Happy new year!
Wow – “Shall we forget the “plant trees” idea as your solution?”
Tell that to the IPCC Wow. With your track record, i’m sure they would listen to you…
Are you actually interested in focusing on smart solutions or are you just interested in arguing with people and calling them names?
Betula did actually point out some solutions @# 95.
But unlike me, Betula is also happy to get into the arguing and name calling.
You also like to argue that even though you’re not right you’re still not wrong, which is funny to watch but doesn’t help anything to do with AGW or anything else .
Whoever moderates this site doesn’t seem to have a problem with it.
So if that’s what you want to do, go right ahead.
Even though I realise that you’re trying to tempt me, I seem to have to repeat again, that I’m not interested thanks all the same.
“Are you actually interested in focusing on smart solutions or are you just interested in arguing with people and calling them names?”
We’ve already focused on smart solutions: Change to renewable energy sources.
What YOU haven’t done is try to get batshit betty to agree.
Not even a little bit.
You’ve spent all your time snarking at me.
Get to it, StuPid,your goal is to get Batshit Betty to agree with the solution.
“Wow – “Shall we forget the “plant trees” idea as your solution?”
Tell that to the IPCC Wow. ”
Go ahead, batshit. You tell them.
Stu, you have to understand that no matter what you post, with Wow it will be always be wrong, It could be from scientists, the IPCC, the U.N….it doesn’t matter. You can even post his own words and he’ll tell you it’s wrong, in which case it usually is, making it one of the few times he’s right…
“You know you are incapable of hearing “yes”. so you never will, no matter what I say….Yes?.”
So you accept there is AGW!
Hey, everyone! Betty accepts AGW as a reality!
Now, remember, StuPid, you have to build on this, next denier turns up, see if they accept that AGW exists, and get Batshit here to help them accept the change.
But you can go ahead and see if Betty will go and accept the solution now, because at least they accept there’s something to act FOR.
See, StuPid, it doesn’t matter for me, Batshit Betty here is convinced I’m always wrong.
It has to be YOU to get betty to accept the solution we have agreed on.
Good luck and get out there!
Wow – “Go ahead, batshit. You tell them”
I would tell them to plant as many as they can….i’m an Arborist.
Since you have a problem with it, I think it’s best you tell them….besides, it’s a retarded thought that belongs to you and since you will pass for a retard….they may believe you.
“Hey, everyone! Betty accepts AGW as a reality!”
So you do accept yes! So from here on out you will never label me as a denier, otherwise you would be lying about your acceptance…
This is the most progress i’ve ever made on Deltoid!
First Brexit, then Trump, now this….simply amazing.
I did mention renewable energy.
In the big global picture hydro is the best performer so far.
But we also use wind and solar out here.
They have problems with reliability and don’t really deliver via CBA.
I’m seriously not interested in getting involved in your game with Betula.
But it’s still enlightening and amusing to watch.
So do please continue.
When either of you ask me a sensible, direct question I’ll attempt to answer.
Sorry Jeff @#29 previous page.
Amongst all the posts between WoW and Betula I didn’t spot your post to me.
All I can say however is refer to my post @# 99 on page 2.
It’s a bit of a shame though.
Momentarily you sort of agreed with what Mundine wrote about exactly that attitude.
For a tiny little moment you recognised that ‘Joe Public’ is perhaps not as dumb as what Mundine dubbed ‘the commentariat’ keep trying to prove.
One of the main problems Jeffie has is that he is a communist and is not willing to learn that communism leads to catastrophy, always and everywhere, as a principle, which erveryone understands easly except the communists like shorter Jeff et al.
Of course he suffers from a lot of further deficiencies: 1) He believes in AGW and has not foundation for own judgement (devoid of knowledge in physics and atmspheric science), 2) he cannot judge the importance of solar magnetic field strengths on the Earth’s climate, 3) her has no knowledge about clouds, 4) … 1000) …
Poor Jeffie, stop to blow you up to a balloon full of hot air and believe on catastrophic warming: increases on average temperatures (if not faked by communists and green monsters) are so small (tenths of a degree just make me laugh of the idiocies of these idiots) cannot do any harm to nobody on Earth, of course also not on your silly insects which you overexaggerate in importance due to your miserable life as a neglected unknown uninteresting pseudoscientist in an unimportant university without any impact on real life: your are simpler silly moron. Shut up and stop your work which wastes money of decent taxpayers which provide you with clothing and nourish you fool.
Well your method failed utterly there, StuPid.
You failed to convince ONE denier (and kim turned up too, so it wasn’t just a one-off) to follow a plan of something constructive to help stop AGW.
MY method seems to have worked 100%,Batshit Betty agrees that there IS AGW and it’s real and needs something to be done about it.
You, unfortunately, have been unable to benefit from my work and getting some deniers to sign up to DOING something other than posting nasty personal attacks on a blog to others.
I was really rooting for you there.
” So from here on out you will never label me as a denier”
As long as you don’t go and start denying reality again, batshit betty.
Wow – “MY method seems to have worked 100%,Batshit Betty agrees that there IS AGW”
I always have, it’s just that you never thought to apply your new found “method” of asking the question
Wow – “As long as you don’t go and start denying reality again”
Yet, I’ve never denied AGW exists…interesting.
Wait, are you starting to revert back to your old retarded self?
Don’t let the big dark cloud cover your thoughts Wow…you’re doing good, hang in there…stay with me here, follow the light Wow….for all that is good please follow the light!!
You;ve never said you accepted it, batshit betty.
And MANY times you’ve whined and whinged and bitched and moaned and vilified others for assuming you mean something you have never said.
Yet when I don’t do that, you suddenly go all chinny-scratching “Hmmmm Interesting”.
Hmmmm. Interesting. You appear to want to just complain about others and refuse to acknowledge reality. Almost as if you’re in denial.
Batshit, you have never once thought of the AMAZING NEW IDEA of “Saying what you think” until after YEARS AND YEARS of being asked whether you accept AGW or not,and only when I had badgered you again and again and again for YEARS, and called you denier all that time.
If you didn’t want to be called denier, you should have said you accept the science and not denied all evidence of it happening,not supported those who insisted it wasn’t real, and supported those who were saying it is happening.
If you didn’t want people to assume you’re not a denier, you had YEARS to clear that up.
Yet you didn’t deem it necessary.
THAT is why you’re called batshit betty!
“Your assumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in a while, or the light won’t come in.”
If the only way to get people to say they accept AGW exists is to call them deniers, you can’t complain that people are called deniers when they refuse to say they accept AGW exists.
Well, if you’re insane you can, but I’m talking to the sane people out there.
By god kim. You have exceeded yourself
in writing absolute shit. A new personal best.
Wow – “You;ve never said you accepted it”
You never asked – you assumed. But now that you know, I see such a civil side to you..
Wow – “Almost as if you’re in denial”
It’s that dark cloud of assumption creeping in….your comment is almost as if you are going against your acceptance. Is this a semi lie I detect?
Wow – “after YEARS AND YEARS of being asked whether you accept AGW or not”
Never by you.
Wow – “If you didn’t want to be called denier”
It didn’t bother me because 1) I know I’m not and 2) I figured you were retarded so it was just your way. It’s not nice to pick on full blow retards…
Wow – “you had YEARS to clear that up”
I’ve been saying I’ve never denied AGW for years… not my fault you just woke up from your ideological slumber…
Wow – “If the only way to get people to say they accept AGW exists is to call them deniers”
I didn’t say AGW exists because I was called a denier. I said it exists because you asked…
Wow – “but I’m talking to the sane people out there”
Since you are talking to me, It’s good to see you no longer think I’m “batshit crazy”…
You really have come a long way Wow, and I’m glad to have been such a big part of your transformation.
I’m proud of you…
“A new personal best.”
Well, given the direction of “best” for kuim, maybe “A new personal extreme” would be more accurate, LiD?
Hehe…Betula, I don’t know how many times I have told the returders that I don’t deny AGW to immediately be told that I do deny it. 🙂
Little Napoleon Hardley is the most gifted returd in that respect. What ever you say he goes into mouth-frothing mode and starts rambling as you didn’t say what you just said. It never fails. 🙂
So you’re saying that you accept AGW is a real thing as per IPCC!
See, StuPid, my way gets results.
Yours has now failed with THREE opportunities in a row.
Wow – “See, StuPid, my way gets results”
Not to burst your bubble Wow, but since you are the one who changed your tune (finally realizing and accepting that I’m not a denier). I would have to say the results are mine. Believe me, it was a lot of hard work that took years…
The method that finally worked was calling you out on the fact that you wouldn’t accept “yes” as an answer, even though “yes” is the truth…
You, being the retard that you used to be, new I was right about you, so in a failed attempt to prove me wrong by accepting “yes”…. you unintentionally discovered the truth….putting you in the awkward position of having to admit the truth, lest you prove yourself to be a retarded liar and decide not to accept “yes”.
In the end, knowing how retarded you were, I got you to use your own retardedness to kill itself, or at least suppress it
Welcome to reality.
Wow – “So you’re saying that you accept AGW is a real thing as per IPCC”
As long as you are accept things like – the planting of trees does and will make a difference…thus agreeing with the IPCC, and Stu.
Remember when you were retarded and you would argue about such truths as though they were false simply because you thought they were stated by a denier?
We can laugh about it now because those days are behind us…..the truth will set you free.
Olaus – “Betula, I don’t know how many times I have told the returders that I don’t deny AGW to immediately be told that I do deny it”
Olaus, Wow is no longer the retard he used to be, he has come along way to get to this point. Let’s encourage him to keep him on the straight and narrow…..we certainly don’t want a relapse.
Perhaps Wow can be the catalyst that puts Hardley and Lionel on the same path…
So,what are you two doing to stop AGW?
Posting here about “us retards” isn’t going to do squat.
Olaus: fuck off, you boring idiot. You and your intimate bedmate Betula haven’t ever once in years you’ve written bullshit up here actually attempted anything close to a scientific discussion. You both aren’t up to it. Its wild turkeys and non-existent hiatuses and that’s it. You claim that you don’t deny AGW. Oh yes you do. Your denial, like that of Betula, is to deny its a problem. You do this while sucking your thumb. Neither of you two uneducated morons can discuss anything except in the most facile, sophomoric way. No depth. Betula is stuck on UN conspiracies that aim to steal his money to help poor in the south. This is the extent of his intellectual capabilities.
You are much the same. Neither of you can explain why there is an overwheling scientific consensus on AGW and the threat that it poses. Oh yes – you deny that too. Deny, deny, deny. Çannot explain why every major National Academy and scientific organization agree with the consensus. EVERY ONE.
The way you two clots write, one would think that the deabte over the causes and consequences of AGW begins and ends on blogs. Two responses to that: IT DOESN’T. And as a parting shot, my education and qualifications in science exceed both of yours combined by light years. Get over it.
Damn it Jeff, I was hoping to surprise them on that, though I think they’ve already been warned by those whose education they rely on that it’s a trap.
Well, they don’t read shit and don’t understand shit, so I should still be good.
@33 Shorter Hardley, stop behaving as an insane fool by elevating yourself above Olaus or Betula, as you are somebody who obviously wastes taxpayers money with totally irrelevant insect stories, which nobody misses and provide zero value to us. You are no climate research person but you open your mouth wide open about topics in atmospheric physics which you don’t understand as naked layman who you are without education and knowledge. You just believe in tales which you like, eco moron
Wow – “So, what are you two doing to stop AGW?”
Well, personally I maintain a low carbon footprint, I have planted thousands of trees and shrubs over the years and I have helped save countless more trees and shrubs over the years..
I have also spotted and removed thousands of dead, diseased and hazardous trees along roadways and by structures, thus preventing property damage and potentially saving people from serious injury or loss of life..
On a larger scale, I plan on being a major player in helping to carry out the Paris Climate Accord…..because I have that kind of power..
Note – This is where we find out if the new Wow can detect sarcasm, unlike the old retarded Wow who couldn’t….
Wow – “Posting here about “us retards” isn’t going to do squat.”
Wow, you shouldn’t lump yourself into a group with Lionel and Hardley….you are no longer retarded. So let’s not bicker about who said what to who….we are on the same page now and those days are gone.
Hardley – “You claim that you don’t deny AGW. Oh yes you do. Your denial, like that of Betula, is to deny its a problem”
Hardley, you should try to be more civil and understanding like Wow. Put the ideology to the side and try and get a hold of yourself.
From here on out, I’ll have Wow help to explain anything I write that you don’t understand.
Shorter Hardley, in order to prove your total incompetence in climate science I confront you with a very simple question concerning atmospheric physics: what is the impact of increased solar magnetic activity on our atmosphere? Try it, green-socialist fool.
No, Betty, I haven’t asked what you’ve planted, I’ve asked what you’ve done to stop AGW.
BTW, why is everyone arguing against the scientists and doing anything about AGW always saying they’re planting trees, lots of trees?
It’s almost as if this is just a lie.
But, hey, maybe your vitriol toward Jeff is making me suspicious of you, you should cut that out. So let me know where you’re planting and your permit.
Quim, if it’s so simple, you explain it. Wow me with your scientifical chops.
We’ve already seen that it takes ~100 million acres of trees to take up 1 year’s CO2 output, 500 million if you take into account that that is 5 years growth.
For the total use of the entire world, even given Mackay’s ridiculously low figures, that means after taking up 14 years’ worth of tree planting land, you could have “planted” solar power to cover 100% of that use.
Using a more reasonable figure, it’s maybe 5 years of planting.
For all those tree planters, you’d be better off planting solar panels.
Wow – “No, Betty, I haven’t asked what you’ve planted, I’ve asked what you’ve done to stop AGW”
I see, a reminder is needed:
IPCC – Another way to take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere is by planting trees. Trees have been sequestering carbon perfectly well for millions of years using photosynthesis.
Glad to help a fellow AGW believer.
Wow – “why is everyone arguing against the scientists and doing anything about AGW always saying they’re planting trees, lots of trees?”
It could be because I’m an arborist for over 30 years and own a tree company…um. other than that I’ve got nothing.
I’ve discussed this on Deltoid going back many years….you probably don’t remember because until recently, you were retarded.
But that isn’t stopping AGW. We already have it. To stop you’d have to plant about 6 400 million acres of trees.
And then add 80 million for each year you spent planting that 100 million square miles of forest. If you stopped producing excess fossil fuels, you wouldn’t have to do all that. So, no planting trees is not stopping AGW, it’s only capturing CO2.
So, what are you doing to stop AGW?
Hey, you’re the believer. I have reason.
Oh, and what permit do you have? For a start, we don’t know how many trees you’re actually planting. We don’t know if they’re being kept as permanent wood forests either. Where are all these trees? Is that anywhere near the amount needed (80 million acres per year).
Basically, we have nothing other than your say-so and nothing to show it is of any use whatsoever.
Surely you wouldn’t be insisting in blind belief in the mere word of another?
Wow – “So let me know where you’re planting and your permit”
Private properties. You don’t need a permit to plant trees, or take them down…
The exception is if you to remove a town tree…. and the setbacks from the road are different from town to town.
In order to remove a town tree, you have to be a licensed arborist and obtain a permit from the tree department….the tree has to then be inspected by the tree warden and then posted for 10 days to notify the public of it’s removal…. if there are any objections in that time, the subject is then taken to public meeting for review.
Thanks for asking though…
Sounds like you’re just a landscape gardner, and your “planted trees” is just recycling, not growing new plants, so your “planting trees” doesn’t actually do anything about CO2, even sequestering, and abandons even the pretense of stopping AGW.
So, I’ll ask again, what are you doing to stop AGW?
Wow – “But that isn’t stopping AGW. We already have it.”
If we already have it, that’s why we try to stop it. It would be more difficult to stop if it didn’t exist…
If you don’t believe planting trees, or improving the health of plant material helps in any way, than you are going against the scientist……dare I say, you are appearing more and more like a denier.
Do you even believe in AGW?
Wow – “Is that anywhere near the amount needed (80 million acres per year”
If you believe it takes one person and one step to stop AGW, I’m afraid you may be falling back into retarded mode…..walk towards the light.
Currently 120 estates ranging anywhere from 1/2 acre to 100 acres. Big money in these parts…you would recognize the names of many clients,
Sounds like you’re just a landscape gardner, and your “planted trees” is just recycling.
Nope. It’s true we don’t grow them, but a have a 4 acre yard, some of which is used to store plants though many are delivered directly to the job site. We deal with some good sized trees, most come from my friend Chet Halka, (Halka nurseries) who’s family started planting in the 50’s…..he has close to 3000 acres and is the place to go for large trees. Look him up.
And I like your recycling comment. It true, sometimes I have planted a tree and people feel like they did something for the globe, when in fact they have just moved a tree from one spot to another.
The pleasure should come from the fact that you know the more trees you buy and plant, the more the growers will grow.
For an interesting story, look up the Swamp White Oaks planted at the Freedom Tower….they came from Chet’s tree farm.
Wow – “So, I’ll ask again, what are you doing to stop AGW?”
From the discussion we’ve had so far…..a lot more than you.
“Wow – “But that isn’t stopping AGW. We already have it.”
If we already have it,”
You said you didn’t deny AGW was a thing. Are you reneging on that claim now?
“If you don’t believe planting trees, or improving the health of plant material helps in any way”
Sending money to Africa helps in some way. Someone there gets to drink clean water for a month.
The point is stopping AGW.
And, no planting trees, ESPECIALLY if you’re merely replacing them for the local council, does not. Replanting trees doesn’t even sequester CO2, so your quote from the IPCC is not in effect in your case specifically.
Currently 120 estates ranging anywhere from 1/2 acre to 100 acres”
“From the discussion we’ve had so far…..a lot more than you.”
Wrong. A 5MW facility over 30 acres.
“Do you even believe in AGW?”
Looks like we’ve got a faithiest here.
I don’t believe in AGW for the same reason I don’t believe in doors. I have evidence for their existence and know what they are.
When you know, there’s no need for “belief”.
Your continued phrasing indicates that you’re not genuine and you merely ape the right forms without knowing what the issue is.
A 5MW facility over 30 acres
Wow – “I don’t believe in AGW for the same reason I don’t believe in doors”
Right, this isn’t about AGW, it’s about semantics….I forgot.
And some people don’t believe in fences, so they don’t put them up…
Strange though, I don’t “believe” I saw the word “yes” anywhere in your comment…
“Right, this isn’t about AGW, it’s about semantics….I forgot.”
No, it’s about rationality. Belief is irrational. Knowledge is rational.
I just wonder, given you claim to “believe” in AGW rather than understand it, whether you’re genuine in your belief. After all, if you’re irrational about AGW, yours is not a reliable claim.
Someone who knew what AGW was and had an idea of what was needed would not be “believing” in AGW, they’d understand it.
“Strange though, I don’t “believe” I saw the word “yes” anywhere in your comment”
Do you? Why don’t you know? Are you uncertain of your eyes? Must what you see be based on faith, that knowledge of what you see is unavailable to you?
This is why your claim to “Believe” in AGW is unreliable. You don’t know by your own admission, but you want to be believed to are right.
Belief means you don’t know what is going on.
I’m saying I don’t know what is going on with you and your claim to believe in AGW.
Just like I don’t know abut your claims to 120 estates.
What I DO know is that your definition of “planting trees” has no effect on AGW, nor even on CO2 levels.
“Oh, and what permit do you have?”
Wow – “What I DO know is that your definition of “planting trees” has no effect on AGW, nor even on CO2 levels”
Why do you deny what the IPCC says? Do you not have faith in the IPCC?
accept that (something) is true, especially without proof.
“the superintendent believed Lancaster’s story”
be aware of through observation, inquiry, or information.
Your insistence on “believe” when you were asked
“Do you even agree there IS AGW?”
when know or understand are far clearer on this than “believe” is evidence your assertion is false and you’re trying to poison the well by labeling those who know and understand the science as “believers”.
A fifth column is any group of people who undermine a larger group—such as a nation or a besieged city—from within, usually in favor of an enemy group or nation. The activities of a fifth column can be overt or clandestine.
Yes, my question to you. Still pending an answer. I see you accept it is a valid query and one that deserves an answer, so that dodge isn’t available.
Wow – “No, it’s about rationality. Belief is irrational. Knowledge is rational”
So if I were to say I know I believe in AGW, is that a rational or irrational statement?
“Why do you deny what the IPCC says? ”
I don’t. The IPCC never said “A blog poster who tries to avoid all questioning in a suspicious manner on Deltoid is planting trees and this will help stop AGW”.
“Do you not have faith in the IPCC?”
Here again with the religious dogma slurs. The evidence that your claim of “Yes” was in fact false mounts up to convincing levels.
“So if I were to say I know I believe in AGW, is that a rational or irrational statement?”
And for anyone not inside your head, unreliable to boot, since the claim of belief requires no knowledge,therefore there is no evidence FOR that belief and therefore the claim of knowledge of personal belief is unverifiable and worthless as an evidentiary claim.
Wow – “Yes, my question to you. Still pending an answer”
Already answered at #47 – Did you not understand it due to a lack of reading skills or is there still some retarded in you creeping back to the surface?
Wow – “The IPCC never said “A blog poster who tries to avoid all questioning in a suspicious manner on Deltoid is planting trees and this will help stop AGW”
A good example of avoiding my question in a suspicious manner…
“Wow – “Yes, my question to you. Still pending an answer”
Already answered at #47 ”
Ah, then I answered yours in #58. Cheers.
“A good example of avoiding my question in a suspicious manner…”
Because your question was nonsensical. The IPCC never said anything what you were doing.
Do you believe that you’re doing what the IPCC says should be done, and believe the IPCC is right in that?
“This IPCC report makes clear that avoiding dangerous climate change by limiting global temperature increase to 2°C (3.8 °F), as agreed by nations in Copenhagen in 2009, will depend critically on taking carbon dioxide out of the air. There are two ways to do this. One way is to strip carbon dioxide out of emissions from power plants before it enters the atmosphere, and store it underground. This technology is called Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and is still in early development stages. Another way to take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere is by planting trees”
So I take it you’re already at zero carbon footprint and pushing for zero carbon in your country, right, betty?
After all, it’s no good reducing atmospheric CO2 by planting trees then burning petrol to put some more back in there. That won’t reduce CO2!
Remember, betty, this is no different, apart from being a hell of a lot more polite and accepting, from the questioning you give to Jeff or Lionel on their claims.
A HELL of a lot more polite.
Wow – “A 5MW facility over 30 acres”
So have you stopped AGW?
So it would be irrational of me to believe anything you say…
Wow – “Do you believe you’re doing what the IPCC says should be done, and believe the IPCC is right in that?”
I didn’t do it because the IPCC says it should be done, but would you accept it if I did?
Besides, I couldn’t find where the IPCC says I should buy a A “5MW facility over 30 acres”
Good in you for having solar panels.
I hope you also realise that the same argument you’re using about trees (ie not enough room etc) can also be applied to needing acreage to have enough panels to actually make a big difference?
& ironically you have to clear away any trees on a solar panel site because they interfere with the direct sunlight and the infrastructure.
Also ironically, and unlike planting trees, there is a quite significant carbon footprint involved in constructing and maintaining and replacing solar panels.
But solar energy is still very useful, especially on a small scale like running meters and small pumps and etc.
So there’s no question it is part of doing your bit in stopping AGW.
Good for you.
“So have you stopped AGW?”
You’re the first one who has asked if anyone has stopped it. Has your tree planting STOPPED AGW????
“So it would be irrational of me to believe anything you say…”
No, it would be irrational to believe without evidence. And if you have evidence, you don’t need to believe, you know.
“I didn’t do it because the IPCC says it should be done”
Then why are you claiming benefit for them?
“Besides, I couldn’t find where the IPCC says I should buy a A “5MW facility over 30 acres””
AR5 3.3 :Reduce CO2 emissions 80% by 2050.
Planting trees won’t cut emissions.
“I hope you also realise that the same argument you’re using about trees (ie not enough room etc) can also be applied to needing acreage to have enough panels to actually make a big difference?”
ROFL! StuPid,I hope you realise that I’ve already done the calculation. To build out enough trees to offset (not reduce) CO2 in the atmosphere over14 years will take up as much land as enough solar PV to power the planet,even if you use Mackay’s ridiculously low figure of 10W/m^2. Using my real figures you get 41W/m^2, so offsetting merely 2.5years will have taken up as much land as 100% solar PV replacement would.
So, yes, I realised that your argument was specious and wrong long before you prattled it out here, StuPid.
“ironically you have to clear away any trees on a solar panel site because they interfere with the direct sunlight and the infrastructure.”
Uh, if that were true,then you would have to clear away any trees before you can plant yours.
However,here in the real world, it isn’t 100% tree cover. No trees had to be cleared,and 100% near enough of the grass is still there, this time with far FAR more wildlife supported because it’s left fallow.
“Also ironically, and unlike planting trees”
Unlike planting trees,these will be replacing CO2 production for 25 years, and most likely 85%+after 35 years. And 4 years to EROI,which it has nearly done already.
Meanwhile your trees will have to be carried out there by truck, using petroleum distillates to power it. And each year you have to travel further, meaning more CO2 output per tree planting.
“especially on a small scale like running meters and small pumps and etc.”
5MW???? Small scale??? It runs an entire village!
My god, you’re ENTIRELY CLUELESS about solar!
ROFLMAO!!!! What a frigging idiot you are!
Your parting shot ?
What on earth does that have to do with anything?
StuPid #77,your coward’s taunt?
What on earth does that have to do with ANYTHING???
Wow – “So, what are you doing to stop AGW?”
Me – “So have you stopped AGW”
Wow – “Has your tree planting STOPPED AGW????”
Well, looks like you’ve stopped it at much as I have…..congratulations!
Wow – “AR5 3.3 :Reduce CO2 emissions 80% by 2050”
I didn’t see anything there about purchasing 30 acres, what do you think I should do?
Not the same words. See the “ped” at the end of the second one, dumbass?
“looks like you’ve stopped it at much as I have”
You’re not even stopping it. Not even reducing. Not even keeping it level. There’s not even the possiblity that if it were done more that it would stop it if everyone did what you are doing.
So there’s a hell of a difference.
I’m doing something that will stop AGW.
You’re doing something you get paid to do.
“Wow – “AR5 3.3 :Reduce CO2 emissions 80% by 2050”
I didn’t see anything there about purchasing 30 acres”
No, you didn’t.
But what you did see is that it must be reduced by 80% by 2050.
Planting trees doesn’t reduce CO2 emissions, idiot.
Wow – “if you have evidence, you don’t need to believe, you know”
Since I don’t have evidence of your 5MW facility over 30 acres, my believing you would be irrational…
Do you think that global electrical power could be replaced by less than 30 acres of a solar PV farm, betty?
If not, then it has to take more than 30 acres.
To install as much as is needed, you have to buy more than 30 acres. And I’ve done 30. Others have done more. When enough acres have been set as solar PV, it will be enough to power the entire earth, reducing CO2 emissions by 80% or more.
No matter how many trees you plant, no CO2 emissions will be reduced.
“Since I don’t have evidence of your 5MW facility”
But I answered your query in #58 to the same standard as you believe answers that sort of question.
If this is enough to disbelieve the claim, then you are still wanting on that answer: Whose?
Wow – “Remember, betty, this is no different, apart from being a hell of a lot more polite and accepting, from the questioning you give to Jeff or Lionel on their claims”
Really? I don’t ever remember claiming I witnessed climate change first hand and not once did I mention dunning – kruger……and there have been plenty of times I have thanked them for the entertainment here at Deltoid..
Really? I don’t recall
It’s still the same argument.
Shouldn’t it be a suite of measures?
Unlike you apparently, I don’t think it’s one or the other or all or nothing.
Solar panels and tree planting and CZM and animal husbandry and etc etc can all help to move humanity to a better place.
Wow, I don’t want to be considered irrational, so I’ll just say I don’t believe you based on the lack of evidence, and hope you will use this statement as evidence to accept my belief.
Wow – “To install as much as is needed, you have to buy more than 30 acres. And I’ve done 30”
So you’ve done nothing. At least the new Wow is honest.
“Really? I don’t ever remember claiming I witnessed climate change first hand”
Really? I don’t remember anyone censuring you for claiming that you had.
Whining for the sake of whining is counterproductive and will only ensure that you will be demonised and pilloried, since you reap what you sow. And all your complaints about the “unfair treatment” will echo hollowly within your hypocrisy.
And Jeff DID see climate change first hand.
Unless you’re going to disbelieve that climate changes have any effect on wildlife, in which case you will need to tell us why scorpions don’t live above the arctic circle.
“and there have been plenty of times I have thanked”
Yes, this is another vile trick of the bedwetting crowd. Passive-aggressive bullshit.
Doesn’t carry, dearie.
I have found your insanity entertaining on occasion in the past. Since I said I found it entertaining, you can find nothing to be upset about in that comment. Yet you will.
Because not even you believe the bullcrap you spouted there.
“and not once did I mention dunning – kruger”
Well, you did, several times. Even accusing others of it as well as the incessant whining about being pointed to it and the definition.
After all, Jeff was only telling you that you were the poster boy for Dunning Kruger as a COMPLiMENT. It’s not HIS fault you took it as a slur!
“It’s still the same argument.”
“Unlike you apparently, I don’t think it’s one or the other or all or nothing.”
Unlike reality, one is not like the other.
When you sweep the floor of a room, you do not consider you to have reduced world poverty, since floorsweeping doesn’t enhance the economy or give the poor extra wealth.
Likewise planting trees sequesters CO2, but does not and cannot and never will reduce CO2 emissions. Because plants aren’t replacements for power stations. Something you have completely ignored.
Unlike you, I know what plants do and what power stations do, and they’re not replacements for one another.
“Wow, I don’t want to be considered irrational”
So you’ll stop saying you “Believe” in AGW?
“So you’ve done nothing. ”
Nope. Due to that solar power station 5MW of fossil fueled power stations are no longer running, meaning that the CO2 those coal stations used to produce (about 43,000 tons of CO2 per year) has been taken off our emissions.
Reducing our CO2 emissions.
How many power stations have been removed from service and replaced by trees, betty?
Wow – “And all your complaints about the “unfair treatment”
Only I never complained about unfair treatment. You’re slipping back Wow…
Wow – “And Jeff DID see climate change first hand”
So he lied when he said he didn’t….
Hardley – May 4th 2012 – “As far as first hand goes, I’d need to look into the soil. But given I was there in winter (a warm winter at that), of course I can’t describe things first hand”
Dropped the wrong figure in there!
You can put the right ones in, the average figure for a CO2 plant is easily available.
Wow – “So you’ll stop saying you “Believe” in AGW?”
Actually, I asked if you believe in AGW.
“Only I never complained about unfair treatment.”
Yes you did. You did in the one I replied to!
“So he lied when he said he didn’t….”
So you lied when you said he did…
Betula January 12, 2017
Really? I don’t ever remember claiming I witnessed climate change first hand
“Actually, I asked if you believe in AGW.”
Actually, you said you believed in AGW.
Wow – “Due to that solar power station 5MW of fossil fueled power stations are no longer running”
Current ye@r *
Leave this field empty
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
Notify me of followup comments via E-Mail.