Climate Denier Hard To Refute
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Climate Denier Hard To Refute
Lots.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 4149
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:48 am
Re: Climate Denier Hard To Refute
Now there is the specificity that you are renowned for. Thanks!
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Climate Denier Hard To Refute
Well, you could have looked it up for yourself rather than let me do it and then discredit the source but here you go...
That's just coal extraction and processing without transportation never mind the pollution and CO2 released when burning it.
Presumably, you were going to make some clever point about the energy used to make solar panels and wind generators...
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files ... dwidth.pdfThis bandwidth analysis report was conducted to assist the ITP Mining R&D program in identifying energy-saving opportunities in coal, metals, and mineral mining. These opportunities were analyzed in key mining processes of blasting, dewatering, drilling, digging, ventilation, materials handling, crushing, grinding, and separations.1The U.S. mining industry (excluding oil & gas) consumes approximately 1,246 Trillion Btu/year (TBtu/yr). This bandwidth analysis estimates that investments in state-of-the-art equipment and further research could reduce energy consumption to 579 TBtu/yr (Exhibit 1). There exists a potential to save a total of 667 TBtu/yr – 258 TBtu/yr by implementing best practices and an additional 409 TBtu/yr from R&D that improves mining technologies. Additionally, the CO2 emission reduction achievable from total practical energy savings is estimated to be 40.6 million tonnes
That's just coal extraction and processing without transportation never mind the pollution and CO2 released when burning it.
Presumably, you were going to make some clever point about the energy used to make solar panels and wind generators...
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 4149
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:48 am
Re: Climate Denier Hard To Refute
Naa. I would rather you pretend you even have the slightest inkling that you know what you are talking about. Fact is that you don't know shit and neither do I. Difference is that I don't pretend to know.
-
- Posts: 4050
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:13 pm
- Location: Canadastan
Re: Climate Denier Hard To Refute
Now there's an interesting argument...
I'm clueless, so you must be too.
Everybody knows nothing.... end of argument.
Self defeating but creative.
Deep down tho, I still thirst to kill you and eat you. Ultra Chimp can't help it.. - Smitty
-
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Re: Climate Denier Hard To Refute
May be the most accurate argument ever made, though.
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Climate Denier Hard To Refute
Assuming an opponent's ignorance is, erm, ignorant.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Re: Climate Denier Hard To Refute
But assuming humanity's ignorance..
-
- Posts: 14790
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:43 am
Re: Climate Denier Hard To Refute
Am I wrong? If so how? And be careful, people will call you out on it pretty damned quickly here.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2019 2:01 pmOh goody, another person here to tell me what I think.The Conservative wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2019 1:54 pmObviously, he's against it, it's too common sense to use it and get away from energy dependency...
#NotOneRedCent
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Climate Denier Hard To Refute
Yes you are. I am not against nuclear power in the short term.The Conservative wrote: ↑Fri May 10, 2019 11:02 amAm I wrong? If so how? And be careful, people will call you out on it pretty damned quickly here.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2019 2:01 pmOh goody, another person here to tell me what I think.The Conservative wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2019 1:54 pm
Obviously, he's against it, it's too common sense to use it and get away from energy dependency...
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.