The Return Of Coal

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Indeed. A great job.

Enjoy. 😅

You're so proud of your ANACHONISTIC BEHAVIOR, like Trump is proud of his SEXUAL ASSAULT.

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Yes. Prosperity is always good.

Destroying the environment is NOT prosperity, dropout.

[robosmith]

49 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

So what?

Thanks for proving your IGNORANCE. LMAO

[herbie]

18 hours ago, Nationalist said:

18 hours ago, herbie said:

 

Yes...more windmills and mirrors...that's what we need..

If there was a valid reason other than sheer arseholiness yo make such a statement, it is beyond anyone's guess.
Condoning the worst and non-renewakle solution just to 'own' the easiest, cheapest and best  . Thinking of using coal over even natural gas is incredibly ignorant.

[Nationalist]

4 minutes ago, herbie said:

If there was a valid reason other than sheer arseholiness yo make such a statement, it is beyond anyone's guess.
Condoning the worst and non-renewakle solution just to 'own' the easiest, cheapest and best  . Thinking of using coal over even natural gas is incredibly ignorant.

Tell that to the miners and the electrical companies and the steel producers.

Oh wait...Hilary-Billary tried...and lost to Trump.

Oops...

What's ignorant is driving up inflation across the board, just to satisfy your irrational fear.

[robosmith]

56 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Tell that to the miners and the electrical companies and the steel producers.

Oh wait...Hilary-Billary tried...and lost to Trump.

Oops...

What's ignorant is driving up inflation across the board, just to satisfy your irrational fear.

You believing it's "irrational fear" when the scientists tell you it's REAL, is the definition of irrational.

Of course you never took science classes and you keep proving that HERE, dropout.

Edited Friday at 08:43 PM by robosmith

[Legato]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

You believing it's "irrational fear" when the scientists tell you it's REAL, is the definition of irrational.

Of course you never took science classes and you keep proving that HERE, dropout.

Which scientists?

[robosmith]

2 minutes ago, Legato said:

Which scientists?

The vast majority of climatologists who know the true cost of coal power plants.

Do you live near one, or want to?

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

You believing it's "irrational fear" when the scientists tell you it's REAL, is the definition of irrational.

Of course you never took science classes and you keep proving that HERE, dropout.

Scientists also tell me its not something we need to be terribly concerned with right now as well.

You sort o' ignored that part eh?

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Scientists also tell me its not something we need to be terribly concerned with right now as well.

You sort o' ignored that part eh?

When we have a huge intractible problem, concern is ALWAYS warranted.

No group of scientists has ever said what you allege.

You're just a cheapskate who doesn't want to do the wise thing now because it will cost you money NOW.

And you don't understand how tipping points can make it much more urgent in a flash.

But probably not in your lifetime, so you don't care. 🤮

[John Stone]

According to major scientific assessments  the effects of climate change will intensify dramatically within the next few decades due to increasing global temps, ice loss (earth's a/c) and sea-level rise. 

 Relax......... chance are the majority won't live long enough to see it.  (whew!)

 

[John Johnston]

11 hours ago, robosmith said:

When we have a huge intractible problem, concern is ALWAYS warranted.

No group of scientists has ever said what you allege.

You're just a cheapskate who doesn't want to do the wise thing now because it will cost you money NOW.

And you don't understand how tipping points can make it much more urgent in a flash.

But probably not in your lifetime, so you don't care. 🤮

Until they lose their home to wildfire or flooding, which can happen at any time now with today's extreme weather. Then they are the first people to beg for help and money to rebuild, which will not be available thanks to things like Trumps bullshit policies. As a matter of fact, it is already happening in many states as we speak. But don't tell them, everyone is suffering from TDS. Shrug. 

[Michael Hardner]

8 hours ago, John Stone said:

According to major scientific assessments  the effects of climate change will intensify dramatically within the next few decades due to increasing global temps, ice loss (earth's a/c) and sea-level rise. 

 Relax......... chance are the majority won't live long enough to see it.  (whew!)

 

If you do a forensic examination of the arguments from people on here who believe themselves to be conservatives, you can kind of plot where this is going to go.

Short answer, a different direction. 

We will have fewer people, less environmental impact, Less reliance on fossil fuel, more automation, more interconnectedness. 

The imbalances We are seeing now by the beginning of the end of those old systems. The future will not be like 1955.  My father used to tell me that every dying Empire clings to nostalgia.  I think he meant culture, but today it seems to mean systems.

[Nationalist]

14 hours ago, robosmith said:

When we have a huge intractible problem, concern is ALWAYS warranted.

No group of scientists has ever said what you allege.

You're just a cheapskate who doesn't want to do the wise thing now because it will cost you money NOW.

And you don't understand how tipping points can make it much more urgent in a flash.

But probably not in your lifetime, so you don't care. 🤮

So go hide Sweetie. Try Alaska.

[Nationalist]

9 hours ago, John Stone said:

According to major scientific assessments  the effects of climate change will intensify dramatically within the next few decades due to increasing global temps, ice loss (earth's a/c) and sea-level rise. 

 Relax......... chance are the majority won't live long enough to see it.  (whew!)

 

Ya ya Ya. I know...'we all gonna die'.

Except we ain't.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobeccles/2025/08/19/heres-why-climate-change-is-actually-not-a-existential-crisis/

You have a choice. Run around claiming 'we all gonna die', or live within reality and get the Hell outta the way of common sense and prosperity. 

 

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

So go hide Sweetie. Try Alaska.

No thanks, you're already in Alaska and it ain't big enough for both of us.

I'm not stupid enough to live in your icebox.

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Ya ya Ya. I know...'we all gonna die'.

Except we ain't.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobeccles/2025/08/19/heres-why-climate-change-is-actually-not-a-existential-crisis/

You have a choice. Run around claiming 'we all gonna die', or live within reality and get the Hell outta the way of common sense and prosperity. 

 

^lDIOT believes "forbes" is a peer reviewed climate journal. LMAO

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Ya ya Ya. I know...'we all gonna die'.

Except we ain't.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobeccles/2025/08/19/heres-why-climate-change-is-actually-not-a-existential-crisis/

You have a choice. Run around claiming 'we all gonna die', or live within reality and get the Hell outta the way of common sense and prosperity. 

 

Your author is NOT a climatologist, he is a sociologist.

Quote

Robert G. Eccles was a tenured professor at the Harvard Business School. He is now with Said Business School at the University of Oxford. He was the founding chairman of the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board. The focus of his work is on the role companies and investors play in creating a sustainable world within the bounds of the fiduciary duty of their directors. This also means understanding the proper relationship between the public and the private sector. He explains this in his Harvard Business Review article "Moving Beyond ESG." Eccles graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. with degrees in pure mathematics and humanities and has a master and doctoral degree in sociology from Harvard University. 

From  the paper YOU CITE:

Quote

To be sure, the IPCC report discusses tipping points at various temperature levels—such as species extinction, irreversible biodiversity loss, and loss of ice sheets in Greenland and West Antarctic—and these are serious. But they don’t mean the end of human civilization. To be clear, I should also say that there is a great deal of uncertainty about tipping points. They are low probability/high impact scenarios which can be extremely consequential. They are “fat-tail” risks for which it is very difficult to assign a precise probability. These scenarios aren’t something to ignore

But YOU want to IGNORE THEM because you're CHEAP.  LMAO

 

[Nationalist]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

Your author is NOT a climatologist, he is a sociologist.

From  the paper YOU CITE:

But YOU want to IGNORE THEM because you're CHEAP.  LMAO

 

Lol...so much for your cause, eh Tweenkie-Poo?

[robosmith]

9 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Lol...so much for your cause, eh Tweenkie-Poo?

IT's your cite which contradicted YOU. Duh

Quote

To be clear, I should also say that there is a great deal of uncertainty about tipping points. They are low probability/high impact scenarios which can be extremely consequential. They are “fat-tail” risks for which it is very difficult to assign a precise probability. These scenarios aren’t something to ignore

You want to IGNORE that which "can be extremely consequential." because you're CHEAP

[Nationalist]

4 hours ago, robosmith said:

IT's your cite which contradicted YOU. Duh

You want to IGNORE that which "can be extremely consequential." because you're CHEAP

Giggle...

You're really upset about the truth coming out' eh?

For over a decade, you fckin' Tweenkie-Ass liars warped the raw facts about the climate and choked absolute worst case scenarios down out throats. 

We always knew such predictions were over the top but, now the scientists themselves have confirmed it. Your lies and need for destruction have been exposed by the very scientists you silly b@stards used to gain power.

An honorable person would realize the great climate change religion was all based on seething lies and be ashamed...even mad at the media and politicians who constructed this farce. But not you Tweenkies. You dumb fcks will go down with the ship.

The death of a gross lie...and the exposition of weak willed twits who actually want to destroy society.

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Giggle...

You're really upset about the truth coming out' eh?

For over a decade, you fckin' Tweenkie-Ass liars warped the raw facts about the climate and choked absolute worst case scenarios down out throats. 

We always knew such predictions were over the top but, now the scientists themselves have confirmed it. Your lies and need for destruction have been exposed by the very scientists you silly b@stards used to gain power.

An honorable person would realize the great climate change religion was all based on seething lies and be ashamed...even mad at the media and politicians who constructed this farce. But not you Tweenkies. You dumb fcks will go down with the ship.

The death of a gross lie...and the exposition of weak willed twits who actually want to destroy society.

What GROUP of scientists have confirmed that "predictions were over the top"? LMAO

ONLY thing which has been admitted was inaccurate was the TIMING. Duh

And you don't understand anything about that and that's why you're desperately clinging to your "win, while we're ALL LOSING" by foolishly clinging to COAL which is killing MILLIONS. 🤮

[WestCanMan]

Libbie f-t4rds don't like coal, but it was an EXTREMELY reliable form of energy for 100 years. 

Conversely, N Gas almost left BC in the cold a few years ago, as one of our 2 lines blew up "unexpectedly". 

It's easy to use coal by the mining site and put its energy on the grid, it's also the safest energy-dense material to ship around. It's impossible to have a disaster with coal. 

Like it or not, coal is awesome. Only hydro power is as safe and reliable as coal.

Nuclear energy is extremely reliable and pushes an enormous amount of juice, but even in highly advanced countries, there have been serious nuclear powerplant incidents:

1. Russia (Chernobyl)
2. Japan (Fukijima)
3. US (3-Mile Island)
4. Canada (Chalk Island)
5. Britain (Windscale)

Those aren't exactly slouch countries. 

I would still be in favour of building nuclear, but I'm not an anti-energy person. 

[robosmith]

28 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Libbie f-t4rds don't like coal, but it was an EXTREMELY reliable form of energy for 100 years. 

Yes, it reliably KILLS MILLIONS with pollution and accidents.

Thanks for proving all you got is lame ad hominems.

 

[Nationalist]

16 hours ago, robosmith said:

What GROUP of scientists have confirmed that "predictions were over the top"? LMAO

ONLY thing which has been admitted was inaccurate was the TIMING. Duh

And you don't understand anything about that and that's why you're desperately clinging to your "win, while we're ALL LOSING" by foolishly clinging to COAL which is killing MILLIONS. 🤮

https://climatecosmos.com/climate-news/why-more-top-scientists-now-question-climate-alarmism/

"In the last two years, there has been a remarkable change in the climate science landscape, with more leading researchers publicly questioning extreme climate forecasts. "

Sorry Sweetie. Your fear-porn party is over.

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

https://climatecosmos.com/climate-news/why-more-top-scientists-now-question-climate-alarmism/

"In the last two years, there has been a remarkable change in the climate science landscape, with more leading researchers publicly questioning extreme climate forecasts. "

Sorry Sweetie. Your fear-porn party is over.

Just as I thought, there is NO GROUP of scientists that you can name.

Quote

No single scientific body endorses the conclusion that climate change is an alarmist hoax. The overwhelming consensus across global institutions, including the ⁠NASA Science Evidence and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is that human-driven global warming is a reality. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

However, a few specific organizations and prominent groups of contrarian scientists actively challenge this mainstream scientific consensus: [1]

• CLINTEL (Climate Intelligence Foundation): An international network of scientists and professionals founded in 2019 by Guus Berkhout and Marcel Crok. They are best known for drafting the "World Climate Declaration," which argues there is no climate emergency and that \(\mathrm{CO}_{2}\) is beneficial to nature. [1, 2, 3]
• NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change): A group of independent scientists and scholars sponsored by organizations like the Heartland Institute. They were formed to provide an alternative to the UN's IPCC, publishing reports that argue natural forces play a much larger role in climate change than human activity. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• Contrarian Researchers: Individual scientists like Richard Lindzen (MIT), John Christy (University of Alabama in Huntsville), and Judith Curry (formerly of Georgia Tech) frequently speak out against what they term "climate alarmism". They emphasize the uncertainties in climate modeling and advocate for a greater focus on the economic costs of mitigation. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

These groups represent a very small minority within the scientific community. For detailed analysis and data representing the broader scientific perspective, visit the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) or review the ⁠IPCC AR6 Synthesis Report. [1, 2]

 

 

 

 

Edited 5 hours ago by robosmith

[Nationalist]

6 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Just as I thought, there is NO GROUP of scientists that you can name.

 

Ur quite insane...ya know that?