Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Proof that wind and solar are disasters


docyabut2

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Doc Socks Junior said:

Incorrect.

Sorry, not sorry, to burst your bubble but those 1.5C models, let's just agree that they are a work of fiction, because that's exactly what they are. A 1.5C rise at the equator does not magnify out to a rise in polar temperatures. The climate claims are utter fiction. Go and ACTUALLY read the 'science', it's laughable.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/24/2024 at 1:28 AM, OpenMindedSceptic said:

The problem is, the core issue of greenhouse gases create climate change is false.

1.  Earth's average temperature is going up.

2.  Carbon Dioxide levels are increasing.

3.  Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas

Draw your own conclusions.

Doug

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/21/2024 at 1:49 PM, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Those changes won't kill us,

In 2005 Paris had a heat wave that killed about 15,000 people.  We have had several in the US that killed in the hundreds.  You're right:  those changes won't kill us.  But the heat will.

Doug

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Doug1066 said:

1.  Earth's average temperature is going up.

2.  Carbon Dioxide levels are increasing.

3.  Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas

Draw your own conclusions.

Doug

Ah yes, your 'facts' are incomplete. How do these affect the greenhouse effect? Because, well, they don't. Point 1 has issues too. Point 2, hmm the jury is out, Point 3, greenhouse gases is a term coined for the greenhouse effect con. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Doug1066 said:

In 2005 Paris had a heat wave that killed about 15,000 people.  We have had several in the US that killed in the hundreds.  You're right:  those changes won't kill us.  But the heat will.

Doug

 

 

Errr, nope.

The year was 2003 not 2005 and the number of deaths attributed climate change by the most ardent body funded by this nonsense was about 750 but that was pretty flawed 'guesstimating'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/31/2024 at 2:54 PM, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Ah yes, your 'facts' are incomplete. How do these affect the greenhouse effect? Because, well, they don't. Point 1 has issues too. Point 2, hmm the jury is out, Point 3, greenhouse gases is a term coined for the greenhouse effect con. 

The Beer-Lambert equations predict temperature given CO2 concentration.  I have some reservations on their accuracy, but you might start with them.

You might want to check the Keeling curve for CO2 levels.  There are actually six monitoring stations, so the Keeling curve is just one, but they all are in good agreement.  I'd say the jury has returned its verdict and gone home.

Any gas that absorbs energy and re-radiates it in the form of heat is a greenhouse gas.  CO2 is not the only one, but because there is something like a thousand times more CO2 in the atmosphere than there is of any other greenhouse gas (not counting water vapor), it is considered the chief culprit.

On 5/31/2024 at 2:58 PM, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Errr, nope.

The year was 2003 not 2005 and the number of deaths attributed climate change by the most ardent body funded by this nonsense was about 750 but that was pretty flawed 'guesstimating'.

I got the year wrong.  It was 2003.  The actual number of heat-caused deaths was 14,802 (Goodell. 2023, The Heat Will Kill You First).

For 2022, it was 61,672 deaths for all of Europe (Ramirez, 2023, Nature Medicine).

The elderly, who live in the cheapest apartments, directly under the roof where temps are highest, are most susceptible, particular with the European use of zinc roofing.  The apartment buildings often have five stories or more with no elevators and so people have a difficult time escaping heat.  The heating is made worse by improper building orientation, so construction methods used during cooler times are now coming back to haunt us.

Parisians have the worst heat-caused death rate (https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/05/04/overheating-parisians-have-the-highest-risk-of-heat-related-deaths-in-europe).

It is heat stroke that actually does the killing.  Such incidents are increasing in frequency (That IS climate change.).

Since 2014, there have been 32,658 heat-caused deaths in France (https://www.lemonde.fr/en/environment/article/2023/06/26/heat-waves-have-caused-nearly-33-000-deaths-in-france-since-2014_6037460_114.html).

There have also been several hundred heat-caused deaths in the US, mainly among farm workers who are close to sun=heated soil and without adequate water/cooling breaks.

 

Stillwater, Oklahoma is 1 degree F warmer now than it was in 2008.  So is Oklahoma City.

Doug

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

The Beer-Lambert equations predict temperature given CO2 concentration.  I have some reservations on their accuracy, but you might start with them.

You might want to check the Keeling curve for CO2 levels.  There are actually six monitoring stations, so the Keeling curve is just one, but they all are in good agreement.  I'd say the jury has returned its verdict and gone home.

Any gas that absorbs energy and re-radiates it in the form of heat is a greenhouse gas.  CO2 is not the only one, but because there is something like a thousand times more CO2 in the atmosphere than there is of any other greenhouse gas (not counting water vapor), it is considered the chief culprit.

I got the year wrong.  It was 2003.  The actual number of heat-caused deaths was 14,802 (Goodell. 2023, The Heat Will Kill You First).

For 2022, it was 61,672 deaths for all of Europe (Ramirez, 2023, Nature Medicine).

The elderly, who live in the cheapest apartments, directly under the roof where temps are highest, are most susceptible, particular with the European use of zinc roofing.  The apartment buildings often have five stories or more with no elevators and so people have a difficult time escaping heat.  The heating is made worse by improper building orientation, so construction methods used during cooler times are now coming back to haunt us.

Parisians have the worst heat-caused death rate (https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/05/04/overheating-parisians-have-the-highest-risk-of-heat-related-deaths-in-europe).

It is heat stroke that actually does the killing.  Such incidents are increasing in frequency (That IS climate change.).

Since 2014, there have been 32,658 heat-caused deaths in France (https://www.lemonde.fr/en/environment/article/2023/06/26/heat-waves-have-caused-nearly-33-000-deaths-in-france-since-2014_6037460_114.html).

There have also been several hundred heat-caused deaths in the US, mainly among farm workers who are close to sun=heated soil and without adequate water/cooling breaks.

 

Stillwater, Oklahoma is 1 degree F warmer now than it was in 2008.  So is Oklahoma City.

Doug

 

 

But  in 2003, only a few hundred deaths could be remotely recorded as heat related and that was clutching at straws. 

As for your other data I'll look but crucially the greenhouse affect is flawed. Heat at the equator does not exponentially increase at the poles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

But  in 2003, only a few hundred deaths could be remotely recorded as heat related and that was clutching at straws. 

As for your other data I'll look but crucially the greenhouse affect is flawed. Heat at the equator does not exponentially increase at the poles. 

GLOBAL warming is the average change in GLOBAL temperature over a 30-year period.  It is not the equatorial temperature or the polar temperature.

Doug

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doug1066 said:

GLOBAL warming is the average change in GLOBAL temperature over a 30-year period.  It is not the equatorial temperature or the polar temperature.

Doug

No.

The greenhouse effect has always specifically been the extrapolation of the inversely proportional temperature rise at the poles correlating to temperature rises elsewhere. That has always been the reason for this nonsense starting and the theory that has the sheeple panicked as the theory states small rises create ice melts on a biblical proportion. 

It does not. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I miss when the climate trolls used to dig up obscure screeds by retired engineers with crucial misunderstandings of atmospheric dynamics. Now they're just sort of yelling at the clouds. Major come down.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

No.

The greenhouse effect has always specifically been the extrapolation of the inversely proportional temperature rise at the poles correlating to temperature rises elsewhere. That has always been the reason for this nonsense starting and the theory that has the sheeple panicked as the theory states small rises create ice melts on a biblical proportion. 

It does not. 

     :unsure: huh?       All I know is.. it’s getting warmer most places.. .and , the ice at both poles is Receding, and all 200,000 glaciers on earth are melting, and in general ,weather patterns are getting larger and more Extreme.   Why?   Windmills?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lightly said:

     :unsure: huh?       All I know is.. it’s getting warmer most places.. .and , the ice at both poles is Receding, and all 200,000 glaciers on earth are melting, and in general ,weather patterns are getting larger and more Extreme.   Why?   Windmills?

Oh dear, that's just not what this whole thing is about. That's mainstream media diluting the core message so much that it's meaningless. The whole message is being made up as it goes along. We should have seen the poles melt by now given the predictions. But they're still there. Whether patterns should be larger by bow, but they're not. We will be a generation laughed at by future generations due to climate change nonsense.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Oh dear, that's just not what this whole thing is about. That's mainstream media diluting the core message so much that it's meaningless. The whole message is being made up as it goes along. We should have seen the poles melt by now given the predictions. But they're still there. Whether patterns should be larger by bow, but they're not. We will be a generation laughed at by future generations due to climate change nonsense.

 

Yes,  given the predictions… that were made  when ?   Have we made any progress in reducing emissions of greenhouse gases during that period of time?    Perhaps that might explain the mysterious lag between prediction and result?     And yes, the polar ice caps are still here…they are just much smaller than 20 to 30 years ago.        but they are.?     …Actually Open,  I guess the Antarctic is gaining ice..so, I’m only half wrong?   https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/scientists-confirm-global-floods-and-droughts-worsened-by-climate-change

image.gif.41fd954e788cbf3a864f32d9c9d3973f.gif
 

               ¥   Antarctica?   I’m not sure.

image.jpeg

Edited by lightly
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, lightly said:

Yes,  given the predictions… that were made  when ?   Have we made any progress in reducing emissions of greenhouse gases during that period of time?    Perhaps that might explain the mysterious lag between prediction and result?     And yes, the polar ice caps are still here…they are just much smaller than 20 to 30 years ago.        but they are.?     …Actually Open,  I guess the Antarctic is gaining ice..so, I’m only half wrong?   https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/scientists-confirm-global-floods-and-droughts-worsened-by-climate-change

image.gif.41fd954e788cbf3a864f32d9c9d3973f.gif
 

               ¥   Antarctica?   I’m not sure.

image.jpeg

You haven't followed the climate argument. 

The theory started very clearly. Small rises in average temperature apparently magnify at the poles. We are already way past predictions. It was a lie.

As for your pictures... you need them on the dame date 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

You haven't followed the climate argument. 

The theory started very clearly. Small rises in average temperature apparently magnify at the poles. We are already way past predictions. It was a lie.

As for your pictures... you need them on the dame date 

https://www.grida.no/resources/5260
How about SEPTEMBER?    image.jpeg.e6d417e17e6547567facba927dc5a300.jpeg

 

 

Edited by lightly
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LED's have made much solar power great.   I have lights and cameras all around my house and they are powered exclusively by solar.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/3/2024 at 1:26 PM, Doug1066 said:

GLOBAL warming is the average change in GLOBAL temperature over a 30-year period.  It is not the equatorial temperature or the polar temperature.

Doug

You’re arguing with someone who doesn’t believe that Jupiter emits natural radio emissions. Oh yeah, and that Tesla talked to aliens.

Science isn’t exactly his thing.

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Myles said:

LED's have made much solar power great.   I have lights and cameras all around my house and they are powered exclusively by solar.  

Yup, LED’s are a great advancement.    Energy production is part of the problem…energy Consumption is another part.    ???

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/5/2024 at 12:13 AM, Antigonos said:

You’re arguing with someone who doesn’t believe that Jupiter emits natural radio emissions. Oh yeah, and that Tesla talked to aliens.

Science isn’t exactly his thing.

Careful now. You know I've neve said anything about believing Tesla talked to aliens. You need to back that statement up, or what else gave you been telling lies about? 

Post the evidence whenever you're ready.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/4/2024 at 7:50 PM, lightly said:

https://www.grida.no/resources/5260
How about SEPTEMBER?    image.jpeg.e6d417e17e6547567facba927dc5a300.jpeg

 

 

Right, before we deal with the above. State the premise for science saying global warming will be a catatrophe on our current trajectory.based on the greenhouse effect. That's what this baloney is based upon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Right, before we deal with the above. State the premise for science saying global warming will be a catatrophe on our current trajectory.based on the greenhouse effect. That's what this baloney is based upon.

I’m not a climatologist .,. So I cannot do as you demand of me.    This topic is    Proof that wind and solar are disasters           Could you you please state the premise, and provide evidence for that claim? 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2024 at 12:47 PM, lightly said:

I’m not a climatologist .,. So I cannot do as you demand of me.    This topic is    Proof that wind and solar are disasters           Could you you please state the premise, and provide evidence for that claim? 

The news in last week in the UK is: warmest May since 1884. It blames climate change.

There are clips of newsreaders laughing while reading it.

That's because we have had a freezing cold May. There is still snow on the hilltops in Scotland which had happened for years and years.

The billions of pounds being poured into climate change has proven too strong a pull for then [follow the science] science scientists.

Stay tuned while the climate change argument gets dismantled over the coking months and years.

The scientists are telling bare faced lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

That's because we have had a freezing cold May.

No we didn't.  Have you even looked at the data?    Stop lying.

Across the whole of the UK there were only 2 times when temps dropped below freezing.   That's is remarkable.   And somewhere in the UK recorded over 20c (ie several degrees above average) on no less than 26 days.   

Quote

There is still snow on the hilltops in Scotland which had happened for years and years.

There are always snow patches around in June.   It's not unusual to even have a brief, fresh covering of snow in June.   It looks unlikely many, if any, snow patches will survive the summer though - which is unusual (though increasingly less so).

Also, June is not May. 

Looks at the facts, and stop decieving yourself.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Search Results

Featured snippet from the web

The Triassic Period (252 to 201 million years ago) kicked off the age of dinosaurs. “Back then, it was extremely hot because concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide were five times higher than today's levels,” explained Olsen. “And yet, marine and terrestrial life was thriving.”
Edited by docyabut2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.