I have a friend in Texas, she emailed me the following message

No problem, just don't bitch when you lose power.

 

Who gets to define 'necessities'? Me or you?

 

With that simple sentence, I'd not put much weight in whatever else she may as well be wrong about too..

At what tempeture does Natural gas freeze?

It was a long way from -40 but whatever!

 

You are tossing the baby out with the bath water.

One doesn't have to be a scientist on point #3, to realize the point in #4

Neither fossil fuels nor renewable energy is to blame. What’s to blame is that the winterization of equipment was put off as an expense because it eats into profits. Remember, the power companies in Texas are all private and completely de-regulated. So, which company is going to eat into profits to protect against a 100 year storm unless required to do so?

Is the salient point of the entire argument, noting that the Gov's whining about ERCOT is amusing, given that he appointed it's members in the first place, another point being one in which being a scientist is not required.

The trick of the disingenuous is to scour the field, find one tiny flaw, which is almost always there, somewhere, and toss out the entire thing.

That is the very definition of disingenuous

 

Do you need it to survive in a reasonable physical and mental health.

 

It wasn't the gas itself that froze it was the equipment to deliver it.

 

I just found something so commonly known or easily looked up to be wrong, as a indicator of the rest of the examples being anything more than regurgitated information fed to people by propagandist that take advantage of those with very little personal knowledge to catch obvious bullshit when presented with it

 

Not what was posted now was it?

But really, what sort of equipment do you think delivered it? A pipeline and a few compressor stations

 

Yep the gas lines froze and so did the equipment for pumping it.

 

LOL, I have seen MANY a NG well head and I can't say I have seen many if any with a pump station connected to them.. Now I have seen dozens of compressor station that add and maintain a set pressure at various distances from the GAS fields Now Oil/Petroleum will geland sort of freeze but NG, not so much..

Then again, I can only attest to -60ish and I know my fuel in my vehicles have never froze and even at -60ish charcoal litter fluid was absolutely gel'd not froze. Now cheap ass Diesel will also gel, but freeze solid, nah..

 

My lines are buried. And I don’t bitch. I know it’s expected when a hurricane hits. It’s why I have a generator and am prepared for 1-2 weeks trapped in our house every season. My kids bitch, hehe.

 

Define reasonable?

In case you couldn't tell, this issue of 'necessity' is extremely subjective. Below is a list of some of the things that according to past debates are hotly contested items in the argument of 'necessity' or
not.

-internet
-TV
-new clothes (vs used clothes)
-'comfort' foods
-entertainment (games, movies, etc)
-cultural exposure (arts and museums)

FTR, these are not thing that I do or do not consider nessities. These are things that have been commonly debated as necessity by some and luxury by others to demonstrate the total subjectivity of this issue. Beyond food, shelter and education is a vast gray area in which no two people agree on what is 'reasonable necessity' and trying to legislate in that gray area is a horendous political quagmire.

 

As of right now the internet is a necessity.

 

The comparison of government and a corporation is bizarre. Neither has anything to do with the other. Tell your friend to seek professional help.

 

Doesn't refute my point.

 

What is your point? From what I gather is your friend may be a little nutty.

 

If that's what you need to rationalize all of it..

 

For a group that preaches and swears by science, you would think something as simple to look up like the freezing point of natural gas would have been their first look in to data points

 

What value are you using as a baseline? Why are you using that value as a baseline as opposed to any other value?

How do you know what the temperature of any large area of Earth (let alone Earth as a whole) is?

See above. I could also say that here in my area of Southern Wisconsin, I've seen MUCH less tornadoes over the last many years than I used to see, say, 15+ years ago.

So? What about the other hundreds, or thousands, or millions, or billions of years prior to last summer?

Here in Southern Wisconsin, there has been no noticeable change in Summertime high temps. We still get hardly any days in the 90s for highs, if any... same as always. Our Winters have been more interesting, though, as some have been quite mild compared to what is typical here and others have been extremely bone freezing colder than what is typical here. The last few years, we've seen a lot of days where temps have gotten down to the -20s or even the -30s for lows (before wind chill). Also, outside of this year where heavier snowfall returned again, we've seen a lot less snowfall (and seeing it accumulate much later into the season) than I remember seeing 15+ years ago. There's been a lot of days where there's been green grass on Christmas Day (or even well into January).

This is called weather. Weather is a random event (it does not have patterns). Weather changes all of the time, and is nothing to freak out about.

See above.

Weather changes all of the time. Who cares.

The polar ice caps are also freezing as well. The melting and freezing of the ice caps occurs with the seasons and is nothing to freak out about. They are not disappearing.

... believing that something is correct because 99/100 people say so is committing the appeal to popularity fallacy. The one person not in agreement with the other 99 might be correct, and the other 99 people might be wrong.

Not "scientifically", but rather "logically". This is an issue of logic, not science.

No, it is not science, but rather mathematics. Probability mathematics to be more precise.

Then why were you calling it "a science" earlier? Science, logic, and mathematics are all different things, dude. The terminology is not interchangeable.

That's not a mathematical probability; that's just going along with the crowd (based on fallacious reasoning). That's just evidence that you outsource your thinking to others.

Yes, I am.

No, you are simply outsourcing your thinking to others.

No, you are just fear mongering over any "increase" or "decrease" in temperature (or storm activity) and dubbing that as "climate change" (an undefined meaningless buzzword). Nope... it is simply weather (not even "extreme" or "normal" or "underwhelming" or whatever else)... just weather. Weather happens, and is nothing to freak out about.

They know how to adapt to different weather situations.

Yes, you should maybe do that sometime.

 

Because the power industry in TX is unregulated. So power generating facilities were not winterized due to cost.

 

What you have presented is not a rebuttal, it's a non-argument, a rhetorical retort, and therefore, incompetent as a rebuttal.

 

Maybe you shouldn't disingenuously mischaracterize and trivialize others arguments.

See, 'outsourcing thinking' isn't quite right.

I'm relying on expertise of climate scientists, which is an acceptable behavior. People tend to do that.

IF I relied on the expertise of a brain surgeon who recommended surgery, even got a second opinion, a third, i.e, a consensus, would you trivialize that act as 'outsourcing thinking' ? How is it, all of the sudden, doing what normal humans do, relying on experts, 'outsourcing thinking'?

I'll tell you why, because the trick of trivializing an opponent's argument is a pseudo debate trick by incompetent debaters who believe that doing so emboldens their arguments and they typically do it when their own argument is weak (it's one device amongst many, which I have cataloged, which I will divulge on request).

It's a vast subject, with tons of detail. I'd like to see someone like you debate someone who really knows the subject.

This guy has rebutted just about every objection raised, so can you refute every thing he writes about, since you are someone who professes to not have outsourced your thinking on the subject?

https://skepticalscience.com/

 

can you provide more compelling rebuttals than this fellow's rebuttals to typical arguments of ACC deniers?

https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

 

So a loss of 10 percent of the power supply was tresponsinlethird of the magawattagw

Bury them in florida, in sink hole heaven, where the water table is 5 feet down in a lot of places? Real genius there...

 

Maybe Texas will begin a state income tax to pay for the repairs of their power grid..

their will be a civil war in Texas if those Texans are told they have to pony up a few bucks for better services and roads

Anybody notice states that have no income tax seem to be the worst kept ..Florida , Texas are the worst 2 Both have outdated airports and horrible roads and services..

reminds me of the saying

you get what you pay for