World’s Top Scientists: ‘Manmade Warming’ Is A Dangerous Lie

[spindok]

Yes I do.

When I asked them what they wanted for Hannukah this year they both looked at me and said:

"Oxygen daddy, we want oxygen"

Quite simply if the US in getting in the way then I think it only fair that we step aside and work out our own solutions. Not fair to keep screwing up all of the great ideas everyone else has.

Spindok

[Zan de Man]

Yep. Get yourselves a different world from the rest of us.

[thaanatos]

Originally Posted by Zan de Man

Yep. Get yourselves a different world from the rest of us.

haven't we always?........

[Zan de Man]

Cough. No.

[thaanatos]

Originally Posted by Zan de Man

Cough. No.

I don't know....seems different to me....ever since we were a country it's been free around here....that's different than most places on earth......seems like just fifty years ago there were only a handful of countries where folks got to pick their own leaders......now I understand it's over half the world.....that made us different too.....we were a country where a guy who grew up in a ghetto could become a millionaire....that's different than lots of places......

[Gilles de Rais]

Americaaa, Americaaa, AMERICAAAAA....

[Zan de Man]

I'm finding it hard not to weep.

[Gilles de Rais]

Better to laugh than to cry... At least, we know... Reality is of no great import to these people...

[spindok]

I figure since we have been voted the Greatest Threat to World Peace as well as the Chief Fucker-upper of the Climate the US is probably the only safe place to be.

So any of you other concerned parents or non-parents out there might want to think about that.

Spindok

[Zan de Man]

Yep. You're in a bubble. Safe as houses.

[spindok]

If the climate warms we will just annex Canada.

We got it covered.

Spindok

[Gilles de Rais]

Originally Posted by spindok

If the climate warms we will just annex Canada. We got it covered.

I am sure you think you're joking but, if i was Canada, i'd get an NBC weapons program under way.... Just in case

(According to some reseachers, Canada and Russia would be the two big countries most hospitable to Humans if the worst came to the worst. I am not convinced - So much is unknown that's got to be little better than a straight guess. In any case, Russia got enough nukes to keep would-be invaders at bay... Canada? Well, see above).

[w14]

Originally Posted by Uplifter

Your lack of understanding scientific issues is clearly your second biggest flaw.

Your lack of understanding of the political issues is yours.

Climate change HAS ALWAYS been happening. It has been warmer in the recent past, and it has been colder in the recent past. IT IS A DYNAMIC SYSTEM, and, just like meterorology, no matter how many Crays they throw at it, they can't model it well enough to produce a weather forcast for tomorrow, never mind 50 years time.

In the meantime, we have a financial sytem which HAS COLLAPSED. The banks are insolvent. €350 billion of "unprecidented" money thrown at the situation today, only days after the "unprecidented" $50 billion combined central bank effort. I wonder how long todays injection of "liquidity" will be "unprecidented" for? A day? A week?

The financial system is in a worse state than it was in 1929. This kind of thing is always what happens when a system is deregulated to the extent ours has been, because greedy bankers do stupider and stupider things for short term gain.

THIS is the problem of the day, not global warming, which is being promoted in a (futile) attempt to create yet another financial bubble to keep the already dead system going for a few more years.

In the meantime, nothing is being done about African poverty, AIDS, malaria. Our own power, water, transport and health systems crumble around our ears.

Well, fine, ignore todays problems and worry about something that has happened naturally since the beginning of time. You want to stop the use of fossil fuels, so do I, but for different reasons. I want to be able to breathe clean air, thanks.

So if we suspend our distaste for each others positions for a moment, we couldn solve that problem today, with nuclear. In 25 years, we could have removed fossil fuels from the equation totally. But no, we can't do that, can we? We can't have other countries having access to nuclear energy. No sirree! So lets stoke up the green lobby to hate nuclear power, that'll keep that genie in the bottle.

The environmentalist fear of nuclear energy is irrational, just as is their fear of climate change.

Reprocessing nuclear fuel vastly reduces the quantity of waste from nuclear fission. Only 3% of the material sent for reprocessing is unusable High Level Waste. That’s approximately 750kgs from a 1000MW reactor. Read that again - 750 kilogrammes.

This 750 kgs of material is normally incorporated into solid blocks of borosilicate glass, in a process known as vitrification.

Vitrification produces a stable solid that has the high-level waste incorporated its structure. That 750kgs of waste from a 1000MW reactor is contained in 5 tonnes of such glass, which can be readily transported and stored, with appropriate shielding.

There is a cooling period of about 50 years between removal from the reactor and disposal, with the conditioned HLW being retained in interim storage. The level of radioactivity and heat fall rapidly in the first few years and is down to about one thousandth of the level at discharge by 40 years.

So if we reprocess, how much waste is produced?

The UK generating capacity is presently about 70GW. In one year, therefore, we would produce 53 tonnes of high level waste if we were completely nuclear. At any one time, based on a 50 year cycle before this waste can be vitrified, we would be storing close to 3000 tonnes of HLW, equivalent to approx 450,000 litres. To put that in perspective, it compares to 5.5 billion litres of oil based fuels stored in the UK at any one time. I think even the UK has enough space that waste could be stored without being in someone’s back yard.

Nuclear power plants can be used to produce:

* Fresh water
* Hydrogen
* Oxygen
* Precious metals such as palladium, rhodium, and ruthenium
* Radioisotopes for medicine

(In fact, the shutdown of the Chalk River reactor, Ontario, for maintenance, has almost completely halted the global supply of radioactive isotopes used for diagnosing and treating thousands of patients with cancer and other diseases.)

The propaganda from the global warming lobby promotes a world where I must save energy, reduce my “carbon footprint.” This is a world which will devolve scientifically and technologically. It’s a world of slavery, where everything I do is taxed to “offset” my use of energy. It is a world where 3rd world countries are not permitted to develop, and where people continue to starve due to biofoolery. It is a world where the rich get richer by blowing bubbles. That's the world promoted by Al Gore who has only one agenda - keeping his pocket full of cash. (Well, he's also a racist, but lets not discuss that ...)

Instead we could have a world where all nation states have access to cheap energy, fresh water (how many conflicts are going currently over water?), unlimited hydrogen, access to new raw materials and medical isotopes.

But lets have a few windfarms and trade some carbon dioxide derivatives instead. Much better.

[parihaka]

Originally Posted by Uplifter

IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO LEAD, JUST GET OUT OF THE WAY SO THAT THE REST OF THE WORLD CAN SORT THIS OUT!

So given modern agriculture is a major component of CO2 and methane emissions, which hundreds of millions of people are you going to starve to death when we 'get out of the way"?

[parihaka]

Originally Posted by Uplifter

Thanks Neko.



Global warming IS HAPPENING.

How come there's been a drop off in temperatures over the last 9 years then?

[parihaka]

And I realise America is the great satan, but is everyone aware that Britain, Japan, Canada, Australia and Russia all had exactly the same objections as America at the Bali love-in?
Not to mention all the 'third world' countries such as China (now #1 CO2 emitter) India et al?

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by parihaka

And I realise America is the great satan, but is everyone aware that Britain, Japan, Canada, Australia and Russia all had exactly the same objections as America at the Bali love-in?
Not to mention all the 'third world' countries such as China (now #1 CO2 emitter) India et al?

Yes, right, true! (except I suggest you recheck the highlighted factoid)

[thaanatos]

Originally Posted by Gilles de Rais

Americaaa, Americaaa, AMERICAAAAA....

hey, it ain't my fault you Belgians haven't got anything to wax proud of......

[parihaka]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Yes, right, true! (except I suggest you recheck the highlighted factoid)

It's open to conjecture as of course they have to be estimates rather than actual recordings but the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency now put China at #1

Since 2006, China’s CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use and industrial processes (cement production) have been larger than the emissions of the USA. With approximately 8% higher emissions than those of the USA, China now tops the list of CO2 emitting countries. In 2005, the CO2 emissions of China were still 2% below those of the USA. The EU-15, with a volume of emissions about half of that of China, occupies the third position, followed by Russia, India and Japan.

Cement clinker production is the largest CO2 source among industrial processes, contributing about 4% of global total CO2 emissions from fuel use and industrial activities. However, for Chinawith its large and increasing share in global cement production of about 44% in 2006, the share of CO2from cement production in national total CO2 emissions is almost 9% (550 megatonne out of a total of about 6200 megatonne CO2). For the USA these figures are about 5800 megatonne CO2 in total, of which 50 megaton from cement production.

[Zan de Man]

That's an astounding scientifically literate post wtf. Are you also the author of this blog?