Jump to content

How Australia Perfected Solar Power and Then Went Back to Coal


Downunder

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 737
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Your right,

You're.

 

Your right, I don't understand the science of GW, in fact I would put it to you that the only people who really understand, or perhaps more accurately have the capacity to see the bigger picture, are climate Scientists,

Have you ever seen a debate, I mean a real good debate between highly intelligent people in their field but on different sides? They choose what they want to be heard to win their case. Pay them to prove GW isn't an issue and then see their case stated.

 

But that doesn't happen does it, pro GW is the gravy train ride currently (ironically it was Ice Age 40 years ago) and see what people like FT do to anyone who dares say it's not an issue. You think Scientists who don't make a living out of it are going to go against it and get abused by society all for free? "You hate the Earth and killing my children's future world", seriously, who's stupid enough to stand in that corner, so it's not a shocking revelation that there's currently a huge imbalance in the debate.

 

climate science is a recreational activity of yours that we are not aware of and you feel up to the standard of real scientists and perfectly able to have a one on one conversation with them about it.........some how I doubt it!......but feel free to tell me otherwise.

Oh, the irony, unless you're presenting yourself as someone of equal footing to those Scientists, then please don't even try to use that against me. [mod was here]

 

Your and other's entire stance is based on pure faith in people who constantly err but, and lucky for mankind, generally are happy to admit they were wrong and move on to ultimate discovery as true Scientists do because to a real Scientist that's the only important bit. They, the 'for GW' Scientists, may be wrong now and it shows many times in their reports.

 

The vast majority of people accept the science,

And? "the vast majority" believe in a God too or even worse, vote Liberal or Labour, enough said.

 

I once saw a bunch of sheep walking around a small dam near Beaudesert about 15 years ago, funniest thing I had seen in years, imagine a complete circle of sheep merely following the one in front blindly, no leader nor one at the end. Had I had a video I would have got the $5000 on Oz Funniest Home Videos at the time I reckon.

 

Your sentence just reminded me of it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's start with Vice President Al Gore.....

Al Gore isn't a scientist, he wasn't even a politician when he released his movie.

 

My point Bex, is that your idea that you are bravely speaking out against the politically corrupt science and have a mass of people behind you is fallacious. You have to be careful, socialist doctors will poison you if you get sick to shut you up.

 

Look at the tinfoil army you follow along behind, thruthers, birthers, deniers, vaccers etc your common currency is half truths.

 

spacer.png

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the tinfoil army you follow along behind, thruthers, birthers, deniers, vaccers etc your common currency is half truths.

You have me wrong, I believe in fluoridation, vaccinations and get a great laugh out of chemtrails etc theories.

 

But most of all, I decide things for myself and I just don't like scams in my face daily when there's real issues at hand.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until recently there was no such discipline as Climate Scientist. There was Geology, which studied the the way the planet evolved and behaved including the atmosphere, and there was Atmospheric Physics which was about what was going on now in the atmosphere. When I read that we should believe the climate scientists an alarm bell rings. Suddenly there are thousands or tens of thousands of them on the public purse, a lot of them playing with computer models. I was taught geology more than 40 years ago and I reckon I know enough to be a skeptic and to see holes in a lot of the silly things we read in the newspapers.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'll never get unbiased facts while the people providing the information have to rely on scaremongering to get grant money, the same as you will never get a cost effective building designed while the architect gets paid a percentage of the building cost....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone has a proven theory about climate change, or even if there is climate change. What I think is that it would be a good idea to use alternative energy, rather than coal and oil wherever possible. That way we could mitigate the danger if it is there. What is not a good idea is to put head in sand and blindly believe all you hear.

 

Our government doesn't help by promoting the global warming scare and at the same time pushing to dig up every bit of coal and export it, while at the same time trying to kill off any alternative energy supply.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I think is that it would be a good idea to use alternative energy, rather than coal and oil wherever possible. .

For sure Yenn, totally agree as long as the alternative is a genuine improvement which brings this thread full circle, solar panels are an improvement over coal and oil for sure along with hydro.

 

Of course it takes coal and oil to make solar work, but gains in the long run.

 

 

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

×
×
  • Create New...