1 - 10 Next
In response to:

What Really Threatens Our Future?

Brian H Wrote: Mar 28, 2011 4:47 AM
It's not feedback, just straight feed-forward. Temperatures crashed and Ice Ages began while CO2 was still in the 000 of ppm, and flat or rising. As a "driver", CO2 isn't even in the back seat. It's in a trailer.
In response to:

What Really Threatens Our Future?

Brian H Wrote: Mar 28, 2011 4:44 AM
Since "climatology" doesn't exist except in the grandiose self-description of the Jackasses of All Sciences, Masters of None at CRU and GISS, being "real" climatologist is an oxymoron.
In response to:

What Really Threatens Our Future?

Brian H Wrote: Mar 28, 2011 4:40 AM
See above. Nuclear is competitive when gas is >8 bucks, and it's half that, and falling. And Barry's "guarantees" and promises are worthless. Except when they have to do with expanding his tools "to rule", as he put it during the campaign. If America is to stay a free nation, it had better be Bedtime for B****, the sooner the better. Trump's call for him to produce evidence he's actually qualified to be CIC by birth will maybe do it!
In response to:

What Really Threatens Our Future?

Brian H Wrote: Mar 28, 2011 4:33 AM
Because they cost like the Devil, make people ill (Google WTS), ruin huge expanses of wilderness, and are abandoned to rot by their owners as soon as the subsidies don't cover the huge maintenance costs. And the really screw up the grid; conventional plants have to be full-time on "hot" standby to pick up the slack when the wind is too weak or too strong. Which is often. That is VERY hard on plants designed for stead efficient production, and vastly increases the pollution they emit. There's lots more, but that's enough. More than enough.
In response to:

What Really Threatens Our Future?

Brian H Wrote: Mar 28, 2011 4:28 AM
Even if that silly claim is true, it's a BIG favour to the MidWest. Much, much better to set off a lot of little quakes than save it up! Just to give you a sense of scale, the Japan 9.0 quake was 31.6 x 31.6 x 31.6 = 31,555X more powerful than a 6.0, which is considered a "major" quake. Saving up is a BAD idea. And their water injections into the ground are '000s of feet below the water table. The water supply is safe.
In response to:

What Really Threatens Our Future?

Brian H Wrote: Mar 28, 2011 4:21 AM
Overlooked isn't quite the right word. "Concealed and ignored" is closer. A finer demonstration of the 'BS Baffles Brains' approach to science and public policy and global manipulation I have never seen!
In response to:

What Really Threatens Our Future?

Brian H Wrote: Mar 28, 2011 4:18 AM
Nope. There is no population crisis. There is no energy crisis. There is no CO2 problem. All bogus. What else ya got?
In response to:

What Really Threatens Our Future?

Brian H Wrote: Mar 28, 2011 4:16 AM
No, quite quite quiet. Unless you mean quite quite very?
In response to:

What Really Threatens Our Future?

Brian H Wrote: Mar 28, 2011 4:15 AM
No, n-g has priced it out of the market. Can only compete at 8 dollars or so, and the price is now about half that "for the foreseeable future".
In response to:

What Really Threatens Our Future?

Brian H Wrote: Mar 28, 2011 3:58 AM
Yes. There is no such thing as a "Climatology" degree! In fact, there is no such science as "Climatology". It's a self-anointed title by the CRU-Krew and Hokey Team to build a wall around the mash-moosh of half-baked ingredients from actual sciences they've cobbled together. It is very telling that they systematically reject critiques and contributions from real specialists in those areas, appealing to their own superior "generalist" grasp of the rest of the moosh-mush. Whatta con job! You gotta admire their brass, if not their brains.
1 - 10 Next
Friday, June 01 | 07:35 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 07:35 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 07:35 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 07:35 AM ET