Fed Up With Climate Change
General Topic
Contributors to this thread:
Zbone 09-Jul-24
sawtooth 09-Jul-24
olddogrib 09-Jul-24
CaptMike 09-Jul-24
Corax_latrans 09-Jul-24
tobywon 09-Jul-24
WV Mountaineer 09-Jul-24
drycreek 09-Jul-24
JSW 09-Jul-24
Candor 09-Jul-24
JSW 09-Jul-24
sawtooth 09-Jul-24
HDE 09-Jul-24
Candor 09-Jul-24
olddogrib 09-Jul-24
tobywon 09-Jul-24
Glunt@work 09-Jul-24
jons 09-Jul-24
TGbow 09-Jul-24
Trying hard 09-Jul-24
Bou'bound 09-Jul-24
Hunts_with_stick 09-Jul-24
sawtooth 09-Jul-24
WV Mountaineer 09-Jul-24
4nolz@work 09-Jul-24
Beendare 09-Jul-24
olddogrib 09-Jul-24
Glunt@work 09-Jul-24
KSflatlander 09-Jul-24
sawtooth 09-Jul-24
HDE 09-Jul-24
Candor 09-Jul-24
KSflatlander 09-Jul-24
KSflatlander 09-Jul-24
Candor 09-Jul-24
KSflatlander 09-Jul-24
sundowner 09-Jul-24
TonyBear 09-Jul-24
KSflatlander 10-Jul-24
TonyBear 10-Jul-24
JSW 10-Jul-24
KsRancher 10-Jul-24
Mike in CT 10-Jul-24
sawtooth 10-Jul-24
KSflatlander 10-Jul-24
Landshark Launcher 10-Jul-24
KSflatlander 10-Jul-24
4nolz@work 10-Jul-24
TRnCO 10-Jul-24
WhattheFOC 10-Jul-24
KSflatlander 10-Jul-24
APauls 10-Jul-24
KSflatlander 10-Jul-24
HDE 10-Jul-24
Landshark Launcher 10-Jul-24
Al Dente Laptop 10-Jul-24
KSflatlander 10-Jul-24
TRnCO 10-Jul-24
Mike Ukrainetz 10-Jul-24
WhattheFOC 10-Jul-24
KsRancher 10-Jul-24
Bowbender 10-Jul-24
KSflatlander 10-Jul-24
4nolz@work 10-Jul-24
Mike Ukrainetz 10-Jul-24
jons 10-Jul-24
KsRancher 10-Jul-24
Kevin Speicher 10-Jul-24
KsRancher 10-Jul-24
4nolz@work 10-Jul-24
Landshark Launcher 10-Jul-24
Shaft2Long 10-Jul-24
Beendare 10-Jul-24
HDE 10-Jul-24
Mike Ukrainetz 10-Jul-24
Live2Hunt 10-Jul-24
Iowa booner hunter 10-Jul-24
KSflatlander 10-Jul-24
4nolz@work 10-Jul-24
Zbone 10-Jul-24
jons 10-Jul-24
4nolz@work 10-Jul-24
KsRancher 10-Jul-24
CaptMike 10-Jul-24
spike78 10-Jul-24
KSflatlander 10-Jul-24
olddogrib 10-Jul-24
bigeasygator 10-Jul-24
Glunt@work 10-Jul-24
HDE 10-Jul-24
Candor 10-Jul-24
Mike in CT 10-Jul-24
Tjm1534 10-Jul-24
TENPOINT 13-Jul-24
Bowhunting 5C 13-Jul-24
bigeasygator 13-Jul-24
Bob Rowlands 13-Jul-24
bigeasygator 13-Jul-24
Jimmyjumpup 14-Jul-24
DL 14-Jul-24
Bowhunting 5C 14-Jul-24
bigeasygator 14-Jul-24
KSflatlander 14-Jul-24
DL 15-Jul-24
shade mt 15-Jul-24
olddogrib 15-Jul-24
KSflatlander 15-Jul-24
Catscratch 15-Jul-24
Jimmyjumpup 15-Jul-24
tobywon 15-Jul-24
KSflatlander 15-Jul-24
DL 15-Jul-24
DL 15-Jul-24
Catscratch 15-Jul-24
KSflatlander 15-Jul-24
Bentshaft 15-Jul-24
KSflatlander 16-Jul-24
Bou'bound 16-Jul-24
Zbone 16-Jul-24
KSflatlander 16-Jul-24
Zbone 16-Jul-24
Iowa booner hunter 16-Jul-24
Zbone 16-Jul-24
KSflatlander 16-Jul-24
CaptMike 16-Jul-24
Iowa booner hunter 16-Jul-24
Beendare 16-Jul-24
KSflatlander 16-Jul-24
WhattheFOC 16-Jul-24
Candor 16-Jul-24
Iowa booner hunter 16-Jul-24
KSflatlander 16-Jul-24
Zbone 17-Jul-24
CaptMike 17-Jul-24
KSflatlander 17-Jul-24
KSflatlander 17-Jul-24
KSflatlander 17-Jul-24
Zbone 17-Jul-24
KSflatlander 17-Jul-24
CaptMike 17-Jul-24
KSflatlander 17-Jul-24
KSflatlander 17-Jul-24
bigeasygator 17-Jul-24
Catscratch 17-Jul-24
Beendare 17-Jul-24
Beendare 17-Jul-24
bluedog 17-Jul-24
KsRancher 17-Jul-24
TonyBear 17-Jul-24
Beendare 17-Jul-24
bluedog 17-Jul-24
KSflatlander 17-Jul-24
Jimmyjumpup 18-Jul-24
DanaC 19-Jul-24
SlipShot 19-Jul-24
From: Zbone
09-Jul-24
I consider myself a naturalist and used to enjoy watching nature programs, used to watch them a lot, but now I am sooooo freakn fed up with them blaming everything in nature on global warming and climate change... Now days they can't put out a single decent nature program without bringing it up... It's ridicules I'm to the point I want to pull my hair screaming at the screen "I get it, move on"... Geez, there was a Ice Age only 10,000 years ago, animals adapt, if they don't so be it...

From: sawtooth
09-Jul-24
Much of the west was an ocean once. Lots of dinosaur bones in Montana and North Dakota. The climate is always in a state of change, and always has been.

From: olddogrib
09-Jul-24
I can't prove it, but it killed "Otzi the Iceman" One of Greta Thunberg's ancient relatives was the "High Exalted Grand Poo-bah" of Otzi's village and freaked out when he saw a drop of ice-melt high in the Austrian-Italian Alps. Otzi became the "fall guy" and got sent out to assess the situation. When he came back and told the villagers everything would be fine her ancestor shot him! It's just been downhill and hysterics for the last 10,000 years since then!

From: CaptMike
09-Jul-24
Nothing more than a manufactured issue, used both as a distraction and a money making scheme. It fits in well with the liberal playbook because it appeals to people driven by emotion more than critical thinking.

09-Jul-24
“Nothing more than a manufactured issue….”

Pretty sure that’s what the science has been saying all along…..

But if you can explain how it’s possible to increase the heat storage capacity of the atmosphere without accumulating heat, I’m sure there are a lot of people who would like to know how that works…

My favorite Fun Fact of the whole debate is that Trump was suing the Scottish government because his business wanted to build a wall to protect his golf course from rising sea levels….

From: tobywon
09-Jul-24
The SE portion of the US should be under water by now according to what some were saying 20 or 30 years ago. I'm not discounting emissions and man-made issues, but some forget or don't even realize that the last ice sheet in North America started to recede about 20,000 years ago. Nothing to do with mankind. The earth has be heating and cooling since the beginning of time.

09-Jul-24
What’s even more funny is watching you stumble all over yourself on climate change issues.

The climate always has and always will change. It’d take an arrogant pompous ass to suggest science has the slightest idea of the impact man has had on it. If any at all.

That’s reality. But, reality and man made climate change has always thrown you a curve. No matter the links and links that’s been posted to discredit your ideas. You still lock on to the “science” of it. While totally ignoring the facts of it.

From: drycreek
09-Jul-24
Me too Z, we had nine tornado warnings in East Texas yesterday afternoon. It’s all Trump’s fault !

From: JSW
09-Jul-24
Have you seen the pictures of the Roman tidal baths built 1000 years ago still at sea level? What about Plimoth Rock, still at sea level? How about all those shoreline pics from 100 years ago, still looking the same? Now we are finding Vikings buried in the permafrost 1000 years ago. No one bothers to ask, what caused the global warming then?

I'll shout it until I die, or until I drown under the rising tides. Man made catastrophic climate change is the greatest hoax of all time.

From: Candor
09-Jul-24
If you have the patience to get into the weeds a bit, this is a good podcast on climate change and discusses not only a counter perspective to the green agenda, but he also discusses the economic and academic forces behind why you do not hear a more balanced perspective. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LVSrTZDopM

What's really funny is the bullshit that Youtube posts as the header to the video: "United Nations • Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns. Human activities have been the main driver of climate change, primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas."

From: JSW
09-Jul-24
Have you seen the pictures of the Roman tidal baths built 1000 years ago still at sea level? What about Plimoth Rock, still at sea level? How about all those shoreline pics from 100 years ago, still looking the same? Now we are finding Vikings buried in the permafrost 1000 years ago. No one bothers to ask, what caused the global warming then?

I'll shout it until I die, or until I drown under the rising tides. Man made catastrophic climate change is the greatest hoax of all time.

From: sawtooth
09-Jul-24
I do not care if there is climate change, humans and others just have to adapt. That is how things have always worked. Humans have become mentally weak, especially the Liberals.

From: HDE
09-Jul-24
Once upon a time, the best grapes for making wine came from England. Not anymore.

How come? Here's a hint; that changed during the Middle-Ages/Renaissance timeframe...

From: Candor
09-Jul-24
I am not saying whether there is or is not man made climate change. I just do not believe there is proof of it and I do believe there is proof of natural climate change. Maybe there is a manmade component. Maybe not. I just firmly believe there is absolutely not enough proof to justify turning economies on their heads for what is a political movement. And everyone wants to act like they know. Ignorance is a tough position to accept but the earth is far more complex than current models can accommodate.

The earth's atmosphere is like 0.03 or 0.04% CO2. Now look up how much is naturally generated every year and how much is man generated? Could that be a problem? possibly, but doesn't seem probable.

I would be curious if there has been significant studies on deforestation impacts in Russia and South America.

From: olddogrib
09-Jul-24

olddogrib's embedded Photo
olddogrib's embedded Photo
I don't drink wine often, but when I do I still prefer the grapes from England!

From: tobywon
09-Jul-24
The most interesting man in the world....his 10-gallon hat holds 20-gallons!!!

From: Glunt@work
09-Jul-24
Regardless of how much the climate changes and the cause, people having less freedom and paying higher taxes won't change it.

We should have spent all the trillions adapting instead of pretending we can steer it.

From: jons
09-Jul-24
Just read a recent article that climate change is cause from the axis poles are going out of tilt by China use of concrete building explosion and India 1billion population with the great use of water being brought in.

It is about having more weight on one side on the spin and the difference will cause the normal axis to change.

Had to really take a hard look at this and the North/South axis have been going east at a rapid rate compared to human era. Once it goes pass the 45 degree the change in climate is. Fact or Fiction this is above my pay grade but makes sense.

From: TGbow
09-Jul-24
Forty plus years ago it was all about the "coming ice age". The left uses the environment a lot to further their cause just as the right uses national security to further their agenda.

From: Trying hard
09-Jul-24
"And on the 6th day God created Man" So he would have something to laugh at.

From: Bou'bound
09-Jul-24
Sounds Like A Pet Peeve kind Of thing

09-Jul-24
zbone, couldn't agree more. I often change the channel when that happens.

From: sawtooth
09-Jul-24
Climate change is a part of making government bigger, exactly what the Libs want. Bigger government means more taxes on the people to pay the lib government employees. Why are some voters ( including hunters ) so dumb ?

09-Jul-24
It’s also the sole reason I don’t watch nature shows anymore.

From: 4nolz@work
09-Jul-24
Climate Change is big business.As drought conditions revealed archaeological evidence of past civilization it strikes me that sea levels have risen in past times.

My main beef is the USA has to pay for everything all the time it seems.China,India and Russia haven't changed a thing.They assume rightly we are fools.

I read an article that said if the USA disappeared today that in 100 years global temperature would decrease 0.1°

From: Beendare
09-Jul-24
We all need to improve and do our part for clean air and water. My vehicles are 50% better than they were 10 years ago. In all of my businesses we recycle everything we can- wood, Concrete, steel- everything possible. Some projects the specific recycle is mandated- Green Halo- for a nice fee to the bureaucracy of course driving up costs to the client.

I think the Zero emissions is ridiculous- this will drive up the cost of goods and services exponentially. This is unreasonable when Mt Etna or a forest fire dumps more pollution into the atmosphere than an entire state will in Decades.

We know what happens when things get too expensive like a garbage bill- people revolt, folks just dump it in vacant lots or in sewers and waterways. Many years ago I would see people dumping old engine oil down a sewer drain- thankfully not anymore.

From: olddogrib
09-Jul-24
Folks in the 60's just poured it on their dirt driveways, gravel was expensive!

From: Glunt@work
09-Jul-24
Oil comes from the ground. I may or may not skip all the middle men when recycling it :^)

From: KSflatlander
09-Jul-24
Hmmmm...should I go with 90% of scientists, meteorologists, chemists, etc. all over the world or the science deniers here. Tough choice.

Carry on brothers LMAO.

From: sawtooth
09-Jul-24
You can believe the Faucci's of the world. They all have a personal agenda.

From: HDE
09-Jul-24
90% of "scientists"? That's laughable...

From: Candor
09-Jul-24
KSF - I would encourage you to watch the interview in the link I posted above. That is a very credible source. I believe former head of meteorology at MIT (I think that's right) and former professor at Harvard. Neither known for their conservative stance. He discusses the forces against publishing articles contrary to anthropogenic climate change.

I sincerely respect you for being an outlier on here and speaking up, but nearly every person I know that believes in man made climate change is doing so from an ignorant position. I am far from sophisticated on it, but academically can track the argument deeper than most and it frightens me the strength of the followers for any position that do so because "more people say go this way than say go the other way". That is a dangerous basis, IMO.

From: KSflatlander
09-Jul-24

KSflatlander's Link
Here you go HDE.

From: KSflatlander
09-Jul-24
Candor- I never put all my eggs in one basket. Science encourages descent but goes with consensus. So do I. But "all the people I talk to think X" (especially here except for bowhunting related stuff) doesn't cut it. That logic you describe is infinitely more dangerous than scientific consensus model. Science consensus got us this far, we shouldn't stray from it because results are contrary to our beliefs.

From: Candor
09-Jul-24
I understand, I think, what you are saying. But the point of my post is that scientific consensus is not what got us to this point on man made climate change. Political and economic pressures have created the illusion of scientific consensus by elimination of dissenting publications.

From: KSflatlander
09-Jul-24
Candor- please provide some proof as to what you're saying. I'm sorry but politicians didn't and can't make up scientific evidence. Dissent is welcome in science and always has in the modern age. Please provide proof that there is some grand conspiracy among the world's scientific community (millions of scientists) to eliminate dissent.

From: sundowner
09-Jul-24
Leftist: "This current July heat wave is the result of climate change."

South Texas cowboy: "Well, down here we always called it Summer!"

From: TonyBear
09-Jul-24
I read in an Arbor Day newsletter that i2t has been the hottest summer last two years since the end of the ice age 10,000 or more years ago.

How the heck would they know? Was the author there to measure it?? No one was. All postulation and extrapolation of models, ice core sampling, etc..

But wait they haven't yet explained the butterfly remains under miles of ice in Greenland....from ice cores.

From: KSflatlander
10-Jul-24
"How the heck would they know? Was the author there to measure it?? No one was. All postulation and extrapolation of models, ice core sampling, etc.."

Did we actually physicall measure the sun's temperature or circumference? Have you ever seen an atom? A black hole, quark, a dinosaur, gravity, evolution? Everything we know of the past isn't directly measurable today but the collective evidence gives use data to draw conclusions. Everything in the future is a prediction. You got a better idea of how we understand anything but the present?

"But wait they haven't yet explained the butterfly remains under miles of ice in Greenland....from ice cores."

Yes they have.

From: TonyBear
10-Jul-24
KS Flatlander, due to man-made global warming, too many pre-historic mastodon overhunting, right?

Theory and extrapolation (or interpolation) is not the same as non-biased real time data collection. especially when everything is politicized.

Do you really know that deer you are pursuing exists by reviewing DNR maps or bowhunting blogs, posts, etc. or did you put boots on the ground and actually see it?

Oh Bohr molecular theory is just that a theory, a very good one but a theory that is still being reviewed, as it should be. Just like everything in science.

10-Jul-24

Ricky The Cabel Guy's Link
"Fact Checking The Claim Of 97% Consensus On Anthropogenic Climate Change"

From: JSW
10-Jul-24
Most people, including most scientists do believe that man has an effect on the climate. Just stand in downtown Phoenix for a few minutes and you get that. Asphalt, concrete, big cities are warmer. What has been completely falsified is how much effect we have on the climate. According to that very study that says 97%, only a very small percentage of scientists believed that man made changes would be catastrophic. That's the disgusting part of the 97% claim. They took a factual statistic and lied about it ever since.

Man has an effect on the climate. Man made "catastrophic" climate change is a hoax. Just how many times do they have to be wrong before you wake up. They have been saying the same thing 50 years, only 10 or 12 years to fix the problem, yet we are still doing just fine. After all, Obama told us in 2009, "this is the day the seas stop rising". That one election in 2008 fixed the entire problem. Obama said it, it has to be true.

Also, recycling is a great and noble concept but only about 6% of everything you send to the "recycling center" actually gets reused. The other 95% goes in a landfill. Another of humanities great hoaxes. It is always just about the money. How can we scam them out of more money?

From: KsRancher
10-Jul-24
Put me in the same camp as JSW

From: Mike in CT
10-Jul-24
The statistics often presented on the recycling of plastics are misleading; the 5-9% figure actually represents the percent of ALL plastics that are recycled.

One also needs to keep in mind that not all plastics are labeled (the number in the triangle, usually on the bottom of the plastic item) as recyclable. Of the plastic products that are labeled as recyclable the actual percent that are recycled ranges from 60-99%. (Our very own Salt Lake CIty, UT hits the 99% mark).

Evidently the "97% of scientists" citation isn't the only one that takes a valid number and miscasts it.....

From: sawtooth
10-Jul-24
I still drink water from a cup, hose, and fountain, why buy water in plastic bottles ? If the soccer mom really cared about the environment, she would carry a thermos and cup . Bottled water is not necessary, lazy people !

From: KSflatlander
10-Jul-24

KSflatlander's Link
"Also, recycling is a great and noble concept but only about 6% of everything you send to the "recycling center" actually gets reused. The other 95% goes in a landfill. Another of humanities great hoaxes. It is always just about the money. How can we scam them out of more money?"

I think your confusing the percent of total recycled plastic with the amount of plastic sent to recycle actually gets recycled. Or provide a credible source.

"Based on the available data, most plastics that get collected for recycling do get recycled. This is especially true of certain types of plastics that are universally recyclable, like water bottles. However, the vast majority of plastics don’t get collected for recycling and are thrown away instead. That is where the 5-9% statistics come from."

Ricky - if you would have checked then you would have seen the link I posted was the same fact check article on the 97% claim in an effort to be fair. That's why I said 90% because the credible data I've seen has ranged from 80-90% CONSENSUS of climate scientists agree the world temperature is rising and it's due to man-made greenhouse gases (mainly CO2 from burning fossil fuel) and average temp is rising. Scientific data from ice cores to fossils to eDNA indicate the earth was warmer in the past than it is now and that was due to volcanic activity and CO2 best science can tell. Try again Ricky. From your article:

"Even though belief is clearly below 97%, support over 80% is strong consensus. Would a lower level of consensus convince anyone concerned about anthropogenic global warming to abandon their views and advocate unrestricted burning of fossil fuels? I think not. Even the 2016 Cook paper says “From a broader perspective, it doesn’t matter if the consensus number is 90% or 100%.”

Maybe you should actually read what you post before you link it.

Tony- Greenland was once much warmer and was a forest (hence fossils for everything from cedar to butterflies to camels. Yes...under the current ice sheets.

"According to that very study that says 97%, only a very small percentage of scientists believed that man made changes would be catastrophic. That's the disgusting part of the 97% claim. They took a factual statistic and lied about it ever since. Man has an effect on the climate. Man made "catastrophic" climate change is a hoax."

Please post a credible link to back this up. Most climate science journals do not gauge whether the changes in climate are "catastrophic." They offer proof it is happening due to rise of CO2 caused by humans. Some articles offer possible effects of various temperature rises. Some of those predictions are observable today (in the present Tony).

10-Jul-24
"Maybe you should actually read what you post before you link it."

i did read...it in its entirety.

i also didnt make any statements as to whether or not the 90% or 97% claim was accurate or not. i simply posted an article that explained how and where the figures originated...and whether or not the author of the piece felt they were accurate or taken in context.

maybe you should actually take notice of what people post...or dont post...before casting aspersions on them. you get so excited about refuting everything i post...you dont bother to actually digest it.

as to what i personally feel about the accuracy 90-97% of scientists claim...i suspect it is like most other statistics that are used to advance a particular narrative. parts are accurate...parts are inaccurate...and parts are deliberate misinterpretations of the facts.

10-Jul-24

Landshark  Launcher's embedded Photo
Landshark  Launcher's embedded Photo

From: KSflatlander
10-Jul-24
"maybe you should actually take notice of what people post...or dont post...before casting aspersions on them. you get so excited about refuting everything i post...you dont bother to actually digest it."

Classic Ricky. A reply implying to make sure there are avenues to crawfish. BEG pretty well described you and embarrassed you.

"as to what i personally feel about the accuracy 90-97% of scientists claim...i suspect it is like most other statistics that are used to advance a particular narrative. parts are accurate...parts are inaccurate...and parts are deliberate misinterpretations of the facts."

I'm sure glad science isn't based on your feelings. Look at all those crawfishing avenues on that one. That's quite a skill Ricky. Maybe...maybe not LMAO.

There is a consensus of all climate scientists on earth that "climate change" is happening and it is caused by humans. Full stop. You have credibility data that says otherwise then please post.

9 out of 10 dentist's recommend brushing your teeth regularly. Nah, Ricky's going with the one.

What's next on the science denying list...fluoride in drinking water.

From: 4nolz@work
10-Jul-24
The doubt is due to past cases of "climate scientists" falsifying results to match their hypothetical models to get more grant money.Its hard to overcome skepticism after that.

Has the climate changed over millions of years ? I'm sure it has.I survived the ice age of the 70s and the acid rain of the 80s.Everyone is corruptible at some point and it makes people dubious even of the true scientists.

So put a social label like "denier" on anyone who is skeptical and let the mob's voices force them into silence.

From: TRnCO
10-Jul-24
Again, a guy could look back at all the predictions in the past and see just how many the "scientists" got wrong. For chits and giggles, a guy should pull up Al Gores movie and count how many predictions in it have come true. Ya know, the polar bears are gonna drown, and all.

From: WhattheFOC
10-Jul-24
There was a day when 97% of the world’s scientists agreed that the world was flat. Good thing there was a ‘denier’ or two who were willing to think about other possibilities.

KSF - don’t bother fact checking my 97%. I made it up. :)

From: KSflatlander
10-Jul-24
Gee 4nolz. I thought Zbone was talking about climate change. Sorry, but if you don't believe human actions are warming the earth you are a science denier. Just because a few scientists did some unethical stuff does not make all science or scientists unethical. If you bar is all science has to be right all the time...really. Science is a process and the scientific method is the best we got. Was the talk in the 70s about a potential coming ice age a scientific consensus or was it some sensationalized articles (not to be confused with scientific journals) to sell some magazines?

Last I seen there was a scientific consensus that water vapor/rain is more acidic and the effects have been measurable. Are you saying acidification of precipitation isn't happening? That our efforts to reduce NOx and SOx is unfounded?

WTF- so your logic is that before the 15th century (before modern scientific methods) humans thought the world was flat is proof that your cherry picked science issue is wrong. There are people today that still think the world is flat. You can probably find a "scientist" that says that today. That's not logic but illogic.

TRnCO- Al Gore is not a scientific consensus.

Land shark- Daily record highs are not climate.

If anyone has a better idea than the modern scientific method then I'm sure the world's scientific community is all ears.

From: APauls
10-Jul-24
Sometimes I feel like a shill as I do sell quite a bit of work to crews from the UK coming to film polar bear stuff. All of it has a climate change agenda baked in. But the reality is they won't get the programming from Disney or Nat Geo (also Disney) if they don't. So if you're wondering where the narrative comes from, it really all comes from a couple sources. The stories for all those shows are made well in advance of the crews showing up on site.

When I sell them the spots the questions revolve around whether they can shoot certain scenes to make the story. The story is what sells. Nature programming is NOT I repeat is NOT a photographer going out on site and simply capturing nature and sharing it with you. The story is made well in advance of ever landing in the area.

From: KSflatlander
10-Jul-24
Natgeo and nature shows are selling programming. It's not scientific consensus.

From: HDE
10-Jul-24
KSflat - 90% agree that need grant funding to justify their relevance. Follow the money LOL...

10-Jul-24
Its all about $$$$.. watch the news...it used to be 4 states will feel the storm....now its 8 million people or in the storms path...sounds worse. Got the put fear in the sheep.

10-Jul-24
A scam for over 6 decades. How many times have the "experts" said that the world would end in 5 years?

10-Jul-24
"Classic Ricky. A reply implying to make sure there are avenues to crawfish."

classic ksflatlander. make easily disproven statements about others...then accuse them of crawfishing when they prove him wrong.

ssdd...

unlike you...i have the ability to look at a given article or report and determine what might be true...what might be partisan hackery...and what might be just plain lies.

the 90-97% of all scientists claim appears to contain all three.

From: KSflatlander
10-Jul-24
Ricky- please tell me what statements I made were false and provide credible proof and not opinion.

From: TRnCO
10-Jul-24
"TRnCO- Al Gore is not a scientific consensus."

SO are we to believe that Al Gore just picked numbers and statistics out of thin air, without talking to some of the "97%" of the scientists, that he made it all up without any input from all these scientists?

10-Jul-24
90% of scientists said you should take the Covid Vaccine…

From: WhattheFOC
10-Jul-24
KSF - what you fail to grasp is that whatever scientific methods are in play at the time (whether that’s 15th century or NOW) are considered ‘modern’ in the moment. It’s pure arrogance to deny that in another 1000 years, people will laugh at things we believe to be true right now. Some of us just take longer than others to see thru the bs …

From: KsRancher
10-Jul-24
WhattheFOC. I agree. It wasn't but 4yrs ago that if you mentioned the origins of Covid coming from a lab you were called a right wing tinfoil hat wearing science denier. Censored on social media and probably losing your job.

From: Bowbender
10-Jul-24
"Land shark- Daily record highs are not climate."

Neither is 150 data points in a 4,500,000,000 data point set.

From: KSflatlander
10-Jul-24
""TRnCO- Al Gore is not a scientific consensus." SO are we to believe that Al Gore just picked numbers and statistics out of thin air, without talking to some of the "97%" of the scientists, that he made it all up without any input from all these scientists?"

No. I'm saying that I don't take anything Al Gore or any single person or scientist says as fact. I encourage everyone to look at the data themselves or summaries of the data from multiple credible sources. Look at what the consensus is or isn't.

"KSF - what you fail to grasp is that whatever scientific methods are in play at the time (whether that’s 15th century or NOW) are considered ‘modern’ in the moment. It’s pure arrogance to deny that in another 1000 years, people will laugh at things we believe to be true right now. Some of us just take longer than others to see thru the bs …"

Oh, I'm well aware of historical science and the evolution there of. So with that logic we should not believe any science at all because humanity will know more in the future. There are scientific abject truths and scientific consensus. We should just stop all scientific advances. Now that's some seriously dangerous logic.

"WhattheFOC. I agree. It wasn't but 4yrs ago that if you mentioned the origins of Covid coming from a lab you were called a right wing tinfoil hat wearing science denier. Censored on social media and probably losing your job."

The origin of Covid remains undetermined and there is not a consensus. Saying that it came from a lab is false unless you have credible proof. Please post if you do.

From: 4nolz@work
10-Jul-24
KSF I didn't say anywhere that man hadn't influenced climate.I pointed out labelling skeptics as "deniers" when some corruptible scientists led to skepticism.

BTW I sure wish either KSrancher or KSflatflander would get a new handle

10-Jul-24
The Covid Scamdemic proved that it’s not that hard to have 90% of scientists to “agree” on something. That dissenting views are not allowed, there will be no “credible news links” allowed.

Again 90+% of scientists say that you should take the Covid Vaccine, that it is safe and effective, I can’t find a single credible news source that says it isn’t and that you never needed it…

From: jons
10-Jul-24
7 Billion people on the planet, scientist say 4 Billion is the limited carrying capacity, does anyone step forward and start stepping off to reduce the capacity?

From: KsRancher
10-Jul-24
I think Ryan has been here longer than me. And I just recently sold out of the cattle business. So not a rancher anymore. I would gladly change my handle if Pat could do it for me

10-Jul-24
I miss the good ol' days of Marty Stouffer's Wild America.

From: KsRancher
10-Jul-24
The origin of Covid remains undetermined and there is not a consensus. Saying that it came from a lab is false unless you have credible proof. Please post if you do.

Our ideas of credible when it comes to climate change and covid would be different. Something that I would post wouldn't change your mind and anything you post wouldn't change my mind.

From: 4nolz@work
10-Jul-24
I agree the window to prove anything about Covid has passed-only possible with Chinas participation and it will never happen.But it sure smells like rotten fish in denmark.

I also agree no one here is changing their opinions-we just state our opinions.Thats why when the same guys start calling each other names and go back and forth like its a mancrush or something I dont read the tit for tat especially the long cut and pastes and links.Ive been in some dustups but try not to unless someone attacks me personally or starts name calling.Ive never posted anything I wouldnt say face to face to anyone.

I grew up the son of an Iowa cattle vet mostly cow/calf but some feedlot I dont know how anyone stays in the cattle business and my best friend has a huge feedlot.I probably would have spent my career there had it not been for the farm crisis/savings and load disaster in the 80s.

10-Jul-24
Al gore in the 90s said we will all die in 20 years if we don't act NOW... A.O.C. recently said we have 12 years... If you believe folks like that, u ain't right...lol

10-Jul-24
"Ricky- please tell me what statements I made were false and provide credible proof and not opinion."

try this one...

"Classic Ricky. A reply implying to make sure there are avenues to crawfish."

i implied nothing.

i simply posted a link to an article that explained where the 97% of scientist thing originated.

however...as long as youre going to go down the "implying" road...lets try this one.

"Maybe you should actually read what you post before you link it."

as i said before...not only did i read every word of it...i didnt imply anything either way...period.

i sure appreciate the free rent...however the view from your head is rather miserable.

From: Shaft2Long
10-Jul-24
They need to talk about climate change to keep the government funding coming for the grants to do the research.

At some point they’ll need to start talking about all the queer and Trans monkeys and lions to keep the cash flow going.

From: Beendare
10-Jul-24
Listen to the Science.

Sure...but I'm not going to listen to the KSFlat partisan political science;

Like the scientists that install climate sensors in a parking lot Like hypocrite John Kerry science who flys around in his plane with one trip spewing more Carbon than I use in my entire lifetime Like the scientists that rarely address Massive forest fires...or the current Mt Etna eruption. Like the scientists beholden to the government for grants- tell the truth and your funding gets cut off...or even worse like the NIH Grants- Threaten to blow the whistle on Fauchi then suddenly get a $6m grant while dropping the whistleblower complaint.

The partisan politics and corruption in the Climate science is pretty disgusting...so many hacks make a living by producing the EIR's- $$$ in their pocket....yep, the sky is falling- show me the money. I wouldn't be surprised if KS Flat makes a living from this.

From: HDE
10-Jul-24

HDE's embedded Photo
HDE's embedded Photo
"In June 1933, it hit 95° in every U.S. state and it topped 100° at least once in 44 states and 105° in 35 states. So far this month, it has reached 100° in 35 states and 105° in only 14 (data in the maps are from NOAA. https://xmacis.rcc-acis.org/).

Oh, but what about “averages”? Well, I’m glad you asked. By the measured GHCNd station data, June 1933 was the hottest on record in the U.S. Of the top 10, eight occurred before 1955, and only two have been in the last 70-years:

Top 10 hottest Junes on record in the U.S. by measured GHCNd station data:

1) 1933 2) 1934 3) 1911 4) 2021 5) 1951 6) 1921 7) 1931 8) 2016 9) 1918 10) 1936"

10-Jul-24

Mike Ukrainetz's embedded Photo
See, dissent isn’t allowed. It’s 100% consensus on mainstream media. Not sure why they say it’s 90-97% consensus…
Mike Ukrainetz's embedded Photo
See, dissent isn’t allowed. It’s 100% consensus on mainstream media. Not sure why they say it’s 90-97% consensus…
But HDE those are just numbers that say things. I can show numbers like that from actual weather stations in Edmonton, Alberta that show it has been colder on average the last 10 years! That is all meaningless, same as pictures of beach front property with the same shoreline from 100 years ago.

You have to show a mainstream link to a scientific news article that doesn’t agree with the climate alarmism or ole flatty won’t listen!

I’m not even sure why the scientists and flatlander say there is 90-97% consensus? Their is 100% consensus on man made climate change, their is zero dissent, dissent isn’t allowed. Try a google search on it.

From: Live2Hunt
10-Jul-24
So, where I am sitting right now was once a glacier. Before that, tropical. Did man bring about the changes that changed from a tropical forest to a glacier to where we are at now? Didn't global warming start when the glaciers started melting? Hasn't there been climate change since the beginning of this planet?

10-Jul-24
Just imagine these idiots a few thousand years ago all worked up about the mile thick ice Sheet melting off of the Midwest. What caused that by the way?

From: KSflatlander
10-Jul-24
June lol...you're as bad as the alarmists that point to one hurricane or one hot day and say it's proof of climate change.

Thank goodness most of your BELIEFS matter not to science.

Ricky- did I say 97%? And I posted the Forbes article before you did. LMAO.

From: 4nolz@work
10-Jul-24
Well either way the climate change people have convinced anyone under 30 that's it's an existential threat.

From: Zbone
10-Jul-24
If we're gonna die because of climate change it's gonna be because of nuclear winter of WWWIII...

From: jons
10-Jul-24
KS, March 31,2020 on ZeroHedge.com there was article of an India viro. Dr/Scientist that had evidence along with an electron microscope of the Covid virus that it was lab made by showing the splice that was made into it. There were two other scientist, one from England and one from France (Noble Winners in Science) that included the same evidence. The articles were taken down several days latter which I presumed it was political.

There was another article I read yesterday In Zerohedge that the cost of Covid was around $18 Trillion that cost. China knew what was happening and they intentionally released it upon the rest of the world that would cause an economic collapse and be a main factor to take Trump out of his next term.

If Trump regains the POTUS office I believe he will bring retribution against China's actions, which I fully should have been done earlier.

From: 4nolz@work
10-Jul-24
"they" have succeeding in making anyone who believes it was from a Chinese Lab a wacko conspiracy theorist.

From: KsRancher
10-Jul-24
Curious what Mike in CT thoughts are now compared to 4yrs ago

From: CaptMike
10-Jul-24
Global warming. Just a turd, swallowed up by the foolish believers.

From: spike78
10-Jul-24
Yup worried about climate change but not a peep about WW3 lol this world is twisted.

From: KSflatlander
10-Jul-24

KSflatlander's Link
Jons- maybe you should check your sources. Zerohedge is crackpot pseudoscience full of disinformation. See link.

"Overall, we rate ZeroHedge an extreme right-biased conspiracy website based on the promotion of false/misleading/debunked information that routinely denigrates the left."

"On 02/15/2022, U.S. intelligence officials accused Zero Hedge of amplifying Kremlin propaganda targeting Ukrainians and taking direction from Russian spies. Zero Hedge denies the claim."

"ZeroHedge’s content has been classified as “alt-right” and has been criticized for presenting conspiracy theories."

But something tells me you don't really care about the source of information you consume.

Ok I'm out on this conspiracy theory mush brain stuff. Enjoy brothers.

From: olddogrib
10-Jul-24
KS, "But something tells me you don't really care about the source of information you consume." That's a bit disingenuous, don't you think. We're all here glued to the Bowsite and only information sources here that are beyond reproach would be used as references, lol!

The only thing "proven" here is that everybody has way too much time on their hands and wastes it in front of a screen. The deer opener can't get here quick enough!

From: bigeasygator
10-Jul-24
“Curious what Mike in CT thoughts are now compared to 4yrs ago”

Same, KS. If I recall, Mike felt strongly the virus wasn’t engineered. That said, even if the virus wasn’t engineered, the pandemic still could have been the result of a lab leak. Curious Mike’s take on both those topics.

10-Jul-24
"Ricky- did I say 97%? And I posted the Forbes article before you did. LMAO."

typical ksflatlander narcissism.

contrary to what you might think...not every post here is about you...in response to you...or having anything to do with you. i never looked at your link...simply because it was specifically directed to another poster.

believe it or not...other people know how to use google also.

again...thanks for the free rent. lol

From: Glunt@work
10-Jul-24
If we decide to go after those responsible for Covid issues at the lab, we might find it was us more than China. The money trail appears to eventually lead back that box on our pay stub labeled "Federal withholding"

From: HDE
10-Jul-24
Mike - the point was that the climate is more stable than the 90% of alarmists will have you think...

From: Candor
10-Jul-24
KSFlat- did you listen to the podcast I linked above? I would suspect the gentleman being interviewed is more qualified to discuss both climate change and suppression of scientific articles than anyone on this thread.

Flat earth was a scientific consensus. Earth being at the center of the universe was a scientific consensus. Even Galileo changed his theory on the sun being the center to avoid persecution by the Catholic church. I can go on for a long time on the error of scientific consensus.

From: Mike in CT
10-Jul-24
Rusty,

My position is exactly the same as it was 4 years ago on all Covid-related issues/topics. This is based on the evidence which I spent a helluva lot of time poring over as well as firsthand, real-world experiences.

The biggest factor in pointing to a naturally evolved virus is the behavior of SARS-CoV-2 since the onset of the pandemic; it has behaved exactly in the manner expected of RNA respiratory viruses; the trajectory has been a steady progression towards highly transmissible, less pathogenic strains.

Regarding the vaccines, some during this pandemic seemed to forget some of the basics of vaccination; there is no such thing as a zero side-effects vaccine and this includes some of the most commonly used vaccines such as those required in childhood.

The "vaccine phobia" is hardly a new phenomenon but it is a dangerous one; witness the increases in outbreaks of measles in the US for example.

In all my years in the field I've never seen anything remotely close to the rampant garbage peddled during this pandemic. Of course, none of the major peddlers walked the halls of NYC hospitals like Elmhurst when body bags were literally piled to the ceiling in the halls outside the morgue because there was no room for them there.

From: Tjm1534
10-Jul-24
Al Gore is the biggest hypocrite and liar on earth but has schemed a fortune for himself.Jet,mansion,limousines the whole nine yards but his lying ass is worried about earth.

From: TENPOINT
13-Jul-24
Same with John Kari jet setting all over the world in his private jet spreading the word as well as all emissions expelled from his Jet !

13-Jul-24
But, but, the climate alarmists peddle our destruction in less than 6 years unless we get a lot of $ to fix the climate. Just another way to say "shut up, give me your $ and if you don't your a racist and hate the earth". Fear mongering at its finest.

From: bigeasygator
13-Jul-24
Thanks, Mike. Couldn’t agree more with your post. Having many friends and family, I don’t ever recall them describing a cold and flu season that filled ICUs and morgues. And regarding the vaccine, to me it was one of the all time scientific achievements. I don’t put it far behind the splitting of the atom or putting people on the moon. The pace at which it was developed and the undeniable efficacy is truly a modern marvel.

From: Bob Rowlands
13-Jul-24
"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding it's way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

Isaac Asimov

From: bigeasygator
13-Jul-24
Thanks, Mike. Couldn’t agree more with your post. Having many friends and family, I don’t ever recall them describing a cold and flu season that filled ICUs and morgues. And regarding the vaccine, to me it was one of the all time scientific achievements. I don’t put it far behind the splitting of the atom or putting people on the moon. The pace at which it was developed and the undeniable efficacy is truly a modern marvel.

From: Jimmyjumpup
14-Jul-24
I don’t care how hot it gets. I’ll turn the AC down.

From: DL
14-Jul-24
News and scientist say it is the warmest day , week or month in an area since 1877. Oh so it has been this warm before. It’s about money and control. Enough electricity can be produced to power EV an tucks. There isn’t enough windmills and solar panels without power plants and hydro electric plants which people want them all taken down. Did anyone ever sit down to calculate the death toll of birds by windmills? Resin that’s used to make blades comes from petroleum. If it is ten made from glass wood or metal it’s made from petroleum products. The science community cried that we were destroying forests just make paper bags(lie) so we got plastic in the oceans like soup from Asia. So let’s ban straws here in the us while rivers in Asia India and Africa area bank to back plastic trash that goes into our oceans.

14-Jul-24
Climate alarmists, funny they are. What do you think they base it off of? 140 years of record keeping? Which is not a big sample for millions of years this rock has been spinning.

From: bigeasygator
14-Jul-24
“What do you think they base it off of?”

Beyond direct temperature measurements, they’ve got plenty of proxy measurements to fairly accurately predict and corroborate temperatures and climate well before they were recorded. Spending five minutes to actually understand the science would have told you that. Things like the chemical and structural composition of rocks, fossils, ocean sediments, tree rings, and ice cores.

From: KSflatlander
14-Jul-24

KSflatlander's Link
"Did anyone ever sit down to calculate the death toll of birds by windmills?"

Yes (see link), there is data out there showing the major causes of mortality of birds and turbines are less than power lines, cars, mirrored glass, and house cats (#1 cause). I've personally collected bird mortality bird data at wind farms and the rate is typically 1-2 birds/MW/year. Not that high comparatively.

As BEG said, just five minutes...

From: DL
15-Jul-24

April 7 (Reuters) - An American wind energy company that pleaded guilty to federal criminal charges after at least 150 eagles were killed, most hacked by turbine blades, has agreed to spend as much as $27 million on efforts to prevent more deaths. ESI Energy Inc., a subsidiary of NextEra Energy Inc. (NEE.N), opens new tab, one of the largest U.S. providers of renewable energy, entered a plea agreement for violations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), the U.S. Justice Department said.

From: shade mt
15-Jul-24
It's pretty obvious that the masses are not always right. I mean a billion people could be led in the wrong direction and just because of the sheer number of followers does it suddenly become the right direction?...don't think so.

How many times have we seen science change their minds?.... granted Not all science is wrong.

But sometimes it's best to just sit back and watch, rather than join the circus.

From: olddogrib
15-Jul-24
Observe the last 4 years...I rest my case!

From: KSflatlander
15-Jul-24
"How many times have we seen science change their minds?"

And will always change until universal absolute truths and that's a positive. It has got us to the depths of the ocean to the moon and beyond, it has more than double human life span, it brought understanding to subatomic particles and quantum physics, supercomputers and AI, and so on.

The Bible is "wrong" about the universe...does that mean the entire Bible is wrong?

From: Catscratch
15-Jul-24
I think most people trust science rather highly. Otherwise medicines, treatments, microwave ovens, facial and finger print phone access, preservatives in food, etc would all be horrifying.

What people don't trust are politicians and media. The moment a politician says the science need us to alter our lives, give up our money, loose convinces... then the science becomes suspect. It's been used as a prop way to many times by these people to blindly trust it/them anymore.

The frustration should not lay with the skeptical or disbelievers, but with the people who made them that way.

From: Jimmyjumpup
15-Jul-24
When the Good Lord says we are done we are done.

From: tobywon
15-Jul-24
Well said Catscratch!!

From: KSflatlander
15-Jul-24
"The frustration should not lay with the skeptical or disbelievers, but with the people who made them that way."

I agree mostly with your post Catscratch; however, don't get your science from any politician ever. There is personal responsibility IMO to check the science yourself and it's just as bad to push data you haven't fact check yourself IMO. Qualifying it with "I heard" doesn't absolve you from passing on misinformation (false witness). IMO the misinformation spread is not an insignificant threat to our sovereignty.

From: DL
15-Jul-24

DL's embedded Photo
DL's embedded Photo

From: DL
15-Jul-24

DL's embedded Photo
DL's embedded Photo
Defund grants regarding climate change and see how options go.

From: Catscratch
15-Jul-24
I agree KS, that's why I'm VERY selective about double checking the science from our politicians and the media. I've read your post several times and believe you agree with me completely (not mostly). Do you not feel frustration while being told something that is wrong? Or when you dig a little deeper and find out it's misleading? Or when the proposed solution will do nothing to fix the problem, or just shift it to another problem?

Bird and wind power generation was brought up earlier. While in college I spent time collecting dead birds from under guide wires supporting radio towers. There were a lot (mostly night migrants). So many in fact that scavengers had trails from their nightly checks. Oftentimes I'd only find a cluster feathers. Point being is that almost everything we humans do have an affect, not just the new things.

From: KSflatlander
15-Jul-24
We do post construction surveys on wind projects picking up dead birds and bats. It's about 1-2 birds/MW/year on a nationwide average. Turbines nowadays are 3-5 MWs. About 1500 birds per year for an average project. Bats are about 4 times that rate and statistical analysis says it's not random take. There's an attraction effect going on. And we don't have a good idea of the bat populations like we do birds. The toll on bats is much more concerning than birds considering reproductive rates and value to the ecosystem and agriculture pests.

Interestingly, about half the dead bats aren't hit by the blades. They get in the negative pressure vacuum behind the blades and the lungs implode.

From: Bentshaft
15-Jul-24
99.9 % of scientists agree with whoever funds them !

From: KSflatlander
16-Jul-24
DP

From: Bou'bound
16-Jul-24
this topic makes my blood boil. so much drivel.

From: Zbone
16-Jul-24
USA is only about 5% of the world's population yet greenies want us 100% green energy while China is building new coal fed power plants daily...

From: KSflatlander
16-Jul-24
We are only 5% of the worlds population but consume ~25% of the worlds energy. So much for American exceptionalism eh Zbone.

From: Zbone
16-Jul-24
Let's hear you stat on how much of the air pollution China creates?

16-Jul-24
Ksflat- why don’t you reduce your carbon footprint to 1/5 what it is now and live in the Stone Age. India and China will continue to escalate their carbon footprint while all these nuts want us to give up all luxuries and pay huge percentage’s of our wealth to attempt to reduce the global temperature.

From: Zbone
16-Jul-24
^^^^^

From: KSflatlander
16-Jul-24
10-4. We should follow China. Got it.

China is a major air polluter and we out perform them economically in many way and we have cleaner air.

That's the spirit fellas.

From: CaptMike
16-Jul-24
Follow China? No. Cripple ourselves so China can continue to advance themselves at our expense? No. I do not own any rose colored glasses but I do know that many here struggle enough economically that I do not support altering our lives in some attempt to fix a yet unproven issue.

16-Jul-24
Why don’t you and all the other climate nuts reduce your own carbon footprint first and show us how it’s done.

From: Beendare
16-Jul-24

Beendare's Link
Thoughtful analysis by Daniel Lacalle on his website regarding the inequity caused by the current [stupid] Climate Change policy. He points out the facts -at link; Dlacalle.com

snippets From the article;

If you read the latest OECD publication, “Employment Outlook 2024: The Net Zero Transition and the Labour Market,” you would imagine that the world has not gone through the largest monetary and fiscal stimulus in decades.

Net zero will make you poorer. Negative real wage growth is a consequence of Keynesian policies. The results are so poor, they are embarrassing. Furthermore, the report illustrates the impoverishment of citizens and subtly suggests that achieving the net zero goal will present an even greater challenge. Translation: You will be even poorer.

According to the OECD report, 20% of the global workforce is in jobs that will expand due to the net-zero transition. The report basically tells us that the remaining 80% will face significant challenges.

(he points out at length that the Biden Admins Employment numbers have been manipulated to make this policy appear better than it is, then)

If the unemployment rate has fallen but the average hours worked per worker are flat, the labour participation rate has slumped, and real wages have declined, then there is no real improvement in employment.

According to the OECD report, average hours worked per worker have declined in all countries except three of the entire OECD, and real wage growth is negative in the United States as well as many other economies.

Now remember that these dreadful statistics come after the largest so-called “stimulus package” in decades. The largest monetary experiment, combined with an unprecedented level of public debt increase, has left workers poorer. The worst is yet to come.

The OECD report warns that the net zero transition will increase inflation in essential goods and services as well as generate significant displacement of low-skilled labor. They even warn that low-skilled jobs in high-emission sectors pay better, and this will create challenges for citizens.

There is no way in which one can defend this social engineering. Keynesianism always leads to malinvestment, misallocation of capital, higher indebtedness, and worse outcomes for workers and the middle class for a very simple reason: governments do not have better or more information about the requirements of society, and they spend money that comes from somebody else.

Malinvestment does happen in an open economy. However, creative destruction takes care of it. Malinvestment when the government controls the economy is the norm. And instead of creative destruction, we get subsidized misallocation of capital.

From: KSflatlander
16-Jul-24
"Why don’t you and all the other climate nuts reduce your own carbon footprint first and show us how it’s done."

I have.

From: WhattheFOC
16-Jul-24
For those that don’t believe in global warming … the topic makes Boubound’s blood boil. What more proof do you need?

From: Candor
16-Jul-24
If you have ever been on a power trading floor you will see one of the major problems with wind turbines. They are often not steady state. So they are ramping power onto the grid up and down. So gas turbines have to adjust for those swings. Emissions from fuel combustion are scaled up during these transition periods. So wind turbines cause an increase in emissions from fuel burning sources. Further, wind turbines decrease the life of gas turbines and their associated steam generators because of this ramping.

No one likes to look at the whole picture when they have an agenda.

Further, a medium size generating station of 250 MW would kill ~375 birds if in a wind station. Why in the name of logic would you compare that to house cats. How is a house cat even relevant to this argument? Logic left the building on that one. So how many thousands of birds are wind turbines responsible for killing? Probably over 150 GW of wind turbines, maybe a lot more than that. That's a lot of dead birds.

16-Jul-24
Ksflat- you need to quit eating meat, drive only electric vehicles and charge them with wind of solar. No propane or natural gas for heat. Do that first then you can say that you have done something. Not using plastic straws isn’t enough

From: KSflatlander
16-Jul-24
He was concerned about all those turbines killing birds but electrical distribution and transmissions kill more but I don't see the concern for that and cats kill 100Xs more. If birds are your concern then you worried about the wrong issue.

As soon as you back up anything you said I'll respond. Otherwise it's just BS.

From: Zbone
17-Jul-24
Do you drive an electric vehicle Ksflat? I could see you being a vegetarian, but aside from plastic straws, lets hear how many of Iowa booner hunter's suggestions you can check the box to reduce your carbon footprint: "quit eating meat, drive only electric vehicles and charge them with wind of solar. No propane or natural gas for heat"

From: CaptMike
17-Jul-24
Zbone, you will never get an unemotional, rational response.

From: KSflatlander
17-Jul-24
Here you go:

1. I've permitted over 50 operating wind farms in the U.S. That alone will more than cover the entire carbon footprint of my entire family.

2. House is all electric and I buy electrons from the wind projects I permitted.

3. House has 2X6 walls, led lighting, extra efficient HVAC and appliances, tankless water heater.

4. Hybrid vehicle that gets +50mpg.

5. Recycling pick up

6. Work from home mostly or in the field so driving is limited.

So I've more than covered my carbon footprint and then some.

How about you all? CaptObvious? Zbone?

17-Jul-24
"We do post construction surveys on wind projects picking up dead birds and bats."

that statement suggests you make your living in the wind energy space. is that the case?

From: KSflatlander
17-Jul-24
No it doesn't...little following puppy.

17-Jul-24
"I've permitted over 50 operating wind farms in the U.S. "

this seems to suggest you do...

"No it doesn't...little following puppy."

so much for the "done with the name calling" thing. that didnt last long.

From: KSflatlander
17-Jul-24
Puppy is name calling? Then stop following me around like a little puppy. Pretty sensitive are we...

Your assumption is wrong.

From: Zbone
17-Jul-24
I recycle my cans, plastics, and glass bottles...8^)))

17-Jul-24
"Puppy is name calling? Then stop following me around like a little puppy. Pretty sensitive are we..."

not to the name calling...that says a lot more about you than me. as to your hypocrisy though...that can be spotted a mile away.

as to following you around...again...just more ksflatlander narcissism. bowsite is a pretty small community. theres a pretty good chance that a poster...especially one with views that are often in opposition to the majority...is going to get noticed and responded to. it really isnt about you "brother"...its about your opinions.

when discussing something like "climate change"...a persons motivations...especially financial... are always relevant. that might be directly (as in income)...or indirectly (as in political donations).

From: KSflatlander
17-Jul-24
I do not get paid by wind companies. I work in all types of energy sectors including fossil fuels. My job is to collect data, keep clients within the law, and be a mediator between companies and regulatory agencies. If you are searching for bias you are in the wrong hole. Data is data and I have no financial incentive to manipulate it. It would cost me my job if I did. I've been doing this job long before renewables were a thing.

It just seems to me you follow me around and incessantly post immediately after me. You can call it random but statistics would say otherwise. And stop with the projecting but feel free to tell yourself that if it makes you feel better.

17-Jul-24
there...that wasnt so hard was it? a simple answer to my question would have saved a lot of back and forth bs.

From: CaptMike
17-Jul-24
KS, i am not concerned with an unproven issue. But if it makes you happy, keep up with your emotional eccentricities and posts.

From: KSflatlander
17-Jul-24
Would it be easier for you not to make assumptions and just ask straight out

CaptMike- still no substance but your consistent so there is that

From: KSflatlander
17-Jul-24
I do not get paid by wind companies. I work in all types of energy sectors including fossil fuels. My job is to collect data, keep clients within the law, and be a mediator between companies and regulatory agencies. If you are searching for bias you are in the wrong hole. Data is data and I have no financial incentive to manipulate it. It would cost me my job if I did. I've been doing this job long before renewables were a thing.

It just seems to me you follow me around and incessantly post immediately after me. You can call it random but statistics would say otherwise. And stop with the projecting but feel free to tell yourself that if it makes you feel better.

17-Jul-24
"Would it be easier for you not to make assumptions and just ask straight out."

of course it would. thats why i did exactly that.

"that statement suggests you make your living in the wind energy space. is that the case?"

From: bigeasygator
17-Jul-24
“of course it would. thats why i did exactly that.”

I’m shocked that the Ricky the Verbal Ninja doesn’t acknowledge he asked a yes or no question!

From: Catscratch
17-Jul-24
KS, curious about wind farm regulations. What kind of parameters are required to be collected? You mention birds and bats, so ecological impacts are studied. I'm assuming wind currents and weather pattern changes might be on the list? What else does the regulatory agencies look at? What would keep a wind farm from being built, or what would get one shut down? As you said bats are of concern, at what point do they become "enough" of a concern?

From: Beendare
17-Jul-24
A KS Flat project?

Broken Vineyard Wind Turbine Scatters Debris Along Nantucket's South Shore; Wind Farm Operations Shut Down By Feds

That was the title of the Article in the Nantucket Current. That project is supplying Zero energy...and will require an expensive clean up BUT the good news is the climate weinies like KS Flat pushing these projects got their big paychecks...we as taxpayers get to pay for their mistakes.

From: Beendare
17-Jul-24
From the article;

Debris from a broken Vineyard Wind turbine blade washed up all over Nantucket's south shore Tuesday morning, prompting the offshore energy company to mount a cleanup effort and the federal government to shut down the wind farm "until further notice."

Residents began reporting pieces of green and white foam, along with larger pieces of what appears to fiberglass, along southern Nantucket beaches at daybreak, stretching from Madaket out to Nobadeer.

The federal Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement announced Tuesday afternoon that Vineyard Wind's "operations are shut down until further notice."

All south shore beaches were closed to swimming by the town just after 11 a.m. as a result of the debris. There is no estimate for when they will be reopened.

"The water is closed to swimming on all south shore beaches, due to large floating debris and sharp fiberglass shards," Nantucket Harbormaster Sheila Lucey said. "You can walk on the beaches, however we strongly recommend you wear footwear due to sharp, fiberglass shards and debris on the beaches."

From: bluedog
17-Jul-24
" climate weinies like KS Flat"

Doubt it matters to you at all Bruce.... you're crossing the line with me. I don't tolerate rude belligerent stuff like that in my private life. Not at all. You want to be an azzhole though.. go right ahead... I've mostly written you off lately

17-Jul-24
“I’m shocked that the Ricky the Verbal Ninja doesn’t acknowledge he asked a yes or no question.”

Of course I asked a yes or no question. That’s what I was accused of not doing. That was the whole point.

Please try to keep up.

From: KsRancher
17-Jul-24
One good thing that comes with the wind turbines is income for local landowners. And which most don't want to pay taxes on that money. So they go and spend it on equipment, fence etc. Which helps boost the local economy. So far that's the only upside I see to them. I don't consider them an eye sore. I drive by a few hundred a day and don't even notice them anymore. Hard for me to think that the money put into them wouldn't be better spent on natural gas, nuclear and coal fired electrical plants. But I don't know the numbers

From: TonyBear
17-Jul-24
The 97% figure is decades old, reported by people who were not even climate or weather specialists. Scientist term includes political scientist... just think about that.

From: Beendare
17-Jul-24
You libs sure can dish it out...but when someone comes right back at you- it's out of line.

I'm not the one bragging about making a paycheck from these Windmill projects- just stating the facts of them crashing and burning....and it's going to be an expensive clean up.

These projects didn't work on the Hawaiian islands- some of the windiest places on earth...now it's a rusting soon to be superfund site.

From: bluedog
17-Jul-24
You're the one calling another poster 7th grader names Bruce

From: KSflatlander
17-Jul-24
Catscratch- wind projects can be stopped mostly from non-participating landowners and t-line congestion. There are a lot of projects stopped due to bird and bat issues voluntarily as they don't want the delay in getting a ESA take permit. Some projects are ordered to curtail production due to endangered bat kills that violate permit requirements. Other stopped due to wetlands and cultural resource issues. Then you have visual impacts, shadow flicker, airports, military airspace, and even FCC problems with TV air frequencies.

Many bird and bats post-construction surveys are voluntary but we mostly do those associated with an endangered species take permit. A take permit is a permit to incidentally kill endangered species at a certain rate (insignificant kill rate) that doesn't cause a population decline..

"These projects didn't work on the Hawaiian islands- some of the windiest places on earth...now it's a rusting soon to be superfund site."

I know that issues with take of the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat was an issue.

From: Jimmyjumpup
18-Jul-24
Our climate is going to change tomorrow. Going to be cooler.

From: DanaC
19-Jul-24

DanaC's embedded Photo
DanaC's embedded Photo

From: SlipShot
19-Jul-24

SlipShot's Link
OMG I just heard that the world is slowing down because of climate change. Eyes rolling.

  • Sitka Gear