On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 5:47 PM, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Chris de Morsella <cdemorse...@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > > A prescription of full speed ahead, burn it all up, as fast as we >> possibly can is a 100% guarantee of complete disastrous sudden onset >> collapse >> > > So now you're claiming that even though computer climate models made > terrible 17 year predictions we know with complete certainty that those > same models make 100% absolutely perfect 100 year predictions. I have to > ask, how do you know this? Did that revelation come to you in a dream? > > >> > you live in a pretend world of make believe eternally available >> reserves of fossil energy. >> > > Nothing is eternal including the sun, but there is enough Thorium just in > the Earth's crust to supply us with energy for about as long as the sun > shines. > > > > when these fossil energy reserves enter into inexorable decline - as in >> fact they are or will soon be. >> > > So we're already in the era of inexorable fossil fuel production decline, > and yet oddly oil production in the USA is the highest it's been in 24 > years and because it uses more advanced technology it now produces more oil > than Saudi Arabia. And given this inexorable decline it's also a bit odd > that in 2012 oil production increased in the USA by 760,000 barrels a day, > the largest yearly increase since records about oil production started in > 1859. And it's even stranger that natural gas production in 2012 was THE > LARGEST IT HAS EVER BEEN. If that's inexorable decline I'm all for it. > >> > Fortunately wiser people than yourself are advocating that we begin to >> transition away from these fossil supplies >> > > These wiser people (environmentalists) are indeed in favor of a transition > away from fossil fuel and nuclear energy, but they are also strongly > against a transition TOWARD anything to replace it. Anything with the > capacity to replace these missing energy sources would of necessity have to > be large, and they could not remain theoretical but would actually have to > be built. And renewable or non-renewable these "wiser people" are rabidly > against any energy source that is larger than a tiny pilot plant, and some > think even that is too big and all future energy sources should remain > strictly on paper till the end of time. > > > > Those, who continue to delude themselves, with this absurd notion that >> fossil energy will always be available (or at least will be available for a >> very long period of time - more than a hundred years say) are deluded fools >> > > In a time of fast technological advancement such as ours making great > sacrifices now to solve problems that you think might become serious more > than about 15 years in the future is just dumb; it would be like demanding > that the Wright brothers solve the problem of airport congestion before > they finished construction of their first airplane. > > >I am calling the "brilliant" John Clark... a (pompous) fool... a >> self-deluded idiot, living in a mind infected by magical thinking. >> > It doesn't matter if John Clark is a pompous self deluded infected idiot > (and a fool too!) if what John Clark said in the above is true. And it is. > Nope. For this, John Clark has to prove or at least plausibly argue that fossil fuel, pollution etc. is the only viable energy option for the future, which he has not. His indifference to various kinds of leakage and seepage of fluids, solids, and gas is a lifestyle choice. I for one don't judge other people's sexual preferences, no matter my difference in taste. If someone likes to sleep, live, and breathe their own uhm... "outputs" as aesthetic lifestyle choice, then how can anybody argue with taste? Prohibition will fall, so John can indulge his fetish. Doesn't bother me. But quoting uncertainty in climate science: wow, major news John. Really? Climate science is complex? Predictions can be faulty with larger variance than thought? My mind is blown. Thanks for enlightening us, John... PGC > > Yours truly, > > John K Clark > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
