OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[Gary Gutful]

I did.

It's an exceedingly attractive narwhal, as far these things go

Just dont let 'em touch your balls.

 

[Gronk]

Also ping @Hollywood Jesus re: Ocean Acidity. Fresh from #fakenews CNN

 

[Gary Gutful]

The Guardian is as bad as the Swedish puppet girl

True.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Also ping @Hollywood Jesus re: Ocean Acidity. Fresh from #fakenews CNN

Just remember @Hollywood Jesus that going from a number over 7 to a lower number that is still over 7 is an increase in acidity. For example, a drop from pH of 8.2 to 8.1 represents a 30% increase in acidity. Hence the term 'acidification'. However, you can call it de-alkalinisation if it makes you feel better.

 

[Eelogical]

Cows have a right to fart, too.

 

[Bandwagon]

How about this perspective, twitter f**kwits!


Australia is the runaway global leader in building new renewable energy

In Australia, renewable energy is growing at a per capita rate ten times faster than the world average. Between 2018 and 2020, Australia will install more than 16 gigawatts of wind and solar, an average rate of 220 watts per person per year.

This is nearly three times faster than the next fastest country, Germany. Australia is demonstrating to the world how rapidly an industrialised country with a fossil-fuel-dominated electricity system can transition towards low-carbon, renewable power generation.

https://theconversation.com/austral...eader-in-building-new-renewable-energy-123694

It's great that we are finally catching up, but one needs to look at figures like growth as a comparison in perspective of the base that growth comes from.

When we compare our selves the Germans for example, we're looking at very different scenarios, in 2017 they had around 42000 Mw of installed solar generation, and a population of around 82 million

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany

In 2018 we had around 11500 mw and a population of 25 million.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Australia

As you can see, we are merely catching up.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

The Guardian is as bad as the Swedish puppet girl

It has the best crossword though.

Outlets like The Guardian are fine as long as you know where they're coming from, and read other sources. My other half, however................

 

[emjaycee]

It's great that we are finally catching up, but one needs to look at figures like growth as a comparison in perspective of the base that growth comes from.

When we compare our selves the Germans for example, we're looking at very different scenarios, in 2017 they had around 42000 Mw of installed solar generation, and a population of around 82 million

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany

In 2018 we had around 11500 mw and a population of 25 million.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Australia

As you can see, we are merely catching up.

OK, so in 2017 Germany produced 0.00051 Mw per person and in 2018 Australia produced 0.00046 Mw per person and you think the scenarios are very different?

By my calculations that is a difference of 0.00005 Mw per person or about 50 watts per person, so effectively they could have powered an additional laptop for everyone in the country for the year, until we caught up and overtook them one year later.

 

[Bandwagon]

OK, so in 2017 Germany produced 0.00051 Mw per person and in 2018 Australia produced 0.00046 Mw per person and you think the scenarios are very different?

By my calculations that is a difference of 0.00005 Mw per person or about 50 watts per person, so effectively they could have powered an additional laptop for everyone in the country for the year, until we caught up and overtook them one year later.

No,I thought my point pretty clear. It's cherry picking. The Inference is that we are doing twice as well, when by your reckoning here it's much of a muchness.

It's all very well to point to a statistic in isolation, but the more you add, the more complete the picture. Whilst we are growing now at a far greater rate, we are also growing at a similar rate that they were growing a decade ago.

The biggest joke in that is that the Australian public and Businesses are leading the way,in spite of the complete lack of coherent energy policy from the government,

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Sorry that it took me so long to get back but a busy day at work, whereas yesterday was a bit of a bludge.

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=bees+and+co2

It basically looks like this search produces only one study, based on one planet, but here's a nice little tidbit from the first article that pops up:

Lower nutrition is probably not the root cause of the decline of bee populations...

And the study itself:

“I am not saying that understanding neonicotinoids or Varroa mites is not important, but I am saying that how bees respond to these stressors might have something to do with their nutrition,” says Ziska

So, basically, we know the reasons for bee troubles (mites, etc/.) but we need to link this to climate change somehow so let's just say this is why...

It's a typical climate alarmist tactic.

Interesting, though.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

It's actually not agricultural runoff. That was a trick. It's urban development.

f**k, I'm so embarrassed.

And I actually have a degree in Urban Development *cough*Bazal*cough*

I should have known. I'm such a failure.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

sorry mate but you didn't post any data that was referenced, anyone can create a couple of graphs

Yeah, so hard to check those things out...

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

I've no doubt you actually believe this

All due respect mate but its as thought your totally brainwashed by Trump mania, you seem to want to defend his every move

Straight up - I believe it.

It was a trap set by Trump. It straight up eliminates Biden from the race, further exposes the corruption of the previous administration, launches the Impeachment proceedings (which Trump wants because it works in his favour politically and gives him a trial where he can subpoena any witnesses he wants).

It has all worked out perfectly for him. And exposing Biden's corruption, getting the trial, and having this happen right when the IG Report into FISA abuse and the declassification of the FISA warrants comes out? Beautiful.

 

[Happy MEel]

Ping @Hollywood Jesus. Attached is a response to your climate change questions.

FFS Gary. An exec summary wouldn’t hurt. I’m 5 beers deep and watching the footy.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

There's no need to squirm mate. I was of the opinion that the worst greenhouse gasses were methane and other shit. Although after witnessing your fixation on carbon dioxide I did some research and have now decided that it's unlikely that more carbon dioxide is better than the right amount.

Sure plants might like more of it but most of them also like temperatures that are uncomfortable for humans to do anything other than sit around on the porch.

The great historical periods of human history are associated with temperatures higher than what we currently live with - the Medieval period, the Roman period and the Egyptian period.



Similarly, more people die from cold than heat, so an increase in temperature reduces deaths.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Ping @Hollywood Jesus. Attached is a response to your climate change questions.

Thanks, mate.

Have only just started but have already gotten to something disproving what you have uploaded - you cite NASA data and, essentially, the hockeystick.

NASA rigs data and the hockeystick is a proven fraud.



Michael Mann, the grandfather of the hockeystick (which was called the 'smoking gun' of climate science) only just recently ran away from a court case where he was asked to produce his raw data. As a result, he was forced to pay US$2.6m in legal fees for the opposition.

***

OK, so I'm finished and it's pretty much just a cut and paste job from New Scientist (an alarmist publication), NASA (which fakes data - see above), and Skeptical Science which (give it some credit, I guess) is blatantly partisan.

So, basically, you haven't looked into anything yourself. You've just done a 5-minute search and cut and paste whatever gave the argument you wanted.

once again, the video above clearly explains how data is fabricated (and now even "estimated" to avoid using actual data).

Look, I appreciate the "effort", and you obviously put some comments in of your own, but...

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Also ping @Hollywood Jesus re: Ocean Acidity. Fresh from #fakenews CNN

Just remember @Hollywood Jesus that going from a number over 7 to a lower number that is still over 7 is an increase in acidity. For example, a drop from pH of 8.2 to 8.1 represents a 30% increase in acidity. Hence the term 'acidification'. However, you can call it de-alkalinisation if it makes you feel better.

No, it doesn't. You can't just decide to make words mean whatever you need to suit your purpose.

Below 7 - acidic.
Above 7 - alkaline.

That's it. It's not an argument. It's just another example of leftoids hijacking language to make it more emotive to guilt people into shutting up.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

The great historical periods of human history are associated with temperatures higher than what we currently live with - the Medieval period, the Roman period and the Egyptian period.

View attachment 33338

Similarly, more people die from cold than heat, so an increase in temperature reduces deaths.

If the increase in temperature also increases resource scarcity then it will lead to increased conflict and therefore more deaths.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Thanks, mate.

Have only just started but have already gotten to something disproving what you have uploaded - you cite NASA data and, essentially, the hockeystick.

NASA rigs data and the hockeystick is a proven fraud.



Michael Mann, the grandfather of the hockeystick (which was called the 'smoking gun' of climate science) only just recently ran away from a court case where he was asked to produce his raw data. As a result, he was forced to pay US$2.6m in legal fees for the opposition.

***

OK, so I'm finished and it's pretty much just a cut and paste job from New Scientist (an alarmist publication), NASA (which fakes data - see above), and Skeptical Science which (give it some credit, I guess) is blatantly partisan.

So, basically, you haven't looked into anything yourself. You've just done a 5-minute search and cut and paste whatever gave the argument you wanted.

once again, the video above clearly explains how data is fabricated (and now even "estimated" to avoid using actual data).

Look, I appreciate the "effort", and you obviously put some comments in of your own, but...

I'm going with a HJ response so that I can avoid inconvenient facts that don't suit my narrative.

"Look, I've watched the video, but it was clearly just a 5 min search that gave you the answers you wanted. Its blatantly partisan."

I was happy to try and have a sensible debate but if you aren't actually going to review my responses and come back with an intelligent rebuttal then it is a waste of time.

 

[Gary Gutful]

No, it doesn't. You can't just decide to make words mean whatever you need to suit your purpose.

Below 7 - acidic.
Above 7 - alkaline.

That's it. It's not an argument. It's just another example of leftoids hijacking language to make it more emotive to guilt people into shutting up.

So if something drops from pH 8.2 to pH 8.1 it becomes 30% more what? What is the word that 'leftoids' have supposedly hijacked? I'm slightly right of centre in my politics so I'd like to know what word it is that the 'leftoids' denied me my right to use.