Recruiting forum off topic thread (no politics, covid, or hot button issues)

Funny, but this isn't the cause of our power crisis here. Our grid has never been weather proofed for these kinds of temperature because it just doesn't normally get this cold here. The last time we had a power grid failure was probably 10 or so years ago. It's not the windmills freezing. ;p
I never said that was the problem in Texas or that it caused the power crisis. I was merely pointing out that petroleum is used in various ways.
 
the planet is warming up but it probably has just a little to do with humans. That is not to say by being even a little cognizant of the effect we can help. Developing alternate energy sources is simply a prudent thing to do when you have a finite source you have been relying on since the dawn of the industrial age. Personally I think nuclear power is our future and designing and implementing the proper safeguards will ensure that it can be relied upon.
 
the planet is warming up but it probably has just a little to do with humans. That is not to say by being even a little cognizant of the effect we can help. Developing alternate energy sources is simply a prudent thing to do when you have a finite source you have been relying on since the dawn of the industrial age. Personally I think nuclear power is our future and designing and implementing the proper safeguards will ensure that it can be relied upon.
Only if the right people can get even filthier rich off of it.
 
the planet is warming up but it probably has just a little to do with humans. That is not to say by being even a little cognizant of the effect we can help. Developing alternate energy sources is simply a prudent thing to do when you have a finite source you have been relying on since the dawn of the industrial age. Personally I think nuclear power is our future and designing and implementing the proper safeguards will ensure that it can be relied upon.
Nuclear is the future, unfortunately we have politicians making decisions who are controlled by oil industry, solar and wind industry money.
 
the planet is warming up but it probably has just a little to do with humans. That is not to say by being even a little cognizant of the effect we can help. Developing alternate energy sources is simply a prudent thing to do when you have a finite source you have been relying on since the dawn of the industrial age. Personally I think nuclear power is our future and designing and implementing the proper safeguards will ensure that it can be relied upon.

Fusion Power baby!!!
 
It is 300% warmer now than when you woke up. Clear evidence of the existential threat of global warming. Now let's kill some birds with our wind farms and drive electric cars that require more energy to run that those dinosaur internal combustion smog skewers.



Sorry. I hate the hyperbole of global warming proponents.
Seriously? As someone who has grown up in a family in the oil industry, this is just crazy. Electric cars are going to be the future, and they are already WAY more efficient in just about every way than gas (and yes, I still drive a extremely un-efficient gas powered vehicle). There are a whole lot of benefits to renewable energy.

Are we going to go after the duck hunters next? I'm pretty sure they kill a lot of birds as well.

I have a good friend who is a geologist and we were talking about global warming and he said that Chicago was under 3000 ft. of ice at one time. He is A LOT smarter than I am and that global warming and ice ages have happened 5 times that we know of. That how the Great Lakes and The Bad Lands of South Dakota were formed. Not saying we aren't contributing to the warming but it isn't the first time either.
 
the planet is warming up but it probably has just a little to do with humans. That is not to say by being even a little cognizant of the effect we can help. Developing alternate energy sources is simply a prudent thing to do when you have a finite source you have been relying on since the dawn of the industrial age. Personally I think nuclear power is our future and designing and implementing the proper safeguards will ensure that it can be relied upon.
Agree on nuclear, but it's one technology you can't allow lowest bidder to design and build.
 
Windmills are not brand new tech. They have been around for centuries.
Yeah I'm obviously referring to skyscraper sized windwills that generate electricity here....that's like saying the car has been here since the wheel was invented
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ace
Data points aren’t enough to give us a good enough trend line (couple hundred years max vs potential millions of years). Seeing as we were coming out of a mini ice age in the mid 19th century, it would only make sense that temps will trend upward.

One other interesting fact that helps the “climate change” argument is that Canada left out nearly 50 years of data when compiling their warming report because it didn’t fit the narrative.
They have brainwashed kids for the last 30 years. I know the earth is warming, I also know the earth has warmed and cooled many times..every single cycle without our help...they leave that simple fact out.
 
Yeah I'm obviously referring to skyscraper sized windwills that generate electricity here....that's like saying the car has been here since the wheel was invented
I am just joking around. We should have a broad based energy policy. Too much money passing between Washington politicians and energy industry. No disrespect to you
 
They have brainwashed kids for the last 30 years. I know the earth is warming, I also know the earth has warmed and cooled many times..every single cycle without our help...they leave that simple fact out.

In my lifetime we’ve “weathered” the experts telling us we’d all be dead from:

Global Ice Age
Famine and drought (starvation)
Ozone depletion (death by UV)
Acid Rain
Rising temps, leading to...
Rising oceans
California breaking into ocean (still hoping)
Coastal cities all wiped out (20 years ago)
Global ice caps melted (7 years ago)
Overpopulation
Oil gone (50 years ago)
Water depleted
Killer bees
Global warming
Killer hurricanes
Climate change
Unprecedented winter storms
Wildfires now

I’m sure I’m missing some since Covid was also a manifestation of climate change as well.

Anyhow, I refuse to live with that kind of fear. That and butter and eggs will kill you.

At the end of the day, it’s a means to and end: taxation of air, the only thing people thought you couldn’t tax and control
 
Seriously? As someone who has grown up in a family in the oil industry, this is just crazy. Electric cars are going to be the future, and they are already WAY more efficient in just about every way than gas (and yes, I still drive a extremely un-efficient gas powered vehicle). There are a whole lot of benefits to renewable energy.

Are we going to go after the duck hunters next? I'm pretty sure they kill a lot of birds as well.
Electric cars suck. You can not take long trips in them.
 
This is a graph that charts the fluctuations in carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere going back hundreds of thousands of years (measured and cross-checked by half a dozen methods such as lake sediment cores, tree rings, ice cores, etc). As you can see, the fluctuations are cyclical. The problem is that the current levels are far above the historic peak. This exponential increase is in tandem with the start of industrialization. These are just numbers, no politics. We know this has occurred.

The true question is: what do we do about it, and what does it mean? That's where answers start to vary. What does it mean? Well, given that carbon is a greenhouse gas, they extrapolate that this increase in carbon concentration will result in an increase in global temperatures to the tune of a few degrees. Then they model what effect these degree increases will have on climates and weather patterns. Are their models right? I don't know, I personally think most of it is sensationalized and hyperbolic. What do we do about it? Do we try to decrease it with technology and decrease carbon output? Some say yes. Do we do nothing? Some would argue for that.

This is my attempt at a cliff-notes synthesis of a very complex process that can't possibly be fully explained in this format. Years ago I was in serious doubt that this was an issue at all, and that it was totally made up. Then I started learning the science behind the madness and the sheer amount of data from dozens of fields (such as wildlife biology and political science, that you'd think isn't closely related) of research showing that there's some legitimacy and facts that should be accepted.

Anyway. Not looking for an argument if anyone gets triggered or disagrees. Just laying that out there for some who are honestly questioning the topic.

20210216_115314.jpg
 
This is a graph that charts the fluctuations in carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere going back hundreds of thousands of years (measured and cross-checked by half a dozen methods such as lake sediment cores, tree rings, ice cores, etc). As you can see, the fluctuations are cyclical. The problem is that the current levels are far above the historic peak. This exponential increase is in tandem with the start of industrialization. These are just numbers, no politics. We know this has occurred.

The true question is: what do we do about it, and what does it mean? That's where answers start to vary. What does it mean? Well, given that carbon is a greenhouse gas, they extrapolate that this increase in carbon concentration will result in an increase in global temperatures to the tune of a few degrees. Then they model what effect these degree increases will have on climates and weather patterns. Are their models right? I don't know, I personally think most of it is sensationalized and hyperbolic. What do we do about it? Do we try to decrease it with technology and decrease carbon output? Some say yes. Do we do nothing? Some would argue for that.

This is my attempt at a cliff-notes synthesis of a very complex process that can't possibly be fully explained in this format. Years ago I was in serious doubt that this was an issue at all, and that it was totally made up. Then I started learning the science behind the madness and the sheer amount of data from dozens of fields (such as wildlife biology and political science, that you'd think isn't closely related) of research showing that there's some legitimacy and facts that should be accepted.

Anyway. Not looking for an argument if anyone gets triggered or disagrees. Just laying that out there for some who are honestly questioning the topic.

View attachment 352012
tenor.gif

tenor.gif

tenor.gif

X394.gif

tenor.gif

tenor.gif

tumblr_inline_o38mh2zcg71t507a3_400.gifv

tenor.gif
 
They have brainwashed kids for the last 30 years. I know the earth is warming, I also know the earth has warmed and cooled many times..every single cycle without our help...they leave that simple fact out.

How dare they teach kids to respect and have some responsibility for how we treat mother nature!!! As a lover of nature and national parks I would think you would understand the need to research better ways to treat this rock. Guess not.
 
Agree on nuclear, but it's one technology you can't allow lowest bidder to design and build.
The new reactor designs are amazing, I read a article in NatGeo a few years ago about them and the massive differences in the new designs and the old ones.

Nuclear is the answer going forward, but it has to be done right, and the anti-nuclear freaks are going to have to stand down. Fossil fuels will run out, and renewables will always be too unreliable and underperforming to count on.
 
This is a graph that charts the fluctuations in carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere going back hundreds of thousands of years (measured and cross-checked by half a dozen methods such as lake sediment cores, tree rings, ice cores, etc). As you can see, the fluctuations are cyclical. The problem is that the current levels are far above the historic peak. This exponential increase is in tandem with the start of industrialization. These are just numbers, no politics. We know this has occurred.

The true question is: what do we do about it, and what does it mean? That's where answers start to vary. What does it mean? Well, given that carbon is a greenhouse gas, they extrapolate that this increase in carbon concentration will result in an increase in global temperatures to the tune of a few degrees. Then they model what effect these degree increases will have on climates and weather patterns. Are their models right? I don't know, I personally think most of it is sensationalized and hyperbolic. What do we do about it? Do we try to decrease it with technology and decrease carbon output? Some say yes. Do we do nothing? Some would argue for that.

This is my attempt at a cliff-notes synthesis of a very complex process that can't possibly be fully explained in this format. Years ago I was in serious doubt that this was an issue at all, and that it was totally made up. Then I started learning the science behind the madness and the sheer amount of data from dozens of fields (such as wildlife biology and political science, that you'd think isn't closely related) of research showing that there's some legitimacy and facts that should be accepted.

Anyway. Not looking for an argument if anyone gets triggered or disagrees. Just laying that out there for some who are honestly questioning the topic.

View attachment 352012
No doubt things are changing due to the population and pollution but I have a hard time putting much stock in scientific studies that show research on something when they weren’t even there to research it.
 
It's more a function of solar activity/inactivity. Might be able to move the needle a fraction by human activity. Sources of energy will evolve like they always have. It was less than 150 years ago that the first 4 stroke combustion engine was built, now look at things.
Truth, there is very strong evidence that we may be in a grand solar minimum and it’s going to be colder for a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vols4us
No doubt things are changing due to the population and pollution but I have a hard time putting much stock in scientific studies that show research on something when they weren’t even there to research it.
Like, archaeology and paleontology?

I get what you're saying and felt the same way at a time. But the science and methods are sound.
 

VN Store



Back
Top