So lets assume its all a lie

Lets assume for a brief moment that the concern over global climate change is a vast left wing conspiracy [designed to destroy our freedoms, and apple pie], how would that effect policy?

How do you feel about the movement away from fossil fuels? Mileage requirements? Emissions restrictions? Solar subsidies? etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

I am just curious because the "denier" movement makes very little sense. Surprising because I was a Libertarian for quite some time.

 

even better lets assume it is all true. WTF you plan to do about it? eliminate 80% of the human race and tel the other 20% to go live in huts ala 1500 AD? With no electricity, hospitals, or schools and go hunt and forage for their food?

wind and solar are jokes - just ask the UK. They are having to build LNG plants to make up power for the failure of their wind farms

without modern farming equipment and transportation there will be no food

people everywhere need to warm their homes in winter and a good portion of us here in the south are addicted to having AC in the summer

best learn to adapt to the climate cause you sure as heck ain't going to change it

 

:/

No one is suggesting that modern farming be removed, barring people from heating or cooling their homes.

Why are solar and wind jokes? I'm curious.

 

it's called grasping at straws....and it's political, it's a socialist plot to steal money led by al bore!...never a mention that GWB is a huge promoter of wind power...

 

the wind does not blow consistently the sun does not shine 24 and 7 however the grid does need a steady source of power. In the UK they discovered they need to have gas turbines running at idle and able to take over when the wind is not blowing hard enough or when it is blowing too hard. The real kicker is a gas turbine plant generates more Co2 at idle than it does when running at 100%

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/a...industry-greatest-scam-age.html#ixzz1REPL2LdQ

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/26/london_array_finance_worries/

wind vs gas turbines in Australia

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8559&page=0

 

Kook opinion pieces by propagandists like

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Christopher_Booker

or those with clear conflicts of interest in the nuclear industry (a low carbon competitor to renewables).

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tom_Quirk

doesn't cut it.

Intermittency has a variety of solutions, some already being implemented quite effectively.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermittent_energy_source#Solving_intermittency

Also, London Array, the subject your 2009 article from your Murdoch-owned news source, is progressing very well. After Shell dropped out, they achieved necessary financing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Array

Renewable energy tends to cost more up front (especially offshore wind), but guess what? The fuel is free.

 

and the sun still does not shine 24 and 7 and the wind does not blow at a steady 11 mph 24 and 7 GMB. If the best you can do is attack the source and post cereal box science form wikipedia then you have already lost the debate.

if you think the problem with wind and solar is anywhere near solved show me something that is not taken from one of your tabloid sources that would supply a city the size of Cleavland with enough power to enable it to get through7 days of cloudy windless days. Then fax it to the people in the UK, they would appreciate it I am sure. They have already been raped for subsidies for the frigging wind mills now they are told they are going to be raped again to build gas turbines cause the wind does not blow all the time.

 

It is a left wing conspiracy. Look at the signatures of all the people who defend AGW. All leftie sigs.

 

That does not indicate a conspiracy, by the same token I can claim that there is a vast right wing conspiracy to cover up and suppress the GLC movement.

 

What is a GLC movement?

 

Sorry, meant to abbreviate global climate change, GCC.

 

I don't deny the possibility of climate change. If it is real then the way to deal with it is pretty clear. Adapt to changed circumstances or die.

 

No one is claiming that all power plants be shut down and replaced with solar energy. Solar energy would greater reduce the fossil fuel usage during the day time, wind turbines reduces it when the wind is blowing, and when neither one of those fuel types are unavailable then move over to fossil fuels to compensate.

Just because a technology has a short coming does not mean that its implementation should be dismissed.

 

if it's real then doing nothing is not an option we can not adapt to a worst case scenario, we will die...

 

Which is why the "deniers" puzzle me. Ok so of the GCC was a vast conspiracy, what harm is there in moving away from fossil fuels? Seems to deny reality and encourage bitter partisanship.

 

Sooner or later every species goes extinct. Humanity is not exempt.

If it gets too hot along the coast of California I'll move to British Columbia along with several million of my compatriots.

 

Folks, it doesn't matter what Europeans and North Americans do. Neither the Chinese nor Indians will sacrifice economic growth to fight AGW. They demonstrated that with conviction at the Copenhagen Global Warming Conference in Dec. 2009.

Without their cooperation nothing is possible. And they ain't going to cooperate.

 

speices extinction due situation beyond their control is one thing...don't know of any species putting a gun to their collective heads

you're assuming they'll let you in...

 

How many times have you been told about solar thermal power?
Why do you refuse to listen?

Heat can be stored. So it can be used 24 and 7.

 

and then there is this wonderful new discover unknown to the denier world...hydro lines... that can transfer power from where the wind doesn't blow to where it does...

the power companies already have all the scenarios worked out but it's apparently too complex for denier world to fathom...

 

They under estimate the progress of technology.

Like I said, it puzzles me. Reminds me of n my Libertarian days.... oh Gawd.....

 

I think it is an irrelevant conversation. Let's assume Global Warming is a Global Conspiracy.... regardless, we will run out of oil, coal, shale etc... within the next 100 years.

Saw an ad for wind turbines- may have been a GE ad. It read "In the future 'alternate' energy will be just energy'.

Whether it's true or not, we need to change our ways and rather quickly. Even you deniers have to agree with this.

 

That's a big part as to which I'm at a loss. The energy sources are finite, its clear as day.

But for a reason that escapes me, people are opposed to alternative.

 

because it's tied to "al gore"...it's political not science based opposition, without looking up any stats I'll bet the overwhelming number of deniers come from the right of the political spectrum....

 

Which are my thoughts. I was hoping for more informative responses from the opposition.

But, I doubt I will get any. Just "poking holes" in whatever without giving an alternative.