Report claims with 99% certainty that ACC is real.

[killemsoftly]

compared to the New Normal established on July 15 1974, in buffalo new york at 10:15 am.

any deviation from that temperature "Norm" of 72 degrees is Anthropogenic Global Climate Change.

all previous deviations from 72 degrees are irrelevant.

all subsequent deviations are the result of evil human action, and the sort of non-productive mindless destruction you see in the villains from Captain Planet cartoons.

BRB i gotta go clearcut a forest in brazil for no apparent reason, without gaining any profit.

you're boring, predictable and unintelligent. anyone who'd clearcut a forest should make a buck or two. please hurry. don't forget to refill your drink with kool-aid.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Yeah, they don't drill for and refine crude oil into motor gasoline because we don't use that stuff at all. If you count gasoline, diesel and jet fuel, it's barely 1/2 the barrel. Who pays for that garbage?

fuel oil, ethers, alcohols, and heavy petrofractions like clinker asphalt and pitch make up a small percentage of a barrel of oil's mass and an even smaller portion of it's $ value.

the real money is in the industrial precursor fractions and feedstocks. if they could refine all of a barrel of oil into that shit, asphalt, diesel and gasoline would be rare and expensive, and your car would run on methyl alcohol or some other fuel source.

you dont raise sheep for lanolin or mutton, those are byproducts. if you could raise just wool with zero lanolin & mutton, sheep ranchers would be all over that shit

just like you dont grow weed for pollen sacks, stems and leaf. if you could grow a plant that was all bud, you would.

oil companies dont make gasoline for you, they are stuck with gasoline as a byproduct, and sell it as motor fuel so they dont have to pay to haul it away.
the same goes for asphalt, which is so cheap you can use it to pave roads and driveways. if oil companies could turn that shit into something more profitable, you can bet your left nut they would do so.

your logic has failed you.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Fuel cells use reformers, which convert very same natural gas that's already flowing into your home into hydrogen for the fuel cells, water vapor as a byproduct, and carbon dioxide.

The fuel cell takes the hydrogen and in the presence of atmospheric oxygen creates electricity and heat, WITHOUT combustion. Since there is no flame, there are no incomplete products of combustion such as carbon monoxide- this makes fuel cells about as dangerous as a new refrigerator.

But please, do continue with your rant, it's most entertaining.

funny, every fuel cell design i can find runs off liquid hydrogen and oxygen, not deconstructed methane.

the energy needed to break methane (or water) into o2 and h2 so it can run through a fuel cell is waste, fuel cells also generate significant heat waste.

fuel cells are great in space, where excess heat is a GOOD thing, and the already exorbitant energy requirements for lifting the needed food water, h2 and o2 for use in other applications, simply makes fuel cells the best choice. IN SPACE.

on earth not so much.

down here, we dont have to fight the gravity well, so hydrocarbons are a good solution for our power needs.

also, protip: fuel cells dont make CO2. they make H2O and massive amounts of heat as their waste product.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/fuel-cell.htm

 

[Dr Kynes]

you're boring, predictable and unintelligent. anyone who'd clearcut a forest should make a buck or two. please hurry. don't forget to refill your drink with kool-aid.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Much better.

 

[UncleBuck]

fuel oil, ethers, alcohols, and heavy petrofractions like clinker asphalt and pitch make up a small percentage of a barrel of oil's mass and an even smaller portion of it's $ value.

the real money is in the industrial precursor fractions and feedstocks. if they could refine all of a barrel of oil into that shit, asphalt, diesel and gasoline would be rare and expensive, and your car would run on methyl alcohol or some other fuel source.

you dont raise sheep for lanolin or mutton, those are byproducts. if you could raise just wool with zero lanolin & mutton, sheep ranchers would be all over that shit

just like you dont grow weed for pollen sacks, stems and leaf. if you could grow a plant that was all bud, you would.

oil companies dont make gasoline for you, they are stuck with gasoline as a byproduct, and sell it as motor fuel so they dont have to pay to haul it away.
the same goes for asphalt, which is so cheap you can use it to pave roads and driveways. if oil companies could turn that shit into something more profitable, you can bet your left nut they would do so.

your logic has failed you.

funny, every fuel cell design i can find runs off liquid hydrogen and oxygen, not deconstructed methane.

the energy needed to break methane (or water) into o2 and h2 so it can run through a fuel cell is waste, fuel cells also generate significant heat waste.

fuel cells are great in space, where excess heat is a GOOD thing, and the already exorbitant energy requirements for lifting the needed food water, h2 and o2 for use in other applications, simply makes fuel cells the best choice. IN SPACE.

on earth not so much.

down here, we dont have to fight the gravity well, so hydrocarbons are a good solution for our power needs.

also, protip: fuel cells dont make CO2. they make H2O and massive amounts of heat as their waste product.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/fuel-cell.htm

i might come close to believing that your posts weren't cherrypicked and resummarized wikipedia entries if not for the fact that you are so woefully unqualified to do anything in life aside from barely above minimum wage labor.

if the fountain of knowledge you portray yourself to be were authentic, you would not be nearing 50, making $11 an hour, living with a dozen family members, and saving what are most likely literal pennies to get that farm you always dreamed of.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

I got news for you. Kynes makes you guys look like bumbling half wits every time you get into it with him. It's awesome watching him tear down your laughable assertions and positions with well thought out rebuttals written in a manner that most of you couldn't approach with a couple dozen extra IQ points and an English tutor.

You truly look like a gaggle of monkeys trying to fuck a doorknob. The latest "bailout save face attempt" of calling him boring is hysterical. His least thought out posts are 50 times more interesting than ANYTHING you cretins have ever posted.

Rock on Brother Kynes. Keep handing them their asses, we'll keep laughing at their feeble attempts to marginalize you.

 

[abandonconflict]

19 gallons of gasoline are produced from one barrel of crude by US refineries. That is nearly 45%. Of the remaining amount many other fuel products are made depending upon market demand.

http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=24&t=10

How do you like marginalized penis there muypoco?

 

[jason1976]

gotta agree. those cities that they have found under water intact as though they were built there before Caesar Augustus. they didn't build them underwater. lol. . water covered them through time which would support that the earths climate has shifted since the dawn of time. its a natural process

 

[Red1966]

Of course, but not in this frequency

Sorry, but that's an unsupported claim. We had no hurricanes this year.

 

[Red1966]

Yeah, just like the question of what you would accept as proof of ACC was answered..

Anyone in science who accepts ACC is a "mainstream fraud" according to you because that's exactly how denial works

Your continued whining that we are somehow obligated to tell you how to prove your points make you look like an idiot.

 

[Red1966]

Yeah, people might have to learn how to be LESS WASTEFUL. The only place on the whole planet that's a problem is right here in the good ol' U S of A. But of course, it's everyone else's problem, because it's inconvenient to recycle...

Hon, remind me to buy a stepladder so you can get up into my pick 'em up truck? You know, the jacked up 4x4 that gets six mpg on diesel, but I never take off road because I'd scratch the paint?

Recycling has almost zero impact on co2 emissions.

 

[abandonconflict]

Recycling has almost zero impact on co2 emissions.

Reduce consumer demand for petroleum products.

 

[Red1966]

Yeah, do that. We know what climate has been like for the last several hundred thousand years, and even why, based on Antarctic and Greenland ice core projects. We also know the averages of climate for many dozens of millions of years, by studying the ratios of various pollen and plankton in the fossil record.

This has given us a detailed map of the basic parameters of climate, velocity of change, natural causes, etc.

Today's CO² emissions are like a volcano that's erupting continuously... and doubling in size every 50 years. That's unique in the climate record- so oddly enough, it's causing UNIQUE effects.

Stick that in your online statistical calculator, but before dividing by billions, explain why any more than the last few million years of the climate record is necessary to determine if humans are changing it?

Today's CO² emissions are nothing like a volcano that's erupting continuously. The last time that happened was a volcano in northern Asia that wiped out virtually all life for hundreds of thousands of years.

 

[abandonconflict]

Make up your mind, is CO2 dangerous or not?

 

[ttystikk]

funny, every fuel cell design i can find runs off liquid hydrogen and oxygen, not deconstructed methane.

the energy needed to break methane (or water) into o2 and h2 so it can run through a fuel cell is waste, fuel cells also generate significant heat waste.

fuel cells are great in space, where excess heat is a GOOD thing, and the already exorbitant energy requirements for lifting the needed food water, h2 and o2 for use in other applications, simply makes fuel cells the best choice. IN SPACE.

on earth not so much.

down here, we dont have to fight the gravity well, so hydrocarbons are a good solution for our power needs.

also, protip: fuel cells dont make CO2. they make H2O and massive amounts of heat as their waste product.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/fuel-cell.htm

You're a badly underinformed windbag about nearly everything you've said regarding modern fuel cell technology. It's abundantly clear that you have done zero research on the subject lately.

Therefore, I find it likely that the rest of your opinions, political or otherwise, are just as hoary and unexamined.

I don't wish to debate with the close minded, so I won't.

Enjoy your weekend.

 

[ttystikk]

Recycling has almost zero impact on co2 emissions.

It can have a very positive impact by reducing the need to produce more new stuff to replace that which can be recycled or reused.

 

[Red1966]

yeah, you go ahead and install a "fuel cell" in your house.

how youll get the liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen to feed it is a mystery, and how you will deal with the safety issues surrounding it's operation is an enigma.

how youll get the permits for all this shit is simply inexplicable.

where youll get a "fuel cell" to begin with is beyond reason, since you can just order them from Hammecker Schlemmer

but yeah, you rock on with your bad self.

and i'm sure youll "prove" that they are totally suitable for operation by even the dumbest dipshit in a public housing low-rent high-rise, or the most retarded redneck in the trailer park.

thats a certainty

Fuel cells run on natural gas and methane, too. Other fuels, also. Liquid oxygen is not needed. Currently, several models and sizes of fuel cells are available. Google has them powering a server farm in California. The technology is tried and proven, is even subsidized and "fast tracked" by the Federal and state governments. His proposal is extremely "doable".

 

[ttystikk]

Today's CO² emissions are nothing like a volcano that's erupting continuously. The last time that happened was a volcano in northern Asia that wiped out virtually all life for hundreds of thousands of years.

No, you're mixing up my example of an impossibly long running but slow burning volcano with a 'supervolcano', which still goes off all at once instead of over time. Yes, those are indeed much bigger, but not the same as what I was referring to.

 

[ttystikk]

Make up your mind, is CO2 dangerous or not?

It's all a matter of degree; is water dangerous? A glass full, life giving. If you're on a sinking ship, the story changes significantly.

Some CO² is necessary and desirable for the growth of plants, proper climate management, etc. Add too much, like trying to run your car on antifreeze alone, and you encounter problems associated with it being out of balance.

The current climate debate is centering around what constitutes acceptable vs out of balance.