| Author |
Message |
    
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3138
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 6:51 pm: | 
|
Elgato:
About my well...we live in Pohatcong Township, Warren County.
tjohn: I drove out to Wisconsin last summer, came back and reported on the Board that I saw a giant windfarm in Paw Paw, Indiana. About six hundred windwmills.
It was quite a sight.
|
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 616
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 8:14 pm: |
|
dougw-
It is useless to carry this conversation on with people like Andrew. We are only ask him and those like him to keep an open mind about GW, but apparently that is too much to ask.
Besides, he blew his whole discussion with his last post and only proves your point.
Human induced GW is not fact, it is theory and inconclusive at that. Andrew needs to admit he is only making a Pascalian Wager on the matter.
Most of us are doing our part short of installing solar panels and windmills on our property. Apparently that is not good enough for the GW crowd....
|
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1446
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 8:47 pm: |
|
Scrotey:
Nice shot! I didn't think another soul on this board would ever bring up Blaise Pascal. You now have my admiration, just for knowing the name.
I'd object that Pascal, however, meant his wager only to apply to betting on the existence of god, and more precisely, on the existence of a Christian religion.. (cf Pascal's Pensees, book iv in Brunschvicg's 1897 edition).
It's a bit in contradiction to Pascal's views of humankind in book ii, " l'homme n'est qu'un roseau, le plus faible de la nature; mais c'est un roseau pensant." Andrew is probably using his Pascalian ability to think when he makes comments about global warming.
It could be that those who say there is no global warming take it on the basis of faith and propaganda and may therefore be the ones taking a "Pascalian wager." |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1447
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 8:50 pm: |
|
Unless you're talking about Louis "the lip" Pascal, famous Brooklyn bookmaker of the 1920's. |
Andrew N de la Torre
Citizen
Username: Delatorre
Post Number: 426
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 10:41 pm: |
|
I haven't heard that phrase since college.
Still waitng for those convincing arguments of how exactly improving energy efficieny and conservation will stagger the economy.
|
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1449
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 11:13 pm: |
|
Well, Andrew, for starters, improving energy efficiency and promoting conservation (which Dick Cheney describes as only a "personal virtue") might reduce by a fraction of a percent the whopping profits that Exxon Mobil, among other petro giants, believe is their Bush-given right (not god-given, mind you, for Pascal does not go that far and the president doesn't need to).
And we just couldn't allow that kind of profit reduction now, could we?
As always, IMHO. |
Threeringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 12
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 7:36 am: |
|
Global warming is real and that is a good thing since there could be no life on earth without it. The impact of man-made GW is less clear. Maybe the
extra C02 will be better for plants, I don't know.
Do climatologists have exhaustive knowledge of
possible feedback mechanisms that could compensate
for high C02? Are their computer models perfect?
I picked up a used paperback acouple of years ago called The New Ice Age. It was all about how we
werw all going to freeze because of increasing
levels of atmospheric C02. It was cutting edge
stuff....in 1977. It makes for interesting reading
today. The most prudent thing to do would be to
build more nuclear plants. We're going to do it
sooner or later, so we might as well get started. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 620
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 7:57 am: |
|
Innisowen-
Thanks for the kudos. Well, I hope my otherwise worthless philosophy degree has some payoff....! 
I understand how the Pascalian Wager was orginally attended but you could apply its main concept to many things, including GW. And this is by no means criticism, but actually a noble and practical position. GW is only a theory based on faith and belief(similar in many ways in the belief in God). Yes, the signs are there (similar to signs of an existing Entity) but solid proof is not at our fingertips.
If GW is indeed caused mainly by human action and people like Andrew take the extra steps to make the environment better, then it is a win-win situation for him and those who do the same.
But it is not just those who take the exta step that are subconsciously placing a Pascalian type of wager. Even skeptics of human induced GW like me still recycle, walk when I can and cut down on the AC.
Please be careful on the opposing position though...Most GW critics are not saying it doesn't exist, only skeptical how much of an impact the human species has on the ecological system (not saying there isn't any).
Have a good day!
|
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2875
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 8:25 am: |
|
Exactly Scrotis. It amazes me how it seems that if you are skeptical about the actual degree to which humans effect GW, you're automatically assumed to be a gas-guzzling, conspicuous consumption, "non-environmentalist" (for lack of a better term). |
aquaboy
Citizen
Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 457
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 8:45 am: |
|
But if the extent that humans have an impact on the ecological system is in question, then it stands to reason that we should do everything in our power as a country to have clean energy policies in our industries. Unfortunately the Bush Admin has done the exact opposite. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 625
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 11:18 am: |
|
aquaboy-can you please provide examples, not saying that you are incorrect?
Meandtheboys-yes indeed, it does appear the GW is the new PC taboo. As a result, no honest discussion can occur. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3139
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 2:31 pm: |
|
No honest discussion?
So all the scientists who have been taking ice core samples of the Artic and Antarctic, all the geologists, climatologists and archaeologists are dishonest, as are their scientific investigations?
As usual, scrot, buggy argument.
|
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 629
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 3:36 pm: |
|
Tulip-
Your thought process really amazes me sometimes. How you get from point A to point B will always remain a mystery to me.
If I need to spell it out for you I will. As long as GW remains in PC limbo, no honest discussions can ever occur between those support GW theories and those who reamin skeptical.
Ice core samples have limitations in the data they offer. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 631
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 3:48 pm: |
|
Scrot,
Let me spell out every one of tulips posts -
THE SKY IS FALLING!
As soon as a Dem become Pres the sky will reappear. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3140
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 4:56 pm: |
|
Fairly accurate, southerner.
Scrotis: I am sure you will continue, despite signs all around you, stubbornly to insist there's no such thing as humans affecting the climate, and this early summer in February is just a turn on the earth's great path. Well, we shall see. If, on the other hand, there is any chance for humans to reverse this obvious warming process, don't you think we might try?
I mean...whatever started it, let's try to slow it down, don't you think?
\
or maybe you like warm weather in winter, and 100 degree weather in summer...no matter what it means.)} |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 632
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 5:08 pm: |
|
Tulip-
Please refer to my earlier posts on this matter and you will see where I actually stand (just look above you...) |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3141
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 6:23 pm: |
|
Good, well, keep recycling and turning off the
AC, there, scrotis.
If everyone does that, who knows, maybe we can have a normal climate.
Actually, I am afraid the sky is not only not falling, it already fell.
I believe we have already ruined our planet, and there is nothing we can do to get it back. But then, I work in Trenton and Camden, and have worked in Newark, and have seen the effects of environment on children, their health and learning. So I am a bit of a pessimist, to be sure.
|
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2887
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 9:26 pm: |
|
Scrotis (and myself and others on this board) NEVER said there was no such thing as humans affecting the climate. Apparently you haven't been paying attention. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3022
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 9:39 pm: |
|
Scrotis... how much data do we actually have to show you before you start describing the MASSIVE CONSENSUS among the PEOPLE MOST QUALIFIED TO KNOW as worthy of acceptance by the layperson?
Do you wait until a company is in the Fortune 500 before you are willing to invest in it?
Do you wait until the middle of huge storm to make sure you have batteries and fresh water on hand?
Would you let people you care about fill a room with bug spray and then hang around, breathing the vapors?
Do you believe, in spite of the fact that you will never really know for sure, that light behaves as both a particle and wave? |
Andrew N de la Torre
Citizen
Username: Delatorre
Post Number: 427
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 9:49 pm: |
|
I don't have that much of a problem with sckeptism of research, modelling and data that implies GW is occuring and green house gases are contributing to the process. Debate is healthy.
So Scrotis, Meandtheboys and Dougw debate away.
I have a great problem with, is when that same sckeptism is directed toward the auguments that increasing energy efficiency and conservation which reduce greenhouse gases will stagger the economy, the market mentality types have little solid data, modelling or research to offer. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3023
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 9:59 pm: |
|
Oh, and I was wondering if anyone could tell me what sort of scientific credentials are held by Holman Jenkins?
It amazes me how many wingnuts keep lapping up "refutations" of global warming that are written by people without any qualifications whatsoever to discuss the subject. Some self-righteous ignoramus thinks he's being informative by saying something to the effect of "Global warming is a very popular subject these days, but, you know, the world is very complex place!" and half the country seems to think that this constitutes a fully developed position on the matter.
It's as if I said "You know, people are constantly referring to something called 'gravity' that supposedly holds us onto the ground. But I think maybe the fact that I weigh a certain amount might just have something to do with that! I mean, I can prove this with a simple bathroom scale! And buildings and mountains obviously way MUCH more. There are over 6 billion people in the world who remain on the ground as a result of their own weight, so I don't know what those scientists are going on about. I think they just want more money to do 'studies' of some kind, but if they think that something is holding ME to the ground, then perhaps they should consider that I can JUMP if I want to. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4311
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 10:41 pm: |
|
Well gravity is only a theory, like evolution, right? |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1461
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 2:08 pm: |
|
Hate to say it, but it's probably the Luddites who, instead of examining the proofs that there is global warming, immediately look for any arguments to the contrary.
It's the Rush Limbaugh School of Loud Remonstrance and Cloudy Thinking at work here.
Or as I keep quoting from Thomas Alva Edison, local boy who made good: "There are no expedients to which a man will not go, to avoid the labor of thinking."
Also seems to be credited to Sir Joshua Reynolds, by the way. |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 8538
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 2:10 pm: |
|
I think anti-gravity should be given equal time. |
Andrew N de la Torre
Citizen
Username: Delatorre
Post Number: 428
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 3:01 pm: |
|
A classic example of White House ignorance trying to suppress the scientists at NASA.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/04/science/04climate.html |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4314
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 4:17 pm: |
|
Dave, you can add "It's very difficult to make someone believe something when his livelihood depends on him not believing it." |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5129
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 4:57 pm: |
|
If every country followed the Kyoto protocols, what is the magnitude of effect upon the overal rise in global temperatures?
Would this cancel out sun-spot activity? Would this neutralize volcanic activity? I've read short-term, volcanic activity cools the earth, as happens whenever you pump reflective 'pollutants' into the atmosphere and stratosphere, though long term volcanoes can significantly warm the atmosphere. Pinatubo lowered the world temperature all by itself for a short period of time. Long term though? I don't know. Let's regulate volcanoes.
No thinking conservative disputes that global temperatures have risen. What they do dispute is the theory that efforts by just one part of the ecosystem -- man (yes, he's a mammal and part of nature) -- can seriously alter the earth's temperature compared to the vastly more significant power of nature and our solar system. The comeback is "well, mankind is the 'tipping point'!" I don't buy that.
Energy efficiency can be a market-based stimulant to industry. When you are efficient, you conserve in the process and it costs less. Technology and government regulations that encourage rather than penalize people into getting where they're supposed to be I think is the best route. Wearing cardigans, taxation and burying your car isn't the way to go.
|
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4316
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 7:40 pm: |
|
Nature and the solar system can make the earth totally uninhabitable, a lifeless ball of rock. So yes, our power to change the climate is small compared to that power.
However, there are 6 billion of us and our activities DO impact enough to make things rather uncomfortable.
Question: there has not been a replay of the infamous "dust bowl" of the 1930s. Human behavior in that part of the world has changed significantly since then. Has that been a factor?
|
Threeringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 18
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 9:45 pm: |
|
The alternative energy sources are not really being supported by markets. They rely more on government subsidies and media hype. This is not to deny that fossil energy sources have had a hand from Mordor, D.C. But a more pertinent question would be about the size of an alternative energy plant. A 500mw fossil plant uses about 50-75 acres. A 500mw solar would sprawl over several thousand acres due to issues of efficiency, etc. You might build one in Arizona or Nevada, but where in New Jersey could you put one, without incurring the wrath of enviros and bunny huggers?
Cheers |
johnny
Citizen
Username: Johnny
Post Number: 1538
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 10:00 pm: |
|
It's cold outside. Brrrrr. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3147
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 5, 2006 - 8:39 am: |
|
Threering. Some of these alternative energy producers may rely on government subsidies now (although many are independent and self-sustaining) for research and start-up, but if they start to produce on a large scale, they'd pay for themselves...cleanly, is the point!!!
An ounce of prevention...
And aren't you being a bit defeatist and pessimistic???
|
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4017
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, February 5, 2006 - 8:56 am: |
|
Tom,
"Question: there has not been a replay of the infamous "dust bowl" of the 1930s. Human behavior in that part of the world has changed significantly since then. Has that been a fctor?
"
I am sure that farming practices have improved since the time of the Dust Bowl. However, there has not been a reoccurrence of the severe drought conditions that triggered the Dust Bowl in the first place. |
Threeringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 19
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, February 5, 2006 - 9:13 am: |
|
Tulip,
I have no problem with people working to make alternative energy sources more efficient and affordable. I wish them success and prosperity.
I just remain skeptical that a technologically advanced, 12 trillion $ economy with 300 million people can be based on solar power, windmills, etc. I enjoyed Thomas Gold's book a couple of years ago. I kind of hope he is right although I am not qualified to evaluate his arguments.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.07/gold.html
Me, defeatist and pessimistic? You may have a point there. I should try to be more upbeat.
Cheers
|
Andrew N de la Torre
Citizen
Username: Delatorre
Post Number: 429
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 6, 2006 - 8:37 am: |
|
CJC said,
"Energy efficiency can be a market-based stimulant to industry. When you are efficient, you conserve in the process and it costs less. Technology and government regulations that encourage rather than penalize people into getting where they're supposed to be I think is the best route.
I couldn't agree with CJC more, However, the problem is, there currently are no elements to increase efficiency and conservation in our current energy policy. There are alot of hand outs, tax breaks and incentives to drill for more oil and add nuclear power plants.
Why not give the automobile manufacters tax incentives to build high mpg (>45 mpg combined) vehicles?
As far as technology, the hydrogen thing is smoke and mirrors. To generate hydrogen. we'll need to burn coal and use nuclear powerplants to generate hydrogen, hardly efficient because to convert from one source of potential energy to another, you need to expend energy.
|
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3025
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 6, 2006 - 10:09 am: |
|
Those who know anything about alternative energy are aware that wind power is the fastest growing sector in energy.
Solar is not far behind wind. Demand for solar power around the world (including the U.S.) is so huge that even as production and PV efficiency is slowly improving, prices of PV panels are actually going up because the industry cannot meet demand. Orders for panels can take up to 6 months or more to fill.
Gee, no more contributions to the thread from Malone or EVM? |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 651
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Monday, February 6, 2006 - 12:32 pm: |
|
Notehead,
Well, if it is true that solar/wind power is in high demand and you have the less the majprit of us recycling/walking/less AC/etc. then we should be wiping out human-induced GW (if it exists, and if so, to what degree)in no time flat...
So what is the problem? Everyone smile already! |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1470
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 6, 2006 - 12:34 pm: |
|
I think there is more wind than fact in this whole thread, and all of us are shedding more heat than light on the subject. |
Montagnard
Citizen
Username: Montagnard
Post Number: 1872
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 6, 2006 - 2:16 pm: |
|
Of course, Toyota is now the world's largest car manufacturer and General Motors has become an issuer of junk bonds on the way to oblivion. Gas-guzzlers weren't quite the right strategy, it seems. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3026
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2006 - 2:13 pm: |
|
On a related note, when I got gas on Monday at a BP in Brooklyn, I noticed that the pump said "contains 10% ethanol". That's pretty cool, especially if the ethanol is American-made, which would be my guess.
Also, for those who didn't read the Times editorial on W's so-called "plan" for energy independence, please consider this point that was made:
An increase in fuel-efficiency standards to 40 miles per gallon in 10 years — a reasonable expectation, with no new technology — would save about 2.5 millions barrels a day, which is just about what we import from the Middle East now. |
Andrew N de la Torre
Citizen
Username: Delatorre
Post Number: 432
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 10, 2006 - 1:20 am: |
|
Mordern Wind technology, making business sense to many in Texas
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/crossing_continents/4693600.stm |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 959
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 6:59 pm: |
|
Notehead said-"Orders for panels can take up to 6 months or more to fill. "
Correct- a friend does installs- he said the same thing.
More importantly- each one of your houses can be a net producer of electricity, with PV cells on the roof.
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 662
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 7:48 pm: |
|
And you can keep out government radio waves by applying tin foil to your hat. Or listen in with it wrapped around a straw stuck into your IPod. |
Andrew N de la Torre
Citizen
Username: Delatorre
Post Number: 441
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2006 - 8:52 pm: |
|
Foj is correct,
During April, May and June, Sept, Oct, when the sun is still strong and high in the sky and the temperature cool, I have registered a net positive electricity on my electric bill. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page