GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

2 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

You are assuming there are many scientists out there attempting to publish climate change denial.  Consider the possibility that there are few to none attempting to do so.

This is the system used for your sacred cow cult, 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science

It is not a real science but only the external trappings of science, not really open to testing or disproof.

One of the features of science cults is a set of myths which are programmed into the acolytes of the sacred cow.

One of the most common is the myth that every true or genuine scientist accepts the sacred cow, and that any scientist who challenges or disagrees with the sacred cow is not a real scientist. You are  a good example of this latter myth.

The mantra which we often hear is that 97% of real or genuine scientists believe in the sacred cow of CO2 causing climate change.

No matter how many times that myth is exposed as false, the acolyte will never believe it, having been programmed to accept the myth as a rite of acceptance into the cult.

[bloodman33 + 22]

In the first ruling of its kind nationwide, a Montana state court decided Monday in favor of young people who alleged the state violated their right to a “clean and healthful environment” by promoting the use of fossil fuels.

 

Want to know how your actions can help make a difference for our planet? Sign up for the Climate Coach newsletter, in your inbox every Tuesday and Thursday.

 

The court determined that a provision in the Montana Environmental Policy Act has harmed the state’s environment and the young plaintiffs by preventing Montana from considering the climate impacts of energy projects. The provision is accordingly unconstitutional, the court said.

 

“This is a huge win for Montana, for youth, for democracy and for our climate,” said Julia Olson, the executive director of Our Children’s Trust, which brought the case. “More rulings like this will certainly come.”

 

The sweeping win, one of the strongest decisions on climate change ever issued by a court, could energize the environmental movement and usher in a wave of cases aimed at advancing action on climate change, experts say.

The ruling — which invalidates the provision blocking climate considerations — also represents a rare victory for climate activists who have tried to use the courts to push back against government policies and industrial activities they say are harming the planet. In this case, it involved 16 young Montanans, ranging in age from 5 to 22, who brought the nation’s first constitutional and first youth-led climate lawsuit to go to trial. Those youths are elated by the decision, according to Our Children’s Trust.

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

13 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

No matter how many times that myth is exposed as false

Where has this been exposed?   Not because you say so, or one or two cherry picked papers, or crazy alt-right website.

Edited August 15, 2023 by TailingsPond

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

3 hours ago, surrept33 said:

wat? Here is the Oak Ridge National Labs/DOE's model, which is about as frontier as one can get:

https://github.com/E3SM-Project

It sounds like you are misinformed.

CTF is all about publishing open data, open source, and public grand challenges, not statistical summaries. It's the norm in Computer Science and any Computational Sciences. 

You literally just proved my point.  What is sad is you do not see it. 

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

17 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

One of the most common is the myth that every true or genuine scientist accepts the sacred cow, and that any scientist who challenges or disagrees with the sacred cow is not a real scientist. You are  a good example of this latter myth.

 

Yet again show me this list of renowned scientist that are being suppressed. 

Plenty of times a single scientist has overturned the "sacred cow" (please stop overusing that term) and in the end has been hailed for it. 

The Earth is round (greeks), Copernicus, Darwin, Newton, Einstein, etc. 

 

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

5 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

You literally just proved my point.  What is sad is you do not see it. 

It's open data... you are free to test any model you want against historical data.

Edited August 15, 2023 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

4 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

Where has this been exposed?   Not because you say so, or one or two cherry picked papers, or crazy alt-right website.

That myth was exposed long ago, but the fact that you still believe it shows the point I was making, the CO2 sacred cow is not about science but is a cult of true believers who repeat the same mantras despite the evidence.

It is essential for the cult to inculcate the belief that anyone who disagrees with the sacred cow are not genuine scientists but are allied with the forces of darkness and money. You and others are programmed to accept this as an essential tenet of your belief system and not open to factual evidence.

Here is the cult pseudoscience paradigm which explains the problem created by accepting CO2 belief as a sacred cow,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science

"Cargo cult science is a pseudoscientific method of research that favors evidence that confirms an assumed hypothesis. In contrast with the scientific method, there is no vigorous effort to disprove or delimit the hypothesis."

"... to avoid becoming cargo cult scientists, researchers must avoid fooling themselves, be willing to question and doubt their own theories and their own results, and investigate possible flaws in a theory or an experiment. He recommended that researchers adopt an unusually high level of honesty which is rarely encountered in everyday life"

 

 

Edited August 15, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

7 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

You are assuming there are many scientists out there attempting to publish climate change denial.  Consider the possibility that there are few to none attempting to do so.

Again this another mantra which you have been programmed to accept, that no genuine scientist disputes the CO2 sacred cow.

We have shown you a great many scientists whose work disputes the CO2 hypothesis, but you are not open to discussing this work or to acknowledging the integrity of it. This is cult-like behavior.

Here is the definition of "sacred cow" from the above link,

"something that people believe or accept as true without questioning it.

being unreasonably immune from criticism or opposition.

an institution, idea, or custom that is held to be above criticism.

something that people do not like to question.

a taboo subject.

something that many people think is too important to change, question, or criticize.

something that cannot be interfered with or harmed in any way.

• Source: theidioms.com"

Edited August 15, 2023 by Ecocharger

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Again this another mantra which you have been programmed to accept, that no genuine scientist disputes the CO2 sacred cow.

Not at all.  I'm just asking you to show me the genuine scientists.

You failed to answer the question or acknowledge that through history great minds have overturned the general consensus.  You are trapped in a conspiracy fallacy where the "truth" is being suppressed by some unknown power. 

Show me some suppressed scientists or expose some evil vetters of science.  Remember, essentially every institution would need some people in on the scheme or it wouldn't work so it should be easy to come up with a very long list.

You could also be the anti-Erin Brockovich yourself.    A male who single handily gets a win against environmental health. 

 

Edited August 15, 2023 by TailingsPond

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

On 8/11/2023 at 6:22 PM, Ecocharger said:

That is not reflected in gasoline sales where Norway has increased MoM and YoY.

I challenged you to show rolling stock numbers which you ducked. ICE still dominate the fleet in Norway,

And gasoline sales are up in Germany, in France and in Britain! Hooray for British gasoline vehicles.

Utter BS

This is what I posted below which tells you what the TOTAL share of the market in Norway was in 2020.

As I pointed out because since 2020 when the market share was 50% there have been 80% sales of EV's, so the market share of EV's will be greater than 50%

Having surpassed an electric vehicle share of 50 percent in 2020, the wealthy Scandinavian country continued its transition to e-mobility last year. According to the Norwegian Road Federation (OFV), electric cars accounted for 79 percent of new passenger car registrations in 2022, and 87 percent when including plug-in hybrids. To put things in perspective, a look across the pond yields an entirely different picture: in the United States, electric vehicles excluding hybrids accounted for just 2.6 percent of passenger car sales in 2021.

https://www.statista.com/chart/23863/electric-car-share-in-norway/

So back in 2020 the total market share was 50% which will certainly be significantly higher now as 80% of new cars since then have been EV's. If you've ever been to Norway you'll know that an ICE vehicle is a rare sight these days.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

1 hour ago, TailingsPond said:

Not at all.  I'm just asking you to show me the genuine scientists.

You failed to answer the question or acknowledge that through history great minds have overturned the general consensus.  You are trapped in a conspiracy fallacy where the "truth" is being suppressed by some unknown power. 

Show me some suppressed scientists or expose some evil vetters of science.  Remember, essentially every institution would need some people in on the scheme or it wouldn't work so it should be easy to come up with a very long list.

You could also be the anti-Erin Brockovich yourself.    A male who single handily gets a win against environmental health. 

 

I have presented above many scientists who have successfully challenged the CO2 belief, but you were silent and not interested in discussing the contents. You are already enveloped in the pseudo-science cult of CO2 and not open to science discussion, as I showed you above.

Thank you for confirming my diagnosis of your circumstances.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

34 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Utter BS

This is what I posted below which tells you what the TOTAL share of the market in Norway was in 2020.

As I pointed out because since 2020 when the market share was 50% there have been 80% sales of EV's, so the market share of EV's will be greater than 50%

Having surpassed an electric vehicle share of 50 percent in 2020, the wealthy Scandinavian country continued its transition to e-mobility last year. According to the Norwegian Road Federation (OFV), electric cars accounted for 79 percent of new passenger car registrations in 2022, and 87 percent when including plug-in hybrids. To put things in perspective, a look across the pond yields an entirely different picture: in the United States, electric vehicles excluding hybrids accounted for just 2.6 percent of passenger car sales in 2021.

https://www.statista.com/chart/23863/electric-car-share-in-norway/

So back in 2020 the total market share was 50% which will certainly be significantly higher now as 80% of new cars since then have been EV's. If you've ever been to Norway you'll know that an ICE vehicle is a rare sight these days.

You are still stuck on that nonsense about current sales, not the rolling stock. Did you not get it? That 50% is about SALES not rolling stock.

The bottom line is gasoline DEMAND, which is UP in Norway, UP in Sweden, UP in Britain, UP in France, UP in Germany, and UP in Italy...etc.

European gasoline demand is now above the 2019 level pre-Covid. You are among those who like to complain about fossil fuels but cannot help yourself from using fossil fuels.

Any attempt by European politicians to actually implement the Green revolution and ban autos will cause a huge backlash which is already being felt.

There is now a political backlash against the Green Revolution in Europe as the enormous and crippling costs of going carbon-free begin to bite the average household.

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/greenlash-fuels-fears-europes-environmental-ambitions-2023-08-10/

"...as policymakers seek to translate net-zero targets into measures that extend beyond power generation to areas such as buildings and transport, they face increasing resistance as citizens struggle with a cost of living crisis.

Angst over a law to phase out oil and gas heating brought Germany's ruling coalition close to breaking point, while in the Netherlands, anger at plans to cut nitrogen pollution led to a shock poll win for a new farmers' protest party."

"...officials say it is getting harder to pass green laws, with some EU governments resisting new emissions limits for cars and seeking to weaken pollution controls for livestock farms. A proposal to improve the energy efficiency of buildings faces pushback from countries worried by the cost.

Poland's government, which faces October elections, is even suing Brussels over climate policies.

"Does the EU want to make authoritarian decisions about what kind of vehicles Poles will drive?" its Minister of Climate and Environment Anna Moskwa asked last month."

Edited August 15, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

43 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

You are still stuck on that nonsense about current sales, not the rolling stock. Did you not get it? That 50% is about SALES not rolling stock.

The bottom line is gasoline DEMAND, which is UP in Norway, UP in Sweden, UP in Britain, UP in France, UP in Germany, and UP in Italy...etc.

European gasoline demand is now above the 2019 level pre-Covid. You are among those who like to complain about fossil fuels but cannot help yourself from using fossil fuels.

Any attempt by European politicians to actually implement the Green revolution and ban autos will cause a huge backlash which is already being felt.

There is now a political backlash against the Green Revolution in Europe as the enormous and crippling costs of going carbon-free begin to bite the average household.

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/greenlash-fuels-fears-europes-environmental-ambitions-2023-08-10/

"...as policymakers seek to translate net-zero targets into measures that extend beyond power generation to areas such as buildings and transport, they face increasing resistance as citizens struggle with a cost of living crisis.

Angst over a law to phase out oil and gas heating brought Germany's ruling coalition close to breaking point, while in the Netherlands, anger at plans to cut nitrogen pollution led to a shock poll win for a new farmers' protest party."

"...officials say it is getting harder to pass green laws, with some EU governments resisting new emissions limits for cars and seeking to weaken pollution controls for livestock farms. A proposal to improve the energy efficiency of buildings faces pushback from countries worried by the cost.

Poland's government, which faces October elections, is even suing Brussels over climate policies.

"Does the EU want to make authoritarian decisions about what kind of vehicles Poles will drive?" its Minister of Climate and Environment Anna Moskwa asked last month."

Your initial argument was "there is no viable alternative to ICE"

I take it you now accept youre wrong!

Edited August 15, 2023 by Rob Plant

[turbguy + 1,544]

 

 

8 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Here is the definition of "sacred cow" from the above link,

"something that people believe or accept as true without questioning it.

being unreasonably immune from criticism or opposition.

an institution, idea, or custom that is held to be above criticism.

something that people do not like to question.

a taboo subject.

something that many people think is too important to change, question, or criticize.

something that cannot be interfered with or harmed in any way.

• Source: theidioms.com"

 

That mindset can be played both ways.

Kinda sounds like those supporting/attempting to maintain the status quo.

Kinda sounds like those who are overly conservative.

Kinda sounds like religious dogma.

Deterministic? Probabilistic?

A great guy in the past was know to say: "God does not play dice with the universe".

As far as I know, we are still looking for an "answer".

There may not be an "answer".

Edited August 15, 2023 by turbguy

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

8 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Your initial argument was "there is no viable alternative to ICE"

I take it you now accept youre wrong!

Where do you see that? There is no realistic alternative to ICE, and the politics are showing that, with governments in Europe being challenged whenever they attempt to enforce Green nonsense.

"Angst over a law to phase out oil and gas heating brought Germany's ruling coalition close to breaking point, while in the Netherlands, anger at plans to cut nitrogen pollution led to a shock poll win for a new farmers' protest party."

"...officials say it is getting harder to pass green laws, with some EU governments resisting new emissions limits for cars and seeking to weaken pollution controls for livestock farms. A proposal to improve the energy efficiency of buildings faces pushback from countries worried by the cost.

Poland's government, which faces October elections, is even suing Brussels over climate policies.

"Does the EU want to make authoritarian decisions about what kind of vehicles Poles will drive?" its Minister of Climate and Environment Anna Moskwa asked last month."

Edited August 15, 2023 by Ecocharger

[notsonice + 1,255]

44 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Where do you see that? There is no realistic alternative to ICE, and the politics are showing that, with governments in Europe being challenged whenever they attempt to enforce Green nonsense.

"Angst over a law to phase out oil and gas heating brought Germany's ruling coalition close to breaking point, while in the Netherlands, anger at plans to cut nitrogen pollution led to a shock poll win for a new farmers' protest party."

"...officials say it is getting harder to pass green laws, with some EU governments resisting new emissions limits for cars and seeking to weaken pollution controls for livestock farms. A proposal to improve the energy efficiency of buildings faces pushback from countries worried by the cost.

Poland's government, which faces October elections, is even suing Brussels over climate policies.

"Does the EU want to make authoritarian decisions about what kind of vehicles Poles will drive?" its Minister of Climate and Environment Anna Moskwa asked last month."

There is no realistic alternative to ICE, and the politics are showing that, with governments in Europe being challenged whenever they attempt to enforce Green nonsense.????

ha ha ha

looks like your having a meltdown in light of the fact that EVs are slowly taking over....

Cash for clunkers will be brought to you by Sleepy Joe in 2025 ........

and

The bottom line is gasoline DEMAND, which is UP in Norway, UP in Sweden, UP in Britain, UP in France, UP in Germany, and UP in Italy...etc.

European gasoline demand is now above the 2019 level pre-Covid????
 

yet once again you do not post any evidence........Got any or just BS once again?????

 

What do you do for a living??? sell snake oil?????

Post some real facts backed by real articles or keep shoveling BS...it is what you do best

 

 

 

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

2 hours ago, notsonice said:

There is no realistic alternative to ICE, and the politics are showing that, with governments in Europe being challenged whenever they attempt to enforce Green nonsense.????

ha ha ha

looks like your having a meltdown in light of the fact that EVs are slowly taking over....

Cash for clunkers will be brought to you by Sleepy Joe in 2025 ........

and

The bottom line is gasoline DEMAND, which is UP in Norway, UP in Sweden, UP in Britain, UP in France, UP in Germany, and UP in Italy...etc.

European gasoline demand is now above the 2019 level pre-Covid????
 

yet once again you do not post any evidence........Got any or just BS once again?????

 

What do you do for a living??? sell snake oil?????

Post some real facts backed by real articles or keep shoveling BS...it is what you do best

 

 

 

No, EVs are piling up in the dealers lots, no one really wants an EV.

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

12 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

I have presented above many scientists who have "successfully" challenged the CO2 belief, but you were silent and not interested in discussing the contents. You are already enveloped in the pseudo-science cult of CO2 and not open to science discussion, as I showed you above.

Thank you for confirming my diagnosis of your circumstances.

No you haven't.  Certainly not "successfully" as the consensuses remains intact!  Show me a winner. 

The one paper you reposted many times as evidence actually said CO2 is increasing temperatures.

Edited August 15, 2023 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

3 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

No you haven't.  Certainly not "successfully" as the consensuses remains intact!  Show me a winner. 

The one paper you reposted many times as evidence actually said CO2 is increasing temperatures.

Go back and read, CO2 is an insignificant greenhouse gas effect, H2O is the dominant greenhouse gas. No one has challenged that paper.

Here, take my handkerchief and dry away your tears.

Edited August 15, 2023 by Ecocharger

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

17 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Go back and read, CO2 is an insignificant greenhouse gas effect, H2O is the dominant greenhouse gas. No one has challenged that paper.

Here, take my handkerchief and dry away your tears.

Post it again, it clearly showed CO2 as a driver.  Saying it is "less significant" than water is not the same as no effect.

PS the word "significant" has special meaning in science.  Do not toss around "insignificant" when you do not understand p values. 

Why would I cry? You are the one supporting losers.  Personally I like winners.  I must be painful for you living in a world where no one listens to you.

Edited August 15, 2023 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

6 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

Post it again, it clearly showed CO2 as a driver.  Saying it is "less significant" the water is not the same as no effect.

PS the word "significant" has special meaning in science.  Do not toss around "insignificant" when you do not understand p values. 

 

Insignificant means that CO2 greenhouse effect does not move the needle and is overwhelmed by H2O greenhouse effects. Your political masters have no explanation for that and do not even attempt to talk about it. They are not really interested in the science behind climate change.

Edited August 15, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

Here is new technology which does move the needle, showing vast benefits for the plastic industry.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Recycling-Breakthrough-Makes-Plastic-Waste-A-High-Value-Commodity.html

"The new method converts waste plastic into pyrolysis oil, which contains valuable olefins used in various industries.

This process offers an opportunity to derive high-value alcohols worth up to $6,000 per ton from waste plastics.

The innovative technique presents potential environmental benefits, economic gains, and an exciting path forward for the recycling sector."

Edited August 15, 2023 by Ecocharger

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

Study shows food and housing are the dominate strains on household budgets. 

Ecocharger then interprets that as "Buying cigarettes has an insignificant effect on fiances.  Therefore, continue wasting money.  Food and housing are the real problem."

Edited August 15, 2023 by TailingsPond

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

3 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Insignificant means that CO2 greenhouse effect does not move the needle and is overwhelmed by H2O greenhouse effects.

No it doesn't, and it does move the needle.

Edited August 15, 2023 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

Just now, TailingsPond said:

Study shows food and housing are the dominate strains one household budgets. 

Ecocharger then interprets that as "Buying cigarettes has an insignificant effect on fiances.  Therefore, continue wasting money.  Food and housing are the real problem."

Take your own example, if we put a tax on cigarettes, how much money is taken from the family budget? Small amount.

If we tax house sales or purchases of food, how much money goes to the government coffers? Much money.