:rolleyes: That ain’t even straw, it’s just moldy hay with dung in it.
I doubt that the fires have anything to do with AGW. Its more a case of periodic drought in the American Southwest-we may be entering a phase similar to that of AD 1300-1400 (when the cliff dwellings, Chaco Canyon, etc. were abandoned).
That, and the propensity of people to move into forested areas…and the (intentional suppression of small fires). The deadwood builds up, then you have a massive fire.
Economic Benefits? Like footing the cost of development? Primary adopters will pay far more per MW in development and infrastructure costs than secondary and tertiary adopters will. France would be wise to let Germany pave the way and foot the bill and then adopt the technology and distribution systems once they have been fully developed and proven in the field on such a large scale.
re: solar
Gigo’s article suggests solar is currently cost-competitive with coal generation, and will halve again in price within 10 years. So at some point it becomes cheaper than natural gas, or anything available. Look at the boom in natural gas- the fuel is cheap and everyone wants to drill it.
If you are competing with gas-drillers and solar costs half, I don’t see why it can’t receive massive investment, which would have a feedback-loop effect in the industry, which could lead to an industrial tipping point…
Like all religions, you are infatuated with what you know and think you know (often confusing the two), and greatly ignore the scale of the amount of information you do not know and might not ever be able to know. That and the evangelical-like certitude you display in every discussion you (singular and plural) enter into.
That’s a fact, Preacher.
And tell me, Preacher, why in the world should I accept your position over Lovelock’s? Can you share your CV so I can make an assessment?
Magellan tries so hard. That’s almost respectable.
Lovelock proposed the Gaia hypothesis. Make what you will of that. I call it woo.
You are really retarded if you think my position means a lot, what I consider here is the evidence that we get from science, science that as been pointed out even the real skeptics acknowledge, after he retired Lovelock only has opinions, he was wrong on the levels of damage we could expect, he is wrong now by assuming that everything will be hunky dory now.
What I do know is that usually retarded ideas like “Lovelock is now against AGW, this is a bomb shell” are considered to be a great deal only in retarded and unscientific circles like Watts up With That, in scientific circles Lovelock was not taken seriously.
And now that he is jumping from one extreme to another he is still outside of what the evidence is showing.
So, here is the huge problem with your line of thinking, someone told you before that Lovelock was the beesnees, whoever source told you that was bananas, and they are even more idiotic now for trying to pass a has been as the purveyor of truth; as usual, I expect that you will find more reasons to trow vitriol at me instead of the ones that misled you all this time.
This bit also needs the input of Dr. Alley (did I mention he is a Republican?)
No religion there.
There is very little evidence to support your idea that the scale prevents science from progressing, the big picture shows that the pieces of the puzzle that scientists know and have are more than enough for them to say that there is a problem and we need to change to take care of it.
Nicholas Stern attempted this in 2006, writing the Stern review. As far as I recall, he held that continuing current rates of using fossil fuels would lead to far more costs further on than subsidising sustainable forms of energy. Tragedy of the commons, I suppose.
Certainly AGW can’t directly cause a particular forest fire, any more than it can directly cause a particular hurricane. The climatic and environmental conditions that lead to forest fires, hurricanes, etc., are there already; what determines when and how a particular event occurs is mostly just random chance.
However, AGW can certainly make the overall climatic and environmental conditions more conducive to forest fires. Which is exactly what climate scientists think is happening.
Why would you think that?
Seriously, why?
We have an observed change in local climate in the American Southwest (increased drought and heat) that the vast majority of climate scientists think is primarily caused by anthropogenic changes in the atmosphere (AGW).
So what’s inspiring you to pull out of your ass an alternative hypothesis about “periodic drought” and confidently assert that that’s a more likely explanation of the observed change than the explanation that scientists are proposing?
Sheesh. There are plenty of scientific phenomena whose causes aren’t thoroughly understood yet, but only in the case of climate phenomena do otherwise intelligent laypeople seem to consider themselves so irrationally entitled to confidently contradict the findings of mainstream science.
For instance, entomologists studying the recent epidemic of honeybee colony collapse disorder currently (though still tentatively) ascribe it to a combination of factors including crop pesticides, pathogens and parasites. If I, a non-entomologist, came along and declared “I doubt the colony collapse disorder has anything to do with those factors. It’s more a case of bird flycatcher species massively increasing their bee predation”, reasonable people would look at me as though I had two heads, and rightly so.
But climate change deniers seem to think they have some kind of approved license to bullshit. I don’t understand it.
Huh. Seriously? Want to show your work on this a little… maybe how much the temperature has changed, how deep the change will have conducted into the Earth’s crust over a few decades, maybe a quick look at the thermal expansion coefficient of deep rock layers? 'Cos on the face of it it’s sounding about as plausible as the claim that the full Moon brings on attacks of gout because of the increased tidal effect on human body fluids.
Yeah, on that I think **Ludovic **may not have it right regarding earthquakes,
Volcano eruptions though..
http://news.discovery.com/earth/will-global-warming-make-icelands-volcanoes-angry.html
Still, I do think more research is needed on that front to be more sure about that.
I was thinking of know-how, patents, existing production lines, etc… giving you a head start in what I think will be a major market in the near future.
Dr. Lovelock seems to disagree. As I asked, can you supply your credentials so I can determine how much weight I should give your opinion over his?
You are a moron indeed, the point here is that what you are doing is only shooting the messenger, I already referred you the experts that have weighted on the levels of respect that Lovelock has with other climate scientists, as usual my credential are not important in this case, so use logic for once.
Your beef is with the climate scientists and many others, you are only insisting on putting down a poster on a message board, and the reason is clear, you are only willing to skip the science, as Lovelock is doing too now has he is not an expert in climate science and he has not published anything in scientific journals in ages.
I sincerely apologize if this is a threadcrap, but The Onion…
http://www.theonion.com/articles/hottest-12-months-on-record,28651/
Don’t forget anything that might help wean Americans off the automobile, as well as improving our daily quality-of-life in countless ways (see Asphalt Nation, by Jane Holtz Kay) – New Urbanist planning-reforms, walkable high-density mixed-use neighborhoods, bulldozing the exurban sprawlscape, a whole lot more fixed-rail mass transit, light rail, streetcars, a national high-speed rail network, a greatly improved and expanded network of commuter rail and conventional inter-city rail, no town or neighborhood in America left rail-inaccessible, myself as Supreme Absolute God-Emperor with unlimited droit du seigneur . . .
There’s still a scientific mystery as to how clouds work?! Was I lied to in junior high school?!
:rolleyes::dubious: Do you really want to be one of our NDD/brazil84-style Dopetards who pretends to miss a point no matter how often and clearly it’s posted in direct response to his own posts?! Don’t PRATT, please.