the rear window, then hands it to a worker, who puts it in. Yeah, I know you saw other facilities in which the robot puts it on the car, but this is how they did it in Shreveport.

Sorry, Ira. Did you look up the difference between cooling towers and deaeration stacks? Do you know what comes out of those stacks. and why they are so HIGH?

Tell me next what you doubt, and we'll clear it up for you.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Jul 28, 2015
I divulged my name website, sites to prove my experiences, and you can't deal with it?
But you haven't atoned for your lies and bullshit fabrications.

Attaching your real name to them only shows the readers here what a liar and bullshitter george kamburoff really is.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.6 / 5 (21) Jul 28, 2015
Oops, the GM plant making the pickups was in Shreveport. "Fed'ville" was a different job in another state
-So how many jobs does that make now? I estimate 20 and counting.

George the masses want to know. List your entire CV along with dates on your cute little website so that we may better appreciate the full depth and breadth of your incompetence.

Iknowiknow it wasn't YOUR incompetence but your extreme bad luck at being hired by every incompetent supervisor in the continental US. And thailand.
gkam
1 / 5 (23) Jul 28, 2015
BTW, that "I'll clear it up for you" was not snarky. I do not need any more of that in the posts.

I am real. Go to Stumpy for a copy of the Edwards base paper. If you want more, tell me. You can look up reactions to my lectures using my name and 7X24Exchange, a group of data center designers, builders and owners.

But stop the sniping.
Uncle Ira
4.8 / 5 (21) Jul 28, 2015
Oops,


Say that a lot, do you?

Well don't be discouraged Cher, it is a easy to mistake Fayetteville somewhere and Grand Gulf not-in-Louisiana for being a Disaster-in-Waiting. I am sure it happens all the time to peoples who have never been here.

Tell me next what you doubt, and we'll clear it up for you.


How you are now confused again with the stacks. Yeah, maybe you can clear that up for me.

Cher, I think you got the flue gas stacks mixed up with the deaeration stacks. Deareation stacks don't vent any thing but steam and they are not particularly tall. Bet you looked at a picture of flue gas stacks somewhere then read some other place about deaeration and got mixed up. Flue gas stacks are the tall ones, because they need to be tall to draw good.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
Ira, before you "bet", I suggest you consider I know nuke plants and combustion plants, and you do not. Flue gases? From nukes? And the stacks for diesel-generators are very short and wider.

Did you look up deaerators, because that is how they vent the radioactive gases from the cooling loops. I'll look it up for you, Cher.
Uncle Ira
4.8 / 5 (21) Jul 28, 2015
But stop the sniping.


Cher, you joined this place with sniping one liners from day one, and every day since then. If you didn't want the attentions, you should have remained in the background and not making your self stand out so much.

You started the sniping Cher from your very first postum here. When a couyon thinks he is witty glibby and quicky he usually trips and stumbles before he even gets to the tall grasses.

If I was going to pretend to be a lawyer, I would not pick the American Lawyers Association forum to do it. If I was going to pretend to be a doctor I would not go to a physician's lounge in the hospital to do it. You came to the Physorg Science place to pretend to be the engineer and scientist. What did you expect would happen?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Jul 28, 2015
Go to Stumpy for a copy of the Edwards base paper. If you want more, tell me
They have nukes at edwards? Perhaps you are mixing up the bombs with the plants like you confuse stacks.

Although your extensive education and experience tells you that Pu can explode in both, even though real experts will tell you that
Pu needs to be very pure, and machined to very exacting tolerances, and compressed by perfectly-timed high explosive detonations in order to produce a nuclear explosion.

But your education and experience (and your pill salesman consultant) would have you believe that this sort of thing could happen with a little H2 and a puddle of the stuff full of dirt and rebar and chunks of concrete.

How do you feel when people laugh in your face? Oblivious?

I know, you enjoy the confirmation that they're not as brilliant as you.
Uncle Ira
4.6 / 5 (22) Jul 28, 2015
Here's to hoping my pictures will divert everybody's attention away from me looking really foolish and silly


@ glam-Skippy those sure are some pretty pictures. Is that you down there directing the guy working the crane?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
No, Toots, go to pic #14 in the list and see a venting stack, a Containment, and two cooling towers. Numbers six and eleven also show venting in schematic form.

What do you think comes out of that really high stack? Popcorn?
Uncle Ira
4.6 / 5 (22) Jul 28, 2015
What do you think comes out of that really high stack? Popcorn?


You mean the tall skinny one? Flue gases from the auxiliary (coal, bitumen or bunker-oil fired) powerhouse. You didn't know that ALL power plants have auxiliary powerhouses for use when they must go off-line? What kind of super-duper power engineer are you? You should be ashamed with your self.

What, Cher? You thought you could just invent something to prove your lies and nobody would know the difference?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
" You didn't know that ALL power plants have auxiliary powerhouses for use when they must go off-line? What kind of super-duper power engineer are you? You should be ashamed with your self."
---------------------------------

No, they don't. They rely on the grid to which they are connected for that. ECCS are required and absolutely necessary for nukes, but no other plants have such backup, except perhaps for instrumentation and control.

Why would you think you know more than somebody who used to be in the business? Ego?
Uncle Ira
4.8 / 5 (21) Jul 28, 2015
No, they don't.


Yes they do.

They rely on the grid to which they are connected for that.


Except when they are not connected to the grid, eh Cher? Sometimes even the grid breaks down and they CAN NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT STARTING UP OR SHUTTING DOWN THE MAIN PLANT WITHOUT A SOURCE, A HUGE SOURCE OF POWER. You should be ashamed with your self Skippy.

ECCS are required and absolutely necessary for nukes, but no other plants have such backup, except perhaps for instrumentation and control.


And except perhaps to run the circulating pumps, and the fuel conveyors and the generator stators and the all the machines that must work before during and after it falls off the grid and needs to startup or shutdown.

Why would you think you know more than somebody who used to be in the business?


I don't why I would think that. I think I know more about it than you it seems.

Ego?


After all the bragging you done here? That must be the joke, eh?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
No, Ira you are the joke, thinking how it MUST be, because that is the way you have always thought of it.

Bunker? Resid? Try that in California, . . we need the money.

True Cold Startups, where the total grid is down are extremely rare, but there was one on the East Coast years ago. The diesels used for backup power are not "A HUGE SOURCE OF POWER"

The powerplants are still connected to the powerline, but not producing power.
Uncle Ira
4.6 / 5 (22) Jul 28, 2015
Bunker? Resid? Try that in California, . . we need the money.


Sorry, I got no money to give you whatever that meant.

True Cold Startups, where the total grid is down are extremely rare, but there was one on the East Coast years ago. The diesels used for backup power are not "A HUGE SOURCE OF POWER"


Silly goose. Powerhouses are on site to provide steam and heat to make the big plant ready to go. You ever try to preheat the boiler water for a several hundred megawatt generator with a diesel? Well you might have tried it, but that is not what the "people in the business" do, non.

The powerplants are still connected to the powerline, but not producing power.


What you think the grid never breaks down?

Skippy, you really should stop pretending to be the engineer, especially when it comes to power generating. You don't get the basic stuffs right.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
"You ever try to preheat the boiler water for a several hundred megawatt generator with a diesel?"
----------------------------------

No, silly. What wiki article did you get that out of?

Show me the one in nukes. I want to see it. Then, in a gas-fired system, show me.

Meanwhile, didn't we already see how that is a vent for radioactive gases from cooling loops? The answer is YES.

You have to understand how the systems work, Toots, not just guess from what you think you read, then try red herrings.
Uncle Ira
4.7 / 5 (23) Jul 28, 2015
@ glam-Skippy. I got to go and make some work and money so I don't have much time to fool around with much more today Cher. Maybe otto-Skippy or Eikka-Skippy will come around so you can learn some more about the power generating business.

Did you know that one of our steady customers we deliver to every other month or so is the GREAT BIG generating power plants? Probably never would have guessed that they get their bunker-oil by the FORTY-SEVEN barge tow. In case you didn't know, that is 11 acres of barges Cher.

What in the world would a GREAT BIG nuclear power plant want all that oil for? Obviously somebody in the business, like you Cher, could maybe guess why they would want so much bunker-oil every other month or so?

Non, that is not what we are line hauling today, today it is the wood chips. You would not believe how much of that stuffs the Japanese buys from New Orleans.
Uncle Ira
4.6 / 5 (23) Jul 28, 2015
P.S. for you glam-Skippy. I see you want to play the down karma vote game with me. Good. I like down votes from couyons. I wear as the badge of honor. Why? Well because I did not come here to pretend to be something special and super-doper know everything whether I know it or not. Like I told you, I am just an Ira-Skippy and am really happy being just a average sort of not remarkable guy.

You on the another hand seem to scream that you want peoples to be in awe of your pretended accomplishments. Ba and Blah to that Skippy.

Let the karma voting began Cher and laissez les bons temps rouler. Remember, it was you who choosed the game.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
"What in the world would a GREAT BIG nuclear power plant want all that oil for?"
------------------------------------

Why don't you ask them, skippy-cher? Aren't they supposed to be "clean"?
greenonions
5 / 5 (5) Jul 28, 2015
Ryggy
How are you going to get their with both energy hands tide behind your back by the state?


A completely meaningless statement Ryggy. Why don't you address the fact - that you are claiming that there is not enough renewable energy to run the world - which is flat out wrong. In other words - you are commenting on something that you obviously have no knowledge of. Why do you insist of making a fool of yourself? Does it feel good?
gkam
1 / 5 (24) Jul 28, 2015
BTW, Toots-cher, our natural gas-fired plants used to have oil backup, for emergencies. Those in the East Bay and Hunter's Point were all dual-fuel capable.

But we took out that nasty stuff a long time ago. You folk can burn that goo, but we outgrew it because it pollutes everyone else.
leetennant
3.2 / 5 (9) Jul 28, 2015
Ryggy
How are you going to get their with both energy hands tide behind your back by the state?


A completely meaningless statement Ryggy. Why don't you address the fact - that you are claiming that there is not enough renewable energy to run the world - which is flat out wrong. In other words - you are commenting on something that you obviously have no knowledge of. Why do you insist of making a fool of yourself? Does it feel good?


Don't you know that solar panels use up the sun?
Uncle Ira
4.8 / 5 (21) Jul 28, 2015
"What in the world would a GREAT BIG nuclear power plant want all that oil for?"
------------------------------------

Why don't you ask them, skippy-cher? Aren't they supposed to be "clean"?


Don't need to ask them. They use it to run their auxiliary powerhouse that does have a couple huge diesel back-up generators and some really HUGE boilers that provide the steam to all sorts of auxiliary machinery. They NEED that stuffs to take the reactors off line and put them on line and all sorts of other things. How do I know? Well I ask a lot of questions whenever we stop to drop off or pick up a tow, just killing time you know.

That's just one more reason we all know you lie a lot.
Uncle Ira
4.8 / 5 (21) Jul 28, 2015
BTW, Toots-cher, our natural gas-fired plants used to have oil backup, for emergencies. Those in the East Bay and Hunter's Point were all dual-fuel capable.


Well that is not what we are talking about it is it Cher? Non, because not even you would be dumb enough to think a nuclear plant could use bunker-oil for a duel-fuel capability. Or maybe you would.

But we took out that nasty stuff a long time ago. You folk can burn that goo, but we outgrew it because it pollutes everyone else.


It does not matter what you put or what you take out, nuclear or fossil fuel, you still GOT TO HAVE an auxiliary powerhouse. There is no way around it Skippy. That's another reason everybody here knows you are full of it.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
" you still GOT TO HAVE an auxiliary powerhouse"
------------------------------

No, Toots, you do not. If the dirty system you folk have needs one, that is a different matter.

And do you REALLY use bunker? Really?

" Non, because not even you would be dumb enough to think a nuclear plant could use bunker-oil for a duel-fuel capability. Or maybe you would."

Perhaps you could take time to actually read my posts before putting both feet into your mouth. I said gas-fired plants, not nukes. Honest, you guys on the sidelines with your guesses get really prickly when we burst your bubble of assumptions.
Uncle Ira
4.6 / 5 (21) Jul 28, 2015
No, Toots, you do not.If the dirty system you folk have needs one, that is a different matter.


Yes you do. You don't know much about making city sized machines go from a stand-still. Not like your car where you just turn a switch. It takes days to start or stop

And do you REALLY use bunker?


Non Cher. We do not use bunker-oil, we deliver the bunker oil & coal & grain & wood chips & scrap metal & just about anything that is bulky and don't need to be there yesterday. We use no 4 fuel oil on our towboat, it is one of the larger ones on the Mississippi, 11,000 hp (8.250 Mw), Some are starting to use LPG and a few can use both. You can not use unscrubbed bunker-oil on marine service (ships or towboats) any more. I would have thought a super-duper power climate engineer would know that.

They still use bunker-oil on some really big slow speed diesels and oil-fired turbine ships, after it goes through onboard SO scrubbers. But we don't use nothing like that non.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
Okay, tell me how the auxiliary powerplant is used to "start" the process. Why don't they just use the grid to which they are already connected through other transformers?

There were none in any of the powerplants I was in, mostly natural gas boilers, oil/gas combos, geothermal, hydro, natural gas turbines, and others. I didn't look around the coal plants of my customers.
Uncle Ira
4.8 / 5 (23) Jul 28, 2015
Okay, tell me how the auxiliary powerplant is used to "start" the process.Why don't they just use the grid to which they are already connected through other transformers?.


DAYS before a large plant goes "on-line" ALL of the boiler waters MUST be preheated. They don't use electricity from the grid to do that, that would not not be very efficient. The same goes when it comes "off-line" while it is cooling down. You can't just turn off the heat, you have to let the boiler, water, machinery, the exchangers and what such cool down in a very controlled way. To do that, start or stop you MUST have the auxiliary power source, not electricity, but a heat source, a powerhouse built for the purpose.

If at anytime the "fuel" system breaks down, you have to keep the machinery, boilers, exchangers and what such "hot" and transformers hooked up to grid just won't do that. To cool him down in a controlled way, you got to have a heat source, a really big one, an auxiliary powerhouse..
Uncle Ira
4.7 / 5 (23) Jul 28, 2015
@ glam-Skippy. Do you have any idea just how huge utility company steam turbines are? It is not like turning your house heat on and off. Choot, on the towboat our machines are tiny teenie weenie little things compared to utility plants, and it takes me most of four hours to start and four hours to stop the engines with all the preheating and timed cooling I got to do. Different fluids and machines all got to heat or cool off at just the right pace. That is why we hardly ever turn them off even if we are not moving for 12 or 18 hours. Multiply that by a million to compare my two little M.A.N. 5500 hp engines to a city sized generator at the utility company.
Uncle Ira
4.8 / 5 (22) Jul 28, 2015
@ glam-Skippy. I know your type. You are going weasel and wiggle and try to make it look like you really do know what you are talking about.I got to get some work done. But because I got to go and don't have time right now for much more foolishment with you, you are going to claim that you won and I am running away and hiding from your superior self. Well Skippy, you don't pay me, and it would be a big mistake on your part to try that line.
Water_Prophet
1 / 5 (3) Jul 28, 2015
Thank 'Unc'
That was educational.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (5) Jul 28, 2015
A completely meaningless statement Ryggy.


How do you make a solar panel or a windmill or any other renewable energy source?

Someone has to dig into the earth to mine the minerals. Do you use you hands or maybe tools? Who makes the heavy equipment to mine the earth?
I haven't seen a solar powered bulldozer or dump truck or a solar powered furnace to make steel.

The Japs are talking about solar power satellites in a few decades. Besides all the capital required to fabricate the satellites, there are the costs and risks of launching all that materiel into geo orbit.

The EPA and other countries are tying the hands of energy producers. Producers that are needed to fuel and create all the capital needed to make your unicorns.

Until all AGWites begin to promote nuclear power to replace all fossil fuels, AGWites are socialists who want to return the world to the turd world burning dung.
Vietvet
5 / 5 (6) Jul 28, 2015


The Japs are talking about solar power satellites in a few decades.

Thanks for the open display of your racism. Every one understands racism is an undertone to most of your comments and now you've confirmed it,
gkam
1 / 5 (24) Jul 28, 2015
Ira, I have been in the firebox of Unit Six or Seven at Moss Landing, a thousand Megawatts each. Seen lots'a turbines. Yup, I understand how big they are. Why not use the boiler you have to raise the steam instead of trying to introduce it from some other source?

BTW, I have some minutiae for you: What was the name of the tugboat in the TV series of the same name? Who played the Captain?

And no, Ira, no wriggling here, I want you to answer those questions of why they need an onsite auxiliary power source to start the main units.

And your "@ glam-Skippy. I know your type. " is just more silly ego. Apparently you do not really know anyone with such a varied background, so you thought I was like the other liars and imposters here.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (5) Jul 28, 2015
"Components of PV panels – including circuit bo
invertors, and hardware – also contain hexavalent chromium, l
copper, nickel, silver, aluminum, zinc, molybdenum, antimony
brominated flame retardants, polybrominated biphenyls,
polybrominated diphenylethers.78 The Agency for Toxic Substances
Disease Registry (ATSDR)79 ranks arsenic, lead, cadmium,
hexavalent chromium among the top 18 of 275 priority haza
substances.80 Cadmium is a highly toxic material that causes k
disease, lung damage, fragile bones, and cancer."
"The legacy of inadequate e-waste management in the United
provides a cautionary tale for controlling the future of PV wa
Common electronic products, such as computers, televisions, an
phones, that have become obsolete or hit the end of their useful liv
e-waste.100 These products comprise many heavy metals and other
substances that are also present in PV systems."
THE NOT-SO-GREEN RENEWABLE
ENERGY:
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Jul 28, 2015
"Thank 'Unc' That was educational."
-----------------------------------

No, it wasn't. Barging stuff into powerplants does not tell you how they work - otto said so.

And Ryggy, look up which power source puts the most heavy metals into our environment. You won't like it.
gkam
1 / 5 (24) Jul 28, 2015
" . . . you are going to claim that you won and I am running away and hiding from your superior self."
-----------------------------

Won? This is a discussion, not a contest. What is it with you folk and your egos? I brought up my experience to discuss issues, and you folk freak out, scream something about appeal to authority, and panic. Or, you accuse me of lying. Is that what you would do? How about if you had already given out your real identity, would you continue to lie?

I don't get you folk.
Uncle Ira
4.8 / 5 (22) Jul 28, 2015
I don't get you folk.


Your kind never do Cher. Would you like to let all this go? You are looking more and more like Bennie-Skippy and the Really-Skippy and the Returnering-Skippy with every postum. Just one more try will do the trick and they will all believe my doo-doo.

Speaking of old TV shows, have you ever watched the The World of Commander McBragg cartoons? Non? Oh well maybe you can find him sometime. What about books? You should try the Harry Flashman novel books some time. He is hilarious too like Commander McBragg.

Maybe if you tell me one more time with some more jargon-words and buzzy-phrases and such like I will fall into line and adore you for all the wonderful things you have done with your life. (I would not count on it happening Skippy. But you can try if you like drawing the attention to your self.)
antigoracle
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 28, 2015
Whoa!!
gskam got learned.
But then, you do know he fell off the stupid-tree and hit every branch on the way down.
NiteSkyGerl
2.5 / 5 (11) Jul 28, 2015
She, shit for brains. But then, you wouldn't know much about them kind o' humans, would you?

. A bit surprising where it is, but it's definitely not a proxy server.


That is surprising that trolls squatting under toadstools have wifi.
howhot2
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 28, 2015
This coming from the moron who rode into NYC burning, you guessed it, fossil fuel, all so that he could have a block party with his man-crush, Al. He's now indignant because he couldn't get within sniffing distance of Al's anus.

LOL! @antiboreacle. So did you go see him and get learned or did security boot you?

greenonions
5 / 5 (7) Jul 28, 2015
Ryggy
How do you make a solar panel or a windmill or any other renewable energy source?


Hard for me to believe that you are really that stupid. You make a solar panel in a solar panel factory. You power that factory with what ever power source your world is currently using. Currently it is a mix of coal, gas, nukes, hydro, wind, solar, geothermal etc. Are you really so damn ignorant that you are not aware of this - and have to keep embarrassing yourself? We are on the first rung of a very long ladder - to convert to a renewable energy economy. Power will be cheap, plentiful, low carbon, and renewable. It does not matter that you are too stupid to understand such things. The world goes on despite what we think is real.
greenonions
5 / 5 (6) Jul 28, 2015
Ryggy
THE NOT-SO-GREEN RENEWABLE ENERGY:


Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good Ryggy. I assume you don't have a t.v., cell phone, computer, microwave, electricity at your house, a car, etc etc. etc. Because the cost of living in an advanced technology society - is environmental pollution. So - we have to look at the balance of system costs - and be willing to accept the consequences of our decisions to have 'stuff'. - right? A system using solar panels for the power source - beats a fossil fuel system hands down.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (24) Jul 29, 2015
Ira's home already? Fall off the boat? Get fired?

I thought it would take a long time to barge all that oil to their nuclear powerplants.
greenonions
5 / 5 (6) Jul 29, 2015
Ryggy
I haven't seen a solar powered bulldozer or dump truck or a solar powered furnace to make steel


Solar powered furnaces do exist http://www.techan...e-world/ and COULD be scaled up if needed. But that will not be necessary - as we can use electricity to power steel furnaces. You haven't seen an electric dump truck huh? https://www.googl...SLfbM%3A

Here is a hybrid - eclectric drive bulldozer - http://www.carand...ure-test

And I guess Ryggy never heard of biodiesel. https://en.wikipe...iodiesel
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2015
The issue is energy density.
Biodiesel is a hydrocarbon fuel that burns (oxidizes) releasing chemical energy.
Solar cells energy is from electron transitions.
Nuclear energy is converts matter to energy, E=mc^2.

Address the capital intensivity associated with 'renewables' and compare that with nuclear or even coal.
Uncle Ira
4.8 / 5 (21) Jul 29, 2015
Ira's home already?


Non Skippy. I work 14 days in a stretch.

Fall off the boat?


I won't say it has not ever happened. But it has been a long time, maybe 8 or 7 years maybe more than that.

Get fired?


Non, I have never had that experience.

I thought it would take a long time to barge all that oil to their nuclear powerplants.


Don't read to good, eh Skippy? I told you right up there that we are towing wood chips this time out. For a guy pretending to be the engineer-scientist-inventor-super-duper-electronic-warrior-teacher-and-everything-else-genius you sure have a big trouble following the easy stuffs.
greenonions
5 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2015
Ryggy
The issue is energy density.


So what? Different fuel sources have different energy densities. To generate enough electricity to run my house would require about 3Kw of solar panels. That is about 300 square feet. Double that to be able to charge my car - and I have 600 square feet, on a 2300 square foot house. So energy density is different - but it works.

Look at what you do Ryggy. You are caught telling one lie, and you just double down and tell another. If energy density is such a problem Ryggy - how did Denmark just generate 140% of their electricity from the wind - http://cleantechn...-demand/
Here check out this graphic if you are worried about energy density http://landartgen...1000.jpg
We have parking lots, roof tops, highways, oceans, commercial buildings, deserts, brown fields, garbage dumps. I think their is plenty of available space.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2015
600 square feet, on a 2300 square foot house.


That is still not the point. That is 600 square feet x .5 feet = 300 cubic feet of stuff: aluminum, glass, cadmium, silicon, ...that must be mined, processed and eventually disposed of.
I would not put solar panels on my house unless I could have the lead acid batteries to store the power and stay off the grid.
But then one must consider the costs of replacing the panels and batteries when they wear out and it's no likely I would take the system with me when I sell the house.
140% of their electricity from the wind

What happens when the wind stops blowing?
How often to the wind turbines explode?
How long do they last in the corrosive sea air?
greenonions
5 / 5 (2) Jul 29, 2015
correction "I think there is plenty of available space" - typing too fast and did not notice it until it was too late to edit.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2015
Toshiba had/has a sealed nuclear reactor small enough to be placed in the basement of an office or apartment building that could provide power to the building and neighboring buildings for 30 years.
That is energy density.
greenonions
5 / 5 (5) Jul 29, 2015
That is still not the point. That is 600 square feet x .5 feet = 300 cubic feet of stuff: aluminum, glass, cadmium, silicon, ...that must be mined, processed and eventually disposed of.


Or recycled. And your statement was that the problem was energy density - correct? So see how you just keep moving the goal posts. You say energy density is the problem - and someone shows you that is not a problem - so you say that something else is the problem.

What happens when the wind stops blowing?


Well - we have covered that one a thousand times - storage, transmission, load shifting, other sources such as solar, geothermal, wave, tidal, otec, etc. etc. Just keep looking stupid Ryggy.
greenonions
5 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2015
Toshiba had/has a sealed nuclear reactor small enough to be placed in the basement of an office or apartment building


Awesome - let the best system win. I am in support of modular nukes - as long as they can compete on a cost basis. Same thing with cold fusion. Bring it on Ryggy. Of course it will take smart engineers to do this stuff - not someone like you - who can't keep a simple story straight.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (5) Jul 29, 2015
Bastiat:
" Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.

We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain. "

Socialists like greenie think I don't support solar power. I do, but not when the state forces me to pay for it.
as long as they can compete on a cost basis.

So should 'renewables'.
greenonions
5 / 5 (5) Jul 29, 2015
Socialists like greenie think I don't support solar power. I do, but not when the state forces me to pay for it.


But you do support technologies that have received, and continue to receive massive amounts of money from states all across the world. You support a situation in which Europe is dependent upon arch socialist Putin for their gas supply. Then when the smart people figure out a way to develop home grown, renewable energy - that will cut the balls off Mr. arch socialist Putin - Ryggy throws every lie in the book out to try to block the free market. What a rube. Here - look at this for socialist state support of your precious nukes.http://cleantechn...project/
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Jul 29, 2015
You support a situation in which Europe is dependent upon arch socialist Putin for their gas supply.


Why would I?

The situation is the result of Euro eco-socialiststs that refuse to be self-sufficient with their power.

gkam
1.3 / 5 (24) Jul 29, 2015
Ryggy, send this to Eikka and all your other folk for whom the dollar is the sole measure of everything.

http://www.vox.co...cy-money
gkam
1 / 5 (22) Jul 29, 2015
We have a new otto, "Tooty" who now follows me around, awarding me "ones" for every post, no matter the issue.

It says more about "Tooty" than it does about me.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.7 / 5 (23) Jul 29, 2015
We have a new otto, "Tooty" who now follows me around, awarding me "ones" for every post, no matter the issue.

It says more about "Tooty" than it does about me.
Lots of people here cannot stand psychopathic liars and posturers and abusers.

Why are you surprised? You think that once you posted your real name your lies and fabrications would somehow become true?

HOW does that work in your mind?
What is it with you folk and your egos?
Ahaahaaahaahaaaaaaa
greenonions
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 29, 2015
Ryggy
Why would I?


Beats me - but when you throw every lie you can come up with in the way of renewable energy - you are certainly supporting the status quo - which is Putin annually holding the European union hostage (to say nothing of Ukraine, and many other states).. Guess that is where the term conservative comes from.
antigoracle
2.5 / 5 (8) Jul 29, 2015
We have a new otto, "Tooty" who now follows me around, awarding me "ones" for every post, no matter the issue.

It says more about "Tooty" than it does about me.

Well, it does say you are a hypocritical dumbass.
So, why don't you cry about it.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 29, 2015
supporting the status quo


I don't support the socialist's status quo.

Putin annually holding the European union hostage


The EU put themselves at risk.
greenonions
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 29, 2015
I don't support the socialist's status quo.


Sure you do - renewables represent the free market - and the energy systems of the future. You have lied consistently on this thread - making false arguments against renewables - that were very easy to systematically refute. You obviously do want to see General Putin continue his stranglehold - using the centralized energy systems of today vs. allowing the free market, decentralized, renewable energy systems of the future - that will allow countries to be independent of General Putin.
leetennant
3.8 / 5 (13) Jul 29, 2015
Meanwhile, the market is moving to renewables. The only thing stopping them are centralised government policies of fossil fuel subsidisation. Adding a price to carbon is a market response. So everybody advocating centralised intervention to stop the move to renewables is arguing for a "socialist" centrally-planned response while all us lefty greeny socialist fascists (keep adding random meaningless terms here) are advocating for market interventions.

Yes, the irony continues to astound me too.
Maggnus
4.3 / 5 (11) Jul 29, 2015
Meanwhile, the market is moving to renewables. The only thing stopping them are centralised government policies of fossil fuel subsidisation. Adding a price to carbon is a market response. So everybody advocating centralised intervention to stop the move to renewables is arguing for a "socialist" centrally-planned response while all us lefty greeny socialist fas *snip* are advocating for market interventions.

Yes, the irony continues to astound me too.


I too, remain is a perpetual state of bemusement by the likes of the self-identifying anti-socialists like Ryg and Noemenom, both of whom often advocate for socialist responses to the climate crisis we are facing. In an earlier exchange, Ryg unknowingly quoted passages from the communist manifesto, almost word for word quoting Marx in a diatribe he leveled against the policies being suggested to deal with climate change.

The federal subsidies for the fossil fuel industry are a means of market control. That is socialism.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2015
What federal subsidies for fossil fuels?
Oil is taxed by the federal and state govts from initial exploration to when the customer pumps it into his car.
Federal and state govts make a lot of money from fossil fuel production and usage.

renewables represent the free market


The 'free market' of govt subsidies that will end soon for solar panels? Or the 'free market' that bans homeowners to disconnect from the grid and use solar power?

ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2015
As for EU:

"Europe has an energy policy - just say 'no'. Germany's Chancellor Merkel says nein to nuclear power. France's President Hollande says non to shale gas. Britain's Prime Minister Cameron says no to wind power unless it is a few kilometres out to sea. Poland's Prime Minister Tusk says nie to any limit on burning brown coal – lignite – the most polluting of any fossil fuel."
"EU's energy policy is incoherent to the point of non-existence, Russia knows exactly what it is doing – seeking to make Europe ever more dependent on Russian gas."
http://www.indepe...936.html

Adding a price to carbon is a market response.

No, it's a socialist response.
That is exactly what Ken Lay wanted GHW Bush to do and Enron would be the broker.

ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 29, 2015
everybody advocating centralised intervention to stop the move to renewables is arguing for a "socialist" centrally-planned response while all us lefty greeny socialist fascists (keep adding random meaningless terms here) are advocating for market interventions.


No, the lefty socialist/fascist are NOT advocating for free markets. They demand that the taxpayers pay for wind and solar power because they can't compete in a free market without that coercion.
Part of that coercion was to force govt monopoly power companies to buy back solar power, at a severe discount (turn your meter back).
In a truly free market, you could put solar on your roof. Put batteries in a storage shed and live off the grid.
Ever wonder why so few people ever did that, even in Tucson? Partly initial up front cost that had to be amortized over several years to break even. Another was resale issues.
Without state coercion, solar panels would not be cost effective.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (25) Jul 29, 2015
Ryggy still has not shown us ONE libertarian government.

I wonder why?
greenonions
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 29, 2015
Ryggy
What federal subsidies for fossil fuels?


The established energy systems receive massive government supports all over the world Ryggy. Here is one quick look.

http://priceofoil...bsidies/

What part of this logic do you not understand? You have lied over and over on this thread. You have proven you do not know what you are talking about. You are a hypocrite. You are against government support of renewables - but support the entrenched fossil fuel system - that receives massive government support - and you will not shut up. What is wrong with you?
greenonions
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 29, 2015
In a truly free market, you could put solar on your roof. Put batteries in a storage shed and live off the grid.


And there are people all over the world who are doing exactly that - and as solar and storage come down in price - that trend will pick up steam. Just shut up and watch it happen Ryggy - it is really interesting.
gkam
1.6 / 5 (26) Jul 29, 2015
Ryggy, would libertarian governments let you pollute the land of your neighbor?

Libertarianism sounds just like selfishness to me.
howhot2
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 29, 2015
My friend @R2 (the Ryggy) says
No, the lefty socialist/fascist are NOT advocating for free markets. They demand that the taxpayers pay for wind and solar power because they can't compete in a free market without that coercion.

Here is what is wrong with your argument @R2. First the name calling is getting old. Socialist/fascist, conservative/communist what do they mean if we are already in a free market economy. I think you confuse economics with social dynamics and that intersection. Anyway, the demand that taxpayers pay for wind and solar is for the purpose of the later; ie. Social dynamics; and Political engineering. The purpose is clear; that is to get 200 million people to switch to clean energy solar and wind, it's best to encourage change through financial incentives. People would eventually do this themselves but they are just too slow.

So there you go @R2, another one of your premises shot down. QED.

ThomasQuinn
2.7 / 5 (19) Jul 30, 2015
Socialists like greenie think I don't support solar power. I do, but not when the state forces me to pay for it.


You support a situation in which Europe is dependent upon arch socialist Putin for their gas supply.


Putin is no socialist, he is an authoritarian, right-wing nationalist. All left-wing and socialist groups in Russia are part of the opposition. Putin gets support from masses of anti-socialist organizations, the Russian-Orthodox church in the lead. His policies are right-wing big government (you could say neo-mercantilist in that sense). I don't know why you are attempting to paint him as a socialist, but it has no basis in fact.
ThomasQuinn
2.6 / 5 (18) Jul 30, 2015
No, the lefty socialist/fascist are NOT advocating for free markets.


This illustrates perfectly that rygg does not have a clue what he's talking about. He thinks anti-capitalist = socialist. That might be a nice Cold War-soundbite, but it runs contrary to historical fact. For instance, in the 19th century, the arch-conservative Catholic church was anti-capitalist AND anti-socialist, instead supporting patriarchal corporatism. Coercive corporatism as an anti-capitalist and anti-socialist policy was the fascist 'alternative' - big government, but anti-socialist.

The Republican Party in the later part of the 19th century was extremely capitalist, but big government and also largely anti-free market, supporting protectionism, government investments and even charters and monopolies.

You just don't know anything about political and economic history, rygg. You just spew fact-free far right propaganda.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Jul 30, 2015
massive government support

BS.
Oil PAYS massive amounts to govts. And govts around the world suck up much of the oil wealth.

Putin is no socialist

Sure he is. He supports state control of private property.

Socialists advocate for state control of private property.
It doesn't matter how the state is organized or who is in charge.

Those who differentiate 'progressives'/'liberals'/fascists/socialists/ communist/corporatist do so because they are in one of these groups trying to acquire the power to control the lives of others for themselves.
They all have one thing in common, use the state's monopoly on violence to control the lives and property of others for their benefit, not the benefit of the individual.
greenonions
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 30, 2015
I don't know why you are attempting to paint him as a socialist, but it has no basis in fact.


Fair point Thomas - I was just playing Ryggy at his own game. To Ryggy - everything is discussed in terms of 'socialists'. When you ask Ryggy for a definition of 'socialist' - it comes back as 'one who promotes state control of private property.' So then you say 'but that means we are all socialist - unless we propose some kind of government free anarchy'. Ryggy's head blows up at that point - and he quotes Mises at you. You are correct that in a more complete dialogue - we would be much more careful with terminology - and understanding nuances. All lost on Ryggy - who is like the people in Invasion of the Body Snatchers - pointing at anyone who is a 'socialist' and screaming.
greenonions
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 30, 2015
Ryggy

Oil PAYS massive amounts to govts. And govts around the world suck up much of the oil wealth.


So does renewable energy. You don't think I pay taxes on my wind generated electricity? Look at how you are happy to support 'socialism' when it is 'socialism' to promote fossil fuels - but you are against it when it favors renewable energy - hypocrite much. And again - you have so discredited yourself over and over on this topic - you need to shut up and learn.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Jul 30, 2015
"Those fossil fuel subsidies described above, they're not subsidies to the producers of fossil fuels, they're subsidies to the consumers of them. Yes, certainly, there's some leakage as the higher demand for fuels stimulated by the subsidies leads to higher prices for producers. But this is still conceptually different from the renewables subsidies which are expressly designed to go to the producers. Indeed, given the way that most of the green energy subsidies are constructed the producers are subsidised by directly over-charging the consumers.

These are, as I say, very different types of subsidies. We're not wandering around throwing money at Exxon and Shell but we are very much doing so for their counterparts in the renewables industry. And we're not subsidising the consumption of renewables but certain foreign countries are for their citizens."
http://www.forbes...ections/
Maggnus
4.1 / 5 (9) Jul 30, 2015
I don't know why you are attempting to paint him as a socialist, but it has no basis in fact.


Fair point Thomas - I was just playing Ryggy at his own game. To Ryggy - everything is discussed in terms of 'socialists'. When you ask Ryggy for a definition of 'socialist' - it comes back as 'one who promotes state control of private property.' So then you say 'but that means we are all socialist - unless we propose some kind of government free anarchy'. Ryggy's head blows up at that point - and he quotes Mises at you. You are correct that in a more complete dialogue - we would be much more careful with terminology - and understanding nuances. All lost on Ryggy - who is like the people in Invasion of the Body Snatchers - pointing at anyone who is a 'socialist' and screaming.

Good analogy. I would only add, he points at EVERYONE and yells "socialist".
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 30, 2015
Look at how you are happy to support 'socialism' when it is 'socialism' to promote fossil fuels -

Never have, never will.
I advocate for zero govt promotion and zero govt prohibition.

You know all oil fields in the Gulf of Mexico and other off-shore sites pay fees to search for oil and then pay royalties to the state when oil is pumped?

"Interior Secretary Salazar told E&E that no administration has raised royalty rates on oil production since the 1920s, and that the 50 percent raise is necessary to generate a fair return for American taxpayers. The proposed rates will go from 12.5 percent to 18.75 percent.

Offshore oil drillers already pay the 18.75 percent rate."
http://cleantechn...y-by-50/
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (4) Jul 30, 2015
he points at EVERYONE and yells "socialist".


If you support state control of life, liberty and private property, then you are socialist.

If you support state protection of life, liberty and private property, you are not a socialist.

Most who post here want the govt to plunder and redistribute wealth to their favorite cause.

Some like to call themselves 'progressive' or 'liberal' or 'socialist democrat' to make them feel better about plundering.
Theft is theft regardless of who is doing the thieving.
greenonions
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 30, 2015
Ryggy
These are, as I say, very different types of subsidies.


So the master of 'everyone who believes that state control of private property is a socialist' (which of course as Maggnus points out - is everyone) - now wants to parse out different KINDS of government subsidy - obviously APPROVING of certain kinds of government subsidy - while condemning other kinds. Shit - don't you see what a mess you create Ryggy? The world is happening around you - while you tie yourself up in knots - trying to scream socialist at everyone. Why don't you shut up and learn?
greenonions
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 30, 2015
Ryggy
If you support state protection of life, liberty and private property, you are not a socialist.
Good deal - then I am not a socialist. So stop calling me your stupid word. You of course are a socialist - because you support certain kinds of government subsidies (see post above) - so don't you think you really need to find a different drum to beat - cuz you are contradicting yourself all over the place - as well as making up lies about renewable energy????
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Jul 30, 2015
then I am not a socialist.

Of course you are.
You support taxpayer funding of your pet projects.

obviously APPROVING of certain kinds of government subsidy -


No.

what a mess you create


It's the socialists fighting amongst each other that make the mess. On flavor of socialist wants to use govt power to force everyone to use solar and wind. Another flavor of socialists wants to use the Regulatory State to squash their competition.
If you don't the state to be limited to protecting private property, then you support socialism.
greenonions
5 / 5 (7) Jul 30, 2015
Ryggy
Of course you are.


Damn it is frustrating talking to someone as stupid as you.

You said
If you support state protection of life, liberty and private property, you are not a socialist


I do support state protection of life, liberty, and private property - therefore I said
Good deal - then I am not a socialist.
And you said.
Of course you are.


Do you not see how stupid you look. You have just blatantly contradicted yourself - as well as lying about different issues regarding renewable energy.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Jul 30, 2015
I do support state protection of life, liberty, and private property


You are on record stating you support a Regulatory State that does NOT protect private property.
greenonions
5 / 5 (7) Jul 30, 2015
You are on record stating you support a Regulatory State that does NOT protect private property


You are on the record - on this thread alone - with lying multiple times. So what's your point?

I do support state protection of life, liberty, and private property. So by your definition - I am not a socialist. But so what what?

ThomasQuinn
2.3 / 5 (15) Jul 31, 2015
I do support state protection of life, liberty, and private property


You are on record stating you support a Regulatory State that does NOT protect private property.


Was abolishing slavery socialism? And was it wrong?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Jul 31, 2015
I do support state protection of life, liberty, and private property. So by your definition


Impossible as you support a Regulatory State that does NOT protect private property.

Slavery was not abolished by the Regulatory State.

Slavery is legal plunder and wrong. Just as socialism is legal plunder, and wrong.
Vietvet
5 / 5 (7) Jul 31, 2015
I do support state protection of life, liberty, and private property. So by your definition


Impossible as you support a Regulatory State that does NOT protect private property.

Slavery was not abolished by the Regulatory State.

Slavery is legal plunder and wrong. Just as socialism is legal plunder, and wrong.


You are saying that from the prospective of 2015. As a conservative in 1850 you would have supported slavery as "property rights".
greenonions
5 / 5 (4) Jul 31, 2015
Impossible as you support a Regulatory State that does NOT protect private property


You support a regulatory state. But the bigger question is - so what? You are a proven liar - and you continue to post on this site. Having been shown to be a liar - your input is of course of no worth. You are the master rationalizer - lying to suit your position, and changing your position when it suits. But the bigger questions still stands - so what? You need to scream socialist at everyone - then you yourself are a socialist (based on your own definition) - it all seems so circular, contradictory, and POINTLESS.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Jul 31, 2015
You support a regulatory state.


No, I do not support the Regulatory State.

As a conservative in 1850 you would have supported slavery as "property rights".


A true liberal, and Christian, who supports the right to life, liberty and property for every individual human being could not support slavery and did not support in 1850 or today.
The law had to support slavery as it was written into the law, hence the Dred Scot decision followed the law.
Modern 'liberals' promote compromise. It was compromise that perpetuated slavery in the US.

Modern 'conservatives' are classical liberals who support the axiom in the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Modern 'liberals' do not support his axiom.
ThomasQuinn
2.3 / 5 (15) Jul 31, 2015
Next question: do you consider a ban on the posession, say, heroin and nuclear materials "socialist" and is such a ban wrong?
ThomasQuinn
1.9 / 5 (13) Jul 31, 2015

As a conservative in 1850 you would have supported slavery as "property rights".


A true liberal, and Christian, who supports the right to life, liberty and property for every individual human being could not support slavery and did not support in 1850 or today.
The law had to support slavery as it was written into the law, hence the Dred Scot decision followed the law.



1) the bible sanctions slavery.
2) the Dred Scott decision was legally flawed on many levels - Roger Taney did not own slaves, but he went way beyond his legal mandate (e.g. by ruling the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional in his majority report without intending it to be obiter dictum) in the Dred Scott decision. Too long and involved to go into here, but there is general consensus among historians on that count.
3) property rights were the main argument used in favor of slavery. You can't dismiss that.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Jul 31, 2015
"But Matthews didn't let it go. "But what's the big difference between being a Democrat and being a socialist?" Matthews asked. "You're the chairman of the Democratic Party. Tell me the difference between you and a socialist."

Again, Wasserman Schultz was unable to answer and tried to change the subject. "The relevant debate that we'll be having over the course of this campaign," she said, "is what's the difference between being a Democrat and being a Republican.""
http://dailycalle...t-video/
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Jul 31, 2015
property rights were the main argument used in favor of slavery. You can't dismiss that.


I think states rights were, but the argument is flawed as the Negro had to be classified as less than human to be called property.
This is what socialism does when the state is the giver and taker of rights. Humans become property of the state.

Planned Parenthood was started by a eugenicist who wanted to decrease the Negro population and PP and their 'liberal' supporters have had to de-humanize babies to make crushing and dismembering babies palatable.
Now the 'liberals' must ban video showing how they sell human baby parts for science.
NAZIs and Japanese did similar research when they had the power.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) Jul 31, 2015
Ask Ryggy to show us ONE Libertarian government!!

ONE!
ThomasQuinn
2.4 / 5 (14) Jul 31, 2015
States' rights were used as an argument for the legality of secession and even as an argument for the lack of federal jurisdiction in the matter of slavery, but not as an argument for maintaining slavery in the states where it existed. The supposed primacy of property rights over any other rights was. You have just implicitly admitted that human rights have primacy over property rights. Congratulations, I call that personal growth!
greenonions
5 / 5 (5) Jul 31, 2015
Ryggy
No, I do not support the Regulatory State.


Yes you do. You have stated clearly in past debates that you would support the government running the military, and a prison/judicial system. On this very thread (21 comments back) - you express support for subsidies to the fossil fuel industry. You have to own your words.

However - I keep asking the same question. So what if I am a socialist (which I am not), and you are not? Why do think there is any value - in coming to a science site - lying - and then spending your day pointing at everyone else - and screaming socialist? I think there is value in coming to a science/tech site, and learning about science/tech. What is your need to piss everyone off - screaming SOCIALISTS at the top of your lungs - on a science/tech site? My point - is that there is value in learning about science and tech - and you are a member of the arsehole brigade - who hates science and progress.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Jul 31, 2015
The cost of the Regulatory State:
"Pat Begrowicz and a business partner bought Onyx from industry giant Mead Westvaco in 2009. She cashed in her kids' college funds to do so. Now she's wondering whether that was such a great idea. The problem isn't labor (starting pay for manufacturing jobs at her 155-employee company is $20 an hour) or even raw materials costs or markets. It's energy.

Massachusetts has the third-highest electricity costs in the lower 48 states, after Connecticut and Rhode Island."
"From housing construction caps in San Francisco and the Keystone XL pipeline in Nebraska to bridge and subway construction in New York City and port expansion in Savannah, Ga., NIMBY has delayed, killed or inflated the expenses of more than 500 projects nationwide over the last decade at a cost to the economy of more than $1 trillion annually, FORBES conservatively estimates, though in truth those numbers are likely far higher."
http://www.forbes.com/
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (5) Jul 31, 2015
human rights have primacy over property rights. Congratulations, I call that personal growth!


One of those human rights is the right to property. You own your self. Neither the state or another individual can own you.
And since rights are unalienable, you can't sell yourself.

government running the military, and a prison/judicial system.

This is NOT part of the Regulatory State.
EPA, FDA, ...are members of the Regulatory State.

a science/tech site


So why does this 'science' site continue to promote socialist propaganda about climate and the economy?

I know it's difficult for socialists to comprehend, but if the state can do something, legally, that an individual cannot legally do, that law should be immediately abolished.
ThomasQuinn
2.1 / 5 (14) Jul 31, 2015
human rights have primacy over property rights. Congratulations, I call that personal growth!


One of those human rights is the right to property. You own your self. Neither the state or another individual can own you.
And since rights are unalienable, you can't sell yourself.


We actually have a term for this kind of reasoning - sophistry. It's using something superficially resembling reasoned argument to further an argument that does not hold water. "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" are not mere property rights - they are much more than that - and such human rights as freedom of conscience, freedom of religion and freedom of speech are certainly no property rights.
ThomasQuinn
1.9 / 5 (14) Jul 31, 2015


I know it's difficult for socialists to comprehend, but if the state can do something, legally, that an individual cannot legally do, that law should be immediately abolished.


Let me ask my question again, taking this into account: private ownership of nuclear weapons, yes or no? Free sale of heroin, yes or no? Prostitution by legal adults, yes or no? Selling organs, yes or no?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Jul 31, 2015
"Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" are not mere property rights


Why not?
They are rights inherent in, or owned, by every human being.
No other human being or collection of human beings, a state for example, can plunder those rights.

'mere property'

Why do you minimize property rights?
Is it a way of dehumanizing to empower others to plunder those rights?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Jul 31, 2015
private ownership of nuclear weapons,

Why not?
What is the difference between a state like DPRK, essentially an individual, owning nuclear weapons and George Soros or Bill Gates owning a nuclear weapon?

Decriminalize all drugs.

Selling sex is a service like any other, right?

Selling one's organs would be a violating the unalienable part of human rights akin to selling one's self into slavery.
greenonions
5 / 5 (3) Jul 31, 2015
So why does this 'science' site continue to promote socialist propaganda about climate and the economy?


I don't know Ryggy - they don't ask me when making their decisions. I like the selection of articles presented by physorg - and learn a great deal from the site. I skip most of the articles. That is a skill - just as I skip creationist web sites. Why don't you address the issue. Why do you lie, spend your life screaming socialist - and generally belong to the arsehole brigade - who hate science/tech/progress - and make a game of pissing off a lot of people who want to see the human race do better?
greenonions
5 / 5 (3) Jul 31, 2015
This is NOT part of the Regulatory State.


Of course it is. What is the legal system going to enforce - unless a system of laws - or "the regulatory state". Unless you are advocating a society without laws - in which case why have a judicial system and prisons.
ThomasQuinn
2.3 / 5 (15) Aug 01, 2015
private ownership of nuclear weapons,

Why not?
What is the difference between a state like DPRK, essentially an individual, owning nuclear weapons and George Soros or Bill Gates owning a nuclear weapon?

Decriminalize all drugs.

Selling sex is a service like any other, right?

Selling one's organs would be a violating the unalienable part of human rights akin to selling one's self into slavery.


So if a rich Islamic extremist, or white supremacist, or communist backer, would want to buy a nuke, that's ok? It's not a problem until they've actually launched the damn thing?

But you draw a line at selling one's organs? That's some pretty weird morality there.
greenonions
5 / 5 (4) Aug 01, 2015
But you draw a line at selling one's organs? That's some pretty weird morality there.


I shudder at the thought of a society - with a proliferation of nuclear weapons. People sometimes commit suicide - and take others out with them. Recently there was a man who was angry at the I.R.S. (U.S. government tax dept.) - and killed himself by flying his private plane through the window of their office. Imagine if he did that with a nuke on board. Suicide bombings with nukes!!! Holy shit....

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.