Jump to content
Due to a large amount of spamers, accounts will now have to be approved by the Admins so please be patient. ×
IGNORED

My bet to a workmate over the future of cars


danny_galaga

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, prktkljokr said:

 

Good video, I actually may have learned something...He kind of dropped the ball somewhat at the end on coal (IMO) diddnt touch on modern advances to the industry, or the comparison costs per Kwh.

Edited by CandyLand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Polar shift doesn't make you money like the CC cult can.

Love watching wind turbines destroying themselves. Cheap overseas rubbish not fit for purpose for very long anyway.

Got a windmill company here in Australia we could use but no, some foreign company in to grab that quick government money, install the rubbish, grab the cash and gone.

No maintenance, no removal from site after the unit is dead, just left there to show how stupidly naive we were at this time in history for generations to come. 

Could of been Australian made by Australians....

    2-14-024-e1599088850359.jpg

Company still going..... 

https://southerncrosswindmills.com.au/

As you can see , totally recyclable being made from Australian steel.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/01/2023 at 11:09 AM, CandyLand said:

Not quite sure how to break this to you, But it would quite arrogant to think man could actually change the climate by creating or destroying energy in any form, and more so to actually blame a substantial percentage of that on farting farm animals, As animals have even been around longer than humans...If you want to actually study the change of weather patterns and climate studies you should look into pole shifts, not man made mind you, but does actually fit into the historical nature cycle of change, and is actually proven by geological fact.

Hate to break this to YOU, but you are just wrong. Humans are changing the climate. It's been established for decades and every passing day only firms up the data. The only people who don't think it's happening are people who swallow the crap Fox News etc spews out. Even THOSE guys don't believe what they say, they just want YOU to believe them.

There is no 'juries out' etc. Man made climate change is real. As is spin doctors working for vested interests, sowing doubt in your mind. Exactly the same way the tobacco lobby used to.

 

"Marty Hoffert was one of the first scientists to create a model which predicted the effects of man-made climate change. And he did so while working for Exxon, one of the world's largest oil companies, which would later merge with another, Mobil."

"But he noticed a clash between Exxon's own findings, and public statements made by company bosses, such as the then chief executive Lee Raymond, who said that "currently, the scientific evidence is inconclusive as to whether human activities are having a significant effect on the global climate".

"They were saying things that were contradicting their own world-class research groups," said Hoffert."

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/stories-53640382.amp

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Hate to break this to YOU, but you are just wrong. Humans are changing the climate. It's been established for decades and every passing day only firms up the data. The only people who don't think it's happening are people who swallow the crap Fox News etc spews out. Even THOSE guys don't believe what they say, they just want YOU to believe them.

There is no 'juries out' etc. Man made climate change is real. As is spin doctors working for vested interests, sowing doubt in your mind. Exactly the same way the tobacco lobby used to.

 

"Marty Hoffert was one of the first scientists to create a model which predicted the effects of man-made climate change. And he did so while working for Exxon, one of the world's largest oil companies, which would later merge with another, Mobil."

"But he noticed a clash between Exxon's own findings, and public statements made by company bosses, such as the then chief executive Lee Raymond, who said that "currently, the scientific evidence is inconclusive as to whether human activities are having a significant effect on the global climate".

"They were saying things that were contradicting their own world-class research groups," said Hoffert."

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/stories-53640382.amp

You have got to be kidding right?...The "Inconvenient truth" is it was FALSIFIED DATA, it still has not been proven, still making it comparable to nothing more than LIES...And for Fox news, they actually report the news, not just take talking points to task and ignore truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Total" human impact on CO2 in the atmosphere is also acknowledged to be only 2% of all the CO2 created on the planet. Whether this 2% has any impact is where the science is not settled.

If this 2% has any impact is actually being negated when you consider China with a population of 1 453 598 787 set to become full 1st world status in 10 years from it's former 3rd world non fossil fuel burning culture.

That last part is clearly being seen with year on year increases of all fossil fuel world sales irrespective of "progressive" nations attempts that only seem to cripple themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Hate to break this to YOU, but you are just wrong. Humans are changing the climate. It's been established for decades and every passing day only firms up the data. The only people who don't think it's happening are people who swallow the crap Fox News etc spews out. Even THOSE guys don't believe what they say, they just want YOU to believe them.

There is no 'juries out' etc. Man made climate change is real. As is spin doctors working for vested interests, sowing doubt in your mind. Exactly the same way the tobacco lobby used to.

 

"Marty Hoffert was one of the first scientists to create a model which predicted the effects of man-made climate change. And he did so while working for Exxon, one of the world's largest oil companies, which would later merge with another, Mobil."

"But he noticed a clash between Exxon's own findings, and public statements made by company bosses, such as the then chief executive Lee Raymond, who said that "currently, the scientific evidence is inconclusive as to whether human activities are having a significant effect on the global climate".

"They were saying things that were contradicting their own world-class research groups," said Hoffert."

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/stories-53640382.amp

Not to mention Fox news is the number one top watched news channel on the planet, Kind of  puts you in the minority there Danny with your fake news sources and cherry picked information...How's that four year collusion lie thing working out for you, still getting a thrill up your leg?...Perhaps we should discuss Hunters laptop.

Screenshot_20230129-231116_Gallery.jpg

Edited by CandyLand
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_and_icehouse_Earth#Greenhouse_Earth

But since you just want to bury your head into your falsified data, and blame Fox news, lets take a look  at what Wikipedia has to say...Well interesting, doesn't even mention anything about what you are saying Danny...Apparently the climate has even changed 5 times in cycles during the history of the planet  even supported by the science, nothing to do with Fox news, Man made climate disaster? You sticking to that story?...One of the falsified data points that was totally ignored by your sources was solar radiation, Well there it is in black and white pal...We anxiously await your rebuttals in three days after you pretend you didn't see this.

Edited by CandyLand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two stories that can go hand in hand. Steve, apparently Barnaby Joyce wants nuclear in his electorate so that would be a good place to start 🙂

 

https://www.drive.com.au/news/toyota-to-install-electric-car-chargers-across-dealer-network/

 

https://oilprice-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Small-Modular-Nuclear-Reactors-Are-A-Game-Changer-For-Clean-Power.amp.html?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIKAGwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From %1%24s&aoh=16751587167866&csi=0&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Foilprice.com%2FAlternative-Energy%2FNuclear-Power%2FSmall-Modular-Nuclear-Reactors-Are-A-Game-Changer-For-Clean-Power.html

Just in case you don't think I look at your video clips candy. Talking of cherry picking candy, I like how you totally ignore the last bit about coal. It really is a dead end technology for power. So much CO2 and particulates. I'm all for nuclear. But it's pretty expensive, just ask the French...

https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/turning-nuclear-warheads-into-nuclear-fuel

 

Edited by danny_galaga
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

Oh no, Steve! Not farmers!

 

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/101905522

Again with the half truths totally ignoring what I said, Since aparently you are not even watching real news, Doesn't surprise me much however...Again it it is all based on a lie, wake up man, you are throwing your future into the toilet, Is the cost of your energy actually going down, Is it free yet? ...Isn't China where you were getting your batteries.

Screenshot_20230131-060552_Gallery.jpg

Edited by CandyLand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But rather than just sitting here wasting another three days just to be ignored again, over your regurgitated CNN bull I will just practice my happy dancing...Have a good life Dude.

 

Edited by CandyLand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, CandyLand said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_and_icehouse_Earth#Greenhouse_Earth

But since you just want to bury your head into your falsified data, and blame Fox news, lets take a look  at what Wikipedia has to say...Well interesting, doesn't even mention anything about what you are saying Danny...Apparently the climate has even changed 5 times in cycles during the history of the planet  even supported by the science, nothing to do with Fox news, Man made climate disaster? You sticking to that story?...One of the falsified data points that was totally ignored by your sources was solar radiation, Well there it is in black and white pal...We anxiously await your rebuttals in three days after you pretend you didn't see this.

Probably should read what you quote if you want to support your position. From you source "Without the human influence on the greenhouse gas concentration, a glacial period would be the next climate state. Predicted changes in orbital forcing suggest that in absence of human-made global warming, the next glacial period would begin at least 50,000 years from now[35] (see Milankovitch cycles), but the ongoing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions mean the next climate state will be a greenhouse Earth period.[33"

and this "Greenhouse gas emissions from human activities strengthen the greenhouse effect, contributing to climate change."

anyway, what pinball machines do you own or what's your favorite era?

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, CandyLand said:

Again with the half truths totally ignoring what I said, Since aparently you are not even watching real news, Doesn't surprise me much however...Again it it is all based on a lie, wake up man, you are throwing your future into the toilet, Is the cost of your energy actually going down, Is it free yet? ...Isn't China where you were getting your batteries.

Screenshot_20230131-060552_Gallery.jpg

Where do you get YOUR batteries from?

Just back on Fox News. How often do you see climate scientists on any of their programs? Ones that say human made climate change is real. You know, the 97% of them? I know that you and Steve are mightily concerned about silent majorities. And you can't get a much bigger majority than 97%, and given that most of those scientists are quietly, silently you might say, working away- shouldn't 97% of Fox News coverage on the subject be favourable towards the silent majorities viewpoint? 

Why is that? Could it be they have an agenda? Good lord! Not Fix News?!!?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

Where do you get YOUR batteries from?

Just back on Fox News. How often do you see climate scientists on any of their programs? Ones that say human made climate change is real. You know, the 97% of them? I know that you and Steve are mightily concerned about silent majorities. And you can't get a much bigger majority than 97%, and given that most of those scientists are quietly, silently you might say, working away- shouldn't 97% of Fox News coverage on the subject be favourable towards the silent majorities viewpoint? 

Why is that? Could it be they have an agenda? Good lord! Not Fix News?!!?!

How dence can you actually get...I dont buy batteries AT ALL, none, not in my house, not in my tools, not in my clocks, not in a box, I don't buy them in bags, or with tags, I dont buy them for my cat, I have literally not bought a battery in decades...BATTERIES ARE BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, I don't but them at all, EVER...The one I do have in my car, Are used from salvage and actually gets drilled, drained,The acid reused as a metal etch for my plating tank, neutralized, and the lead recycled AFTER they dont work on my car anymore....and they do have climate scientists on Fox news, you should watch it sometime, maybe you would know that.

Edited by CandyLand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, you remarkably don't use any batteries. Did you write that on your phone?

Are these the sorts of scientists you are talking about?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/media/physicist-tells-tucker-carlson-climate-change-is-fiction-of-the-media.amp

 

Because I'm  dense, can you post me some links to Fix News stories that say that man made (anthropological) climate change is real and that we need to curb greenhouse gas emissions?

K thanx.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, peely said:

Probably should read what you quote if you want to support your position. From you source "Without the human influence on the greenhouse gas concentration, a glacial period would be the next climate state. Predicted changes in orbital forcing suggest that in absence of human-made global warming, the next glacial period would begin at least 50,000 years from now[35] (see Milankovitch cycles), but the ongoing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions mean the next climate state will be a greenhouse Earth period.[33"

and this "Greenhouse gas emissions from human activities strengthen the greenhouse effect, contributing to climate change."

anyway, what pinball machines do you own or what's your favorite era?

 

 

3 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Ok, you remarkably don't use any batteries. Did you write that on your phone?

Are these the sorts of scientists you are talking about?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/media/physicist-tells-tucker-carlson-climate-change-is-fiction-of-the-media.amp

 

Because I'm  dense, can you post me some links to Fix News stories that say that man made (anthropological) climate change is real and that we need to curb greenhouse gas emissions?

K thanx.

 

 

 

 

Do it yourself clown act.

Edited by CandyLand
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Oh no, Steve! Not farmers!

 

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/101905522

 

6 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

How often do you see climate scientists on any of their programs? Ones that say human made climate change is real. You know, the 97% of them?

And what attar level do you need to achieve to become a climate scientist in Australian universities?.

A very low one.

And what exactly does a climate change scientist do?.

Repeat potentially tainted data found everywhere in the universities after all, what actual scientific testing do they do themselves from inside the confines of a university to test any of this data.

Well none required actually because the data has already been read by thousands of like minded people like themselves and any descent from "what is written" is a sure fire way of getting yourself removed from the university.

Ask Australia's leading expert on the Great Barrier Reef and his dealings with the University of Queensland when he questioned the "what is written"

As for the farmers and your ABC clip.....

They have no choice but to watch and therefore be educated by your ABC. They have no other choices in the location of there farms. It is often the only channel they can get.

As for Fox News, You have been saying for months Fox News said this Fox News said that and I suspect you only know that was said by the links the ABC selectively have cherry picked but this is the real story.............Fox has many News channels

Sky News

Fox Sports News

Sky News Extra

Sky News UK

BBC World News

Fox News Channel

CNN

CNBC

Bloomberg Television

ABC News

World Watch

Aljazerra

CGTN

NHK World News

A pretty good list of many world news channels I would think with a variety of views on all News stories quite unlike your one channel fits all ABC.

Problem is, you have to pay for FOX don't you?

Pity every Australian doesn't get the choice on where there Tax dollars go because I'm sure if they had a choice.......

fund the ABC or put there money towards a Fox subscription

most Australians would prefer that 1.4 billion dollars a year the ABC gets from the government going towards there costs to get Fox with it's 14 News channels and around 70 other channels non News related.

Education is king but not when it all comes from the one tainted source.   

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Ok, you remarkably don't use any batteries. Did you write that on your phone?

 

 

 

 

 

Not really sure the tiny battery in my previously owned phone is really a fair comparison to the almost 3k pounds of batteries in one EV vehicle...But if you want my review on lithium technology based on that...It sucks and is incredibly inefficient, my phone won't even hold a charge anymore and has to be perpetually plugged in.

Edited by CandyLand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, CandyLand said:

Isn't China where you were getting your batteries.

 

6 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Where do you get YOUR batteries from?

 

5 hours ago, CandyLand said:

How dence can you actually get...I dont buy batteries AT ALL, none, not in my house, not in my tools, not in my clocks, not in a box, I don't buy them in bags, or with tags, I dont buy them for my cat, I have literally not bought a battery in decades...BATTERIES ARE BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, I don't but them at all, EVER...

 

5 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Ok, you remarkably don't use any batteries. Did you write that on your phone?

 

2 hours ago, CandyLand said:

Not really sure the tiny battery in my previously owned phone is really a fair comparison to the almost 3k pounds of batteries in one EV vehicle...

 

So, yes. China then...

 

2 hours ago, CandyLand said:

But if you want my review on lithium technology based on that...It sucks and is incredibly inefficient, my phone won't even hold a charge anymore and has to be perpetually plugged in.

Willing to bet billions of mobile phone users and millions of tradies would disagree with you on that statement.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, so we can all agree that Fox News doesn't talk to any climate scientists (the silent majority) who say that man made climate change is real. That's what I like about this debate. We can all agree on some things 🙂

I also agree that lead acid batteries are about the most recyclable to hing we make, after aluminium cans.

Steve, you do realise that a 'scientist' is someone who does research, right? A researcher doesn't 'repeat potentially tainted data' . That's not what researchers do. You Cant even get a master's degree if you don't show original research. This is one of my concerns about the news you and Candy selectively listen to. The sources YOU seem to follow just keep repeating disproven ideas, or old news. Science keeps moving forward. 

Whats the bet though, that now ice explained what a scientist is, you still continue to imagine scientists are people who repeat incorrect data. That's not a scientist Steve, that's a priest. 

FOX NEWS is it's own news service. On FOX CABLE, you can watch other news services. I specifically single FIX NEWS out quite often because they seem to have the most deranged people on it. 

I have often posted links from almost ALL the news services you just listed. Interestingly, Sky News, who here in Australia are climate change deniers, in the the UK actually even have a climate change desk! Isn't that interesting, that where there is less lobbying from the fossil fuel industry, even conservatives agree man made  climate change is real and we need to do something about it. 

Anthropological climate change is real. It is as real as the earth revolving around the sun. Anything you say to me to the contrary is pretty much equivalent to saying that the sun revolves around the earth. I am no more being arrogant or obstinate about climate change as about the solar system. 

The only question then is what are we going to do about it? People of certain political persuasions have started to address the problems. Too many conservatives are wasting time and energy hating on Greta Thunberg and wokeness and China. What more of them should be doing is saying 'to hell with this coal lobby money, we need to fix this problem the way we know how'. Winston Churchill was probably the most important and consequential conservative politician ever. Imagine if he just fucked around for four years hating on people and denying there was a problem in Europe. I think Winston would be ashamed of most modern conservatives.

Climate change is science. It's a pity politics is getting in the way 

Edited by danny_galaga
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Steve, this is what I'm talking about when I say fossil fuel lobbying colours the news of that country. Two stories about flooding in Sydney. Both from Sky News.

Sky News UK (very low lobbying power from fossil fuel)

https://news.sky.com/video/daily-climate-show-thousands-evacuated-after-sydney-floods-12645805

 

Sky News Australia (lots of lobbying of Labor and LNP) 

https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/peta-credlin/raise-the-dam-wall-not-scare-people-over-climate-change-credlin/video/c81f7a319416f30ffe6d3ea1948ff654

 

Do you not see a distinct difference in reportage? The former attempts to report facts. The latter just peddles opinions. Normally you would just tell me I'm listening to commie conspiracists and if I would just listen to your news sources...

Well, in both cases I'm showing you Sky Frikken News! Aren't they one of your standbys? One major difference between the two countries...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...