The horror of global warming!
- Thread starter kelly4
- Start date
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
" Deaths per TWh % of world energy production
Coal 161 26Oil 36 36Natural Gas 4 21Biofuel/Biomass 12 Peat 12 Solar (rooftop) 0.44 0.1Wind 0.15 1Hydro 1.4 2.2Nuclear 0.04 5.9"
http://www-958.ibm.com/software/ana...s/1fa41e6c4fb211e0b29f000255111976/versions/1
Coal 161 26Oil 36 36Natural Gas 4 21Biofuel/Biomass 12 Peat 12 Solar (rooftop) 0.44 0.1Wind 0.15 1Hydro 1.4 2.2Nuclear 0.04 5.9"
http://www-958.ibm.com/software/ana...s/1fa41e6c4fb211e0b29f000255111976/versions/1
echelon1k1
New Member
Do you know what the name is for a male rat?
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
dont get distracted now you've got answers to give
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
not sure the reasoning behind posting those figures but for perspective
we are talking 1000's of TWH per day
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
sorry what is the point?
anyone who correlates smoking to numbers of deaths is missing the point?people die in droves?
anyone who counts the number of deaths on a construction project is missing the point? people die in droves?
anyone who counted the number of people killed on 911 is missing the point? people die in droves?
if im reading this wrong i apologise and please correct me
Doer
Well-Known Member
Yeah, you are missing it. People die in droves. And the un-intend consequences come from ignoring proportion.
And I don't buy this meta-data about Tw production linked to death at this level of detail SWAG only, I am sure.
No peer reviewed research was shown. So, I won't argue with the professional tap dancers. Your mind on certain subjects is much more closed that mine. That's all.
Yet, I am not trying to open your mind. It doesn't seem possible on these few subjects.
And I don't buy this meta-data about Tw production linked to death at this level of detail SWAG only, I am sure.
No peer reviewed research was shown. So, I won't argue with the professional tap dancers. Your mind on certain subjects is much more closed that mine. That's all.
Yet, I am not trying to open your mind. It doesn't seem possible on these few subjects.
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
you can see the working out of it there go have a look see how it adds up
i have never seen a conflicting set so have no reason to doubt it.
now as to "proportion" you saying theres lots of people so theres no point comparing safety of 2 different ways of doing things?
Doer
Well-Known Member
One - I think this drive to indemnify danger is a real danger. It leads to the straw dog. We drive fear uncertainly and doubt by suggesting there is an ideal situation, with no danger. Not that you are, feel me? But, the entire world is mortgaged and insured beyond any sense. It is about 90%, no there there. No cash. Mostly indemnity and promise.
Very fragile when we get caught in the scam in Economic war. We left ourselves open and China caught us. That was not a President doing. Just that they allowed it. They wanted home ownership for all to stabilize all manner of things.
Two - Yeah it is econ-war, but, we still won that round. We forced both China and Russia to stop the re-arming. Tough nuts. I can't say even if that was intended.
My point is that even if, those "facts" are correct, they still don't show anything at all but noise in the death of people.
It is the same as the gun debate to me. !2,000 gun murders is nothing in 300M people. The million saves a year produced by guns (outside law enforcement), is something.
Proportion. I'm neutral to all these debates, even the Constitutional ones. I am just taking proportion.
Why have a bunch of people sign on about AGW, when we know for a fact, this world is starving in the midst of plenty?
People die in droves and you don't seem to want to see that. This isn't the old age or the usual. This is entirely preventable. For example.
Every year 15 million children die of hunger. (so they say)
This my forum friend, is just about 42,000 kids, mostly infants.....A DAY, starve to death. That is 28 in the minute you read this. And it is one child every 2 seconds dies for no reason.
So, I am only taking about proportion. This we can do something about, yet we want to jack all this money into tech bullshit that does not work on a global scale for energy needs. It is only about that to me, the de-railing of the energy economy. More people will starve.
AFAICS, the globe is sure to cool. And you know the hourly energy budget of this world dwarfs what we produce in a human lifetime.
Proportion.
Very fragile when we get caught in the scam in Economic war. We left ourselves open and China caught us. That was not a President doing. Just that they allowed it. They wanted home ownership for all to stabilize all manner of things.
Two - Yeah it is econ-war, but, we still won that round. We forced both China and Russia to stop the re-arming. Tough nuts. I can't say even if that was intended.
My point is that even if, those "facts" are correct, they still don't show anything at all but noise in the death of people.
It is the same as the gun debate to me. !2,000 gun murders is nothing in 300M people. The million saves a year produced by guns (outside law enforcement), is something.
Proportion. I'm neutral to all these debates, even the Constitutional ones. I am just taking proportion.
Why have a bunch of people sign on about AGW, when we know for a fact, this world is starving in the midst of plenty?
People die in droves and you don't seem to want to see that. This isn't the old age or the usual. This is entirely preventable. For example.
Every year 15 million children die of hunger. (so they say)
This my forum friend, is just about 42,000 kids, mostly infants.....A DAY, starve to death. That is 28 in the minute you read this. And it is one child every 2 seconds dies for no reason.
So, I am only taking about proportion. This we can do something about, yet we want to jack all this money into tech bullshit that does not work on a global scale for energy needs. It is only about that to me, the de-railing of the energy economy. More people will starve.
AFAICS, the globe is sure to cool. And you know the hourly energy budget of this world dwarfs what we produce in a human lifetime.
Proportion.
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
hang on i brought up "twh deaths" because someone was saying nuclear was unsafe. is the process of showing someone their beliefs are not based in fact idemnifying danger now?
i certainly am not saying danger can be eliminated and the world certainly isnt crippled as to moving on with this financially
. the days are over where mere mention of the "evil commie threat" added up to a reasoned arguement. now a bit more is needed
nonsense if it was just "noise" the figures would all be the same
really guns in climate thread? not to derail but the study of this laughable "million saved"?
as to this you show that your lying within this post
your a "cooler" you do not believe in AGW ©and have your own beliefs and in a climate thread to claim "neutrality" is nonsense
what a disgustly patheic arguement to bring
i thought better of you
nice strawman you got going there ....
ahh the neutral passing shot from the bastion of neutrality
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Naw son that's the bull shit right there. Anyone want to make fun of commie stuff now??
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
show your work?
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Tit for tat don't ask me for something the whole thread has been asking you to provide for a while.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Woah a mod edited post, stay classy dude.