Perry deserves his own thread

[IamOld]

Well, you are literally talking about tens of thousands of scientists versus a literal handful.

Oil and gas will run out eventually - period. I have nothing against nuclear or hydro - the French (the best in the world for nuclear power) get about 80% of their power from nuclear energy (state owned and run!!)

Today's solar power is very very efficient...and there are places where the wind always blows...we just need the ability (and we have it) to store that energy when the sun doesn't shine - one way to do it is using liquid salt thermal reactors. The solar arrays heat up salt melt it, (super hot) which boils water, etc., that gets so hot, that it radiates eanough heat to keep the water boiling going through the night.

I can't say for sure where any of their funding comes from, but I will say that scientists on the pro-global warming side of the debate get at least part of their funding from governments who are very strongly pushing the global warming fear-mongering for political ends. They most certainly have an incentive to push the global warming agenda to keep getting their government funding.

Electric cars are great. I've driven one and enjoyed it.

But, what alternative method would you use to generate this electricity for all these electric cars? I personally like nuclear power plants and hydro power (dams), but I don't think that most environmentalists would want any more of these built in the United States.

Solar power and wind power have some very obvious flaws-- the sun doesn't shine at night, and the wind doesn't blow all the time, but I also know that solar power loses a huge amount of its energy converting from direct current (DC) to alternating current (AC), and from stepping up the voltage to 120 volts. It just isn't practical now, and I am skeptical about it. I doubt that it will ever be practical and certainly not cheaper than fossil fuels.

[GoingDown]

15% ? That's all?

I wonder what supplies the rest of their energy needs?

It seems that solar and wind only supply a tiny amount of the energy needed and fossil fuels still get burnt to supply most of the energy needs, so what is really being accomplished?

At this point at least, there just doesn't seem to be any practical alternative source of energy out there. If they could show me something that provided sufficient power day and night at a reasonable cost, I would jump on the bandwagon. But I don't see that ever happening, at least not in the near future.

Instead they want to start off with restrictions and caps and regulations that will make everything cost a lot more.

I say follow the money and the power in all of this. Who is going to get even richer and who is going to become even more powerful?

[GoingDown]

I can't say for sure where any of their funding comes from, but I will say that scientists on the pro-global warming side of the debate get at least part of their funding from governments who are very strongly pushing the global warming fear-mongering for political ends. They most certainly have an incentive to push the global warming agenda to keep getting their government funding.

Electric cars are great. I've driven one and enjoyed it.

But, what alternative method would you use to generate this electricity for all these electric cars? I personally like nuclear power plants and hydro power (dams), but I don't think that most environmentalists would want any more of these built in the United States.

Solar power and wind power have some very obvious flaws-- the sun doesn't shine at night, and the wind doesn't blow all the time, but I also know that solar power loses a huge amount of its energy converting from direct current (DC) to alternating current (AC), and from stepping up the voltage to 120 volts. It just isn't practical now, and I am skeptical about it. I doubt that it will ever be practical and certainly not cheaper than fossil fuels.

The thing is Goingdown, that the ONLY country where there is a "debate" is here - the science is there, the consensus worldwide is there...sadly the few scientists that oppose this viewpoint are (literally) paid by Exxon etc. Think of it like this...even if the climate were to be naturally changing - it's like we've slammed the gas pedal to the floor.

Besides, the way I look at it is this - if we get off of "foreign" oil, that's good - if we stop burning fossil fuels and generate electricity by other means that's good a) because it's sustainable, b) because the air is cleaner...so here are a few good reasons regardless of climate change.

Also, electric cars WILL be cheaper once they go into truly mass production - they're quiet, and have FAR FAR fewer moving parts to lube, oil, belt, wrench, fill, tweak, break etc. In other words...cheaper to maintain.

Perry is a charlatan, and he has zero empathy for his fellow human (or any other) beings. If anyone thinks he gives a rat's behind about anyone's behind but his own and his billionaire buddies, the bridge is still for sale in Brooklyn!

[IamOld]

but the thing is, going down, that Germany supplies (GERMANY not a "sunny" country) around 15% of its needs via solar and growing, wind power is part and parcel of power production in Europe, and China is hanging its hat on both. It works, and works well - we've just been so inundated with propaganda from the "oilers" that it's hard to see through the haze...

Science is supposed to be open to debate. Science is supposed to be skeptical. Belief and faith have nothing to do with science. Anyone who is skeptical, as I am, instantly becomes a "denier", which is a way of putting us down and trying to get us to shut up.

The only thing that "fighting" global warming would accomplish for certain is make everything cost a lot more. If you restrict the use of fossil fuels, you will send energy and transportation costs through the roof, and everything we go to do or buy will cost a lot more and our standard of living will fall. At this point there is no real practical alternative to oil, gasoline, coal, and natural gas, besides maybe more nuclear power plants and hydro plants (dams) which most environmentalists also oppose. I have done some work as an electrician, and let me tell you that I know solar power is a pipe dream at best. Same thing for wind power. So, what would you have us do? Roll back our standard of living in the hopes that it will somehow magically control the weather?

[GoingDown]

It is unfortunate that all these people who deny climate change also agreed with the Bush/Cheney 1% doctrine. If there was a 1% chance of a terrorist threat they would act - costs don't matter. How about if there is a 1% chance that climate change is real and is going to have catastrophic consequences if we don't act - we act as if it will happen. Just think if we had spent a couple trillion on fighting climate change the last 10 years were would we be today. Better economy, more energy independent AND less money going to the terrorists that want to harm us!

Science is supposed to be open to debate. Science is supposed to be skeptical. Belief and faith have nothing to do with science. Anyone who is skeptical, as I am, instantly becomes a "denier", which is a way of putting us down and trying to get us to shut up.

The only thing that "fighting" global warming would accomplish for certain is make everything cost a lot more. If you restrict the use of fossil fuels, you will send energy and transportation costs through the roof, and everything we go to do or buy will cost a lot more and our standard of living will fall. At this point there is no real practical alternative to oil, gasoline, coal, and natural gas, besides maybe more nuclear power plants and hydro plants (dams) which most environmentalists also oppose. I have done some work as an electrician, and let me tell you that I know solar power is a pipe dream at best. Same thing for wind power. So, what would you have us do? Roll back our standard of living in the hopes that it will somehow magically control the weather?

[IamOld]

The thing is Goingdown, that the ONLY country where there is a "debate" is here - the science is there, the consensus worldwide is there...sadly the few scientists that oppose this viewpoint are (literally) paid by Exxon etc. Think of it like this...even if the climate were to be naturally changing - it's like we've slammed the gas pedal to the floor.

Besides, the way I look at it is this - if we get off of "foreign" oil, that's good - if we stop burning fossil fuels and generate electricity by other means that's good a) because it's sustainable, b) because the air is cleaner...so here are a few good reasons regardless of climate change.

Also, electric cars WILL be cheaper once they go into truly mass production - they're quiet, and have FAR FAR fewer moving parts to lube, oil, belt, wrench, fill, tweak, break etc. In other words...cheaper to maintain.

Perry is a charlatan, and he has zero empathy for his fellow human (or any other) beings. If anyone thinks he gives a rat's behind about anyone's behind but his own and his billionaire buddies, the bridge is still for sale in Brooklyn!

I've never voted for a Republican in my life, and I'm not going to start with Perry. My issue is with this "belief" in global warming. It has become like a superstitious religion. Science is all about being skeptical and being open to argument and debate. I hate to see science being dragged down to the level superstitious nonsense all because some people have a political agenda and want to use fearmongering to get it accomplished.

Whether global warming is truly happening or not should be up for debate, and even more so whether it is caused by humans or whether it is a natural phenomenon over which we have absolutely no control.

Ice ages have come and gone before on this planet, long before humans were even using oil and coal for energy. How do we know for certain that the natural forces which caused ice ages to retreat in the past are not at work now?

Perhaps we are at the end of one of the periods in between ice ages, and just like it is always hottest just before sunset, it would be at the warmest point just before a new ice age began. If you want to fear anything, fear an ice age. It would kill far more people than anything global warming could throw at us.

[GoingDown]

Doesn't believe in global warming? Another idiot and what they fail to acknowledge is that the real threat is that the oceans are absorbing more and more CO2 which will eventually kill the coral reefs which in turn kills the fish and eventually works its way up the food chain.
Just keep your head in the sand Perry.

I've never voted for a Republican in my life, and I'm not going to start with Perry. My issue is with this "belief" in global warming. It has become like a superstitious religion. Science is all about being skeptical and being open to argument and debate. I hate to see science being dragged down to the level of superstitious nonsense all because some people have a political agenda and want to use fearmongering to get it accomplished.

Whether global warming is truly happening or not should be up for debate, and even more so whether it is caused by humans or whether it is a natural phenomenon over which we have absolutely no control.

Ice ages have come and gone before on this planet, long before humans were even using oil and coal for energy. How do we know for certain that the natural forces which caused ice ages to retreat in the past are not at work now?

Perhaps we are at the end of one of the periods in between ice ages, and just like it is always hottest just before sunset, it would be at the warmest point just before a new ice age began. If you want to fear anything, fear an ice age. It would kill far more people than anything global warming could throw at us.

[IamOld]

Well said Frogger - actually I agree with you - religion is a man made concept - faith is quite something else. Very well said and I agree 100%.

I was using the word "religion" in the American context :-)

You see my friend, that is where you are wrong. Perry is very "religious". There is however, a huge difference between religion and faith.

"Religion" has been behind most of the violence and wars that this earth has ever known. "Religion" is an evil invention of mankind to control the masses.

And make sure that none of you get your panties in a wad because I am not talking about your God or your faith.

[mlsj2009]

You see my friend, that is where you are wrong. Perry is very "religious". There is however, a huge difference between religion and faith.

"Religion" has been behind most of the violence and wars that this earth has ever known. "Religion" is an evil invention of mankind to control the masses.

And make sure that none of you get your panties in a wad because I am not talking about your God or your faith.

Well said, Frogger. Legalism is a dastardly thing. In Perry's case, I suspect the man is more like George W when it comes to his religion. He is not gonna let a bunch of blankety blank Christians stand in his way of becoming President (George W quote in "W"). He is going to get on his knees and pray to get their vote, then he is going to ask them to get on their knees when he is elected.

[frogger]

Perry is about as religious as my cat. .

You see my friend, that is where you are wrong. Perry is very "religious". There is however, a huge difference between religion and faith.

"Religion" has been behind most of the violence and wars that this earth has ever known. "Religion" is an evil invention of mankind to control the masses.

And make sure that none of you get your panties in a wad because I am not talking about your God or your faith.

[tobee43]

sorry, I posted same statement twice.

that's ok, it was worth reading twice

[mlsj2009]

sorry, I posted same statement twice.

[mlsj2009]

Perry's thread & Global warming

Listen, if Perry can't understand global warming after this current Texas record drought where there have already been 62 days over 100 degrees in Central Texas (a record) and many of them sweltering close to 110 degrees, this moron will govern the nation like he thinks, denying all except what he can see through his blinders.

I grew up in West Texas where the temperature was often 110 in the summer, but this heat nowadays is different, it bakes. You feel like your in an oven when you go outside. My skin literally cooks. No one in their right mind goes out for very long in the daytime.

Perry is twice as dangerous as George W and he shoots from the hip. He is like Al Gore in that he takes credit for things that he really didn't do (ie Gore's claim he invented the internet). Perry says he has created jobs for Texas and is personally responsible for the economic welfare of Texas, but if you look at the record, Texas has been running on a deficit itself 3 times the size than it has ever been. And, unemployment in Texas is 8.2%, higher than it has been in many many years. See:

http://www.caller.com/news/2011/mar/02/why-the-state-faces-a-texas-size-deficit/

I don't know what Perry has been smoking, but this guy is 100% politician, and you can't believe anything that comes out of his mouth.

[IamOld]

what' is even most disturbing is people actually believe him.

exactly!!!!!!!!

[Freddy03]

I agree. But regardless of who wins, we've got more of the same coming.

Your vote no longer matters....

Sadly I agree...