Green new deal equals magical thinking

[headoverheels 333]

7 hours ago, brenthutch said:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/11/asia/china-south-korea-coronavirus-reopening-intl-hnk/index.html
 

No surprise that more opening means more cases.  Yep, US only has 49x the per capita deaths as S. Korea now.

[DJL 235]

12 hours ago, brenthutch said:

BTW CO2 levels are higher today, when global economies are in shutdown, than they were a year ago when things were going gang busters.  It all illustrates how futile this GND fantasy is.

The best source for CO2 levels is the station in Hawaii since the levels it measures are the most untainted by local manufacturing.  What they say doesn't shoot down what your claim but it certainly doesn't confirm it.

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/2020/03/11/what-does-it-take-for-the-coronavirus-or-other-major-economic-events-to-affect-global-carbon-dioxide-readings/

[billvon 2,995]

15 hours ago, brenthutch said:

BTW CO2 levels are higher today, when global economies are in shutdown, than they were a year ago when things were going gang busters.  

?? We are currently burning 70% of the oil we are usually burning and 65% of the coal we are usually burning.  People are still ordering stuff from Amazon and using electrical power.  We are still emitting CO2; we haven't even cut it in half in the US.  And China, who emits more than we do, has had even less of a decline - they are still emitting 75% of what they usually do.  The IEA is predicting a reduction in anthropogenic CO2 over this year by less than 8% for all countries, because most countries are not shutting down.

You won't see that for years in the Mauna Loa CO2 results.  It will keep increasing since we will still be emitting over 90% of the CO2 we usually emit.

[kallend 2,027]

[brenthutch 444]

9 hours ago, DJL said:

The best source for CO2 levels is the station in Hawaii since the levels it measures are the most untainted by local manufacturing.  What they say doesn't shoot down what your claim but it certainly doesn't confirm it.

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/2020/03/11/what-does-it-take-for-the-coronavirus-or-other-major-economic-events-to-affect-global-carbon-dioxide-readings/

The source I cited uses the Hawaii station measurements 

[brenthutch 444]

6 hours ago, billvon said:

?? We are currently burning 70% of the oil we are usually burning and 65% of the coal we are usually burning.  People are still ordering stuff from Amazon and using electrical power.  We are still emitting CO2; we haven't even cut it in half in the US.  And China, who emits more than we do, has had even less of a decline - they are still emitting 75% of what they usually do.  The IEA is predicting a reduction in anthropogenic CO2 over this year by less than 8% for all countries, because most countries are not shutting down.

You won't see that for years in the Mauna Loa CO2 results.  It will keep increasing since we will still be emitting over 90% of the CO2 we usually emit.

Yes, and we will continue to do so for the rest of our lives.  (And that is going to be OK)

"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference"

Edited May 12, 2020 by brenthutch

[brenthutch 444]

6 hours ago, kallend said:

I would go with dead horse, since it is an argument I have been winning for the past year.  It is time for you to cry "uncle" and move on.

Edited May 12, 2020 by brenthutch

[kallend 2,027]

" it is an argument I have been winning for the past year."

 

Professors Dunning and Kruger strike again.

[brenthutch 444]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

" it is an argument I have been winning for the past year."

 

Professors Dunning and Kruger strike again.

Oh!  I'm sorry, did I miss the implementation of the Green New Deal?  Or is it only alive in your imagination?

https://southpark.cc.com/clips/163661/imagination-flying-machine

Replace "imagination flying machine" with "imagination climate machine"

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by brenthutch

[billvon 2,995]

In a development that surprised exactly no one, the same militant anti-science characters who deny climate change for profit are now seeking to deny epidemiology.  From SciAm:

================================

Climate Science Deniers Turn to Attacking Coronavirus Models

Vocal critics have cited perceived flaws in both climate and virus modeling, despite scientific evidence to the contrary

A vocal set of conservative critics have increased their attacks recently on the data modeling behind the novel coronavirus response, and they claim—despite scientific evidence to the contrary—that the flaws also prove the limits of climate change forecasts.

The group, which includes federal lawmakers, climate science deniers and conservative pundits with close White House connections, has even called for congressional hearings into the coronavirus modeling.

That’s in spite of assurances from public health officials that better-than-expected U.S. death estimates for COVID-19 are because millions of Americans responded to pleas for social distancing.

================================

[brenthutch 444]

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/17/influential-covid-19-model-uses-flawed-methods-shouldnt-guide-policies-critics-say/

"A widely followed model for projecting Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever, and now epidemiologists are criticizing it as flawed and misleading for both the public and policy makers. In particular, they warn against relying on it as the basis for government decision-making, including on “re-opening America.”

“It’s not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited” to projecting Covid-19 deaths, epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told reporters this week"

Harvard is a bastion of science deniers?

[kallend 2,027]

Professors Dunning and Kruger strike once again.

 

[DJL 235]

15 hours ago, brenthutch said:

The source I cited uses the Hawaii station measurements 

You didn't cite any source.  What I linked is literally their words on this issue.

[brenthutch 444]

https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2-numbers

This isn't their words, this is their observation

[brenthutch 444]

12 hours ago, kallend said:

Professors Dunning and Kruger strike once again.

 

I wish I had known you when you were at the top of your game.  It is obvious, at some point, you garnered some respect in this forum.  It pains me to see you reduced to Matt Groening memes, pathetic insults and personal attacks.

[kallend 2,027]

Your game is trolling.

You aren't even close. to knowing what my game is.

Edited May 14, 2020 by kallend

[DJL 235]

11 hours ago, brenthutch said:

https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2-numbers

This isn't their words, this is their observation

Yes, and in their words they said we wouldn't see a drop in CO2 from this.

[turtlespeed 221]

2 hours ago, DJL said:

Yes, and in their words they said we wouldn't see a drop in CO2 from this.

But we did!

Shocker!!

[DJL 235]

2 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

But we did!

Shocker!!

We didn't.  There was a 1.58ppm rise.  It's one of the lower ones in recent years, but still an increase.

[turtlespeed 221]

1 minute ago, DJL said:

We didn't.  There was a 1.58ppm rise.  It's one of the lower ones in recent years, but still an increase.

My bad - I thought we were talking about current output.

[brenthutch 444]

https://resourceworld.com/russia-eyes-big-plans-for-coal-production-and-exports/
 

somebody needs to tell Russia that coal is dead

“Russia plans to increase its domestic coal production up to 448-530 million tonnes annually until 2024 and up to 485-668 million tonnes annually until 2035, according to the recently presented draft of state strategy for Energy Development of Russia until 2035.”

[DJL 235]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

https://resourceworld.com/russia-eyes-big-plans-for-coal-production-and-exports/
 

somebody needs to tell Russia that coal is dead

“Russia plans to increase its domestic coal production up to 448-530 million tonnes annually until 2024 and up to 485-668 million tonnes annually until 2035, according to the recently presented draft of state strategy for Energy Development of Russia until 2035.”

Another example of a country with no regard for human health.  You're getting good at pointing out how it's typically desperate 2nd and 3rd world countries who are expanding their use of coal.

Edited May 15, 2020 by DJL

[evh 22]

Who says coal is dead? It isn't and it won't be as long as a few rich russians are making a lot of money (while other russians are dying beacuse of it, but who cares, right, MAGA fuck yeah!)

And if you don't like the black snow, you can aways paint it white....  brilliant solution!!

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2018/12/19/russian-authorities-cover-snow-white-paint-hide-sings-pollution-a63892

https://www.businessinsider.nl/snow-turns-back-siberia-russia-pollution-2019-2/

 

[DJL 235]

1 hour ago, evh said:

Who says coal is dead? It isn't and it won't be as long as a few rich russians are making a lot of money (while other russians are dying beacuse of it, but who cares, right, MAGA fuck yeah!)

And if you don't like the black snow, you can aways paint it white....  brilliant solution!!

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2018/12/19/russian-authorities-cover-snow-white-paint-hide-sings-pollution-a63892

https://www.businessinsider.nl/snow-turns-back-siberia-russia-pollution-2019-2/

 

I like this bit:

"The head of the town said he had reprimanded those responsible and ordered the removal of the paint from the snow hill."

[billvon 2,995]

1 hour ago, DJL said:

Another example of a country with no regard for human health.  You're getting good at pointing out how it's typically desperate 2nd and 3rd world countries who are expanding their use of coal.

Yep.  When did the right wing turn into such meek subordinates that they now point to Russia as a leader, and hope that the US follows in their footsteps?