A cold winter is awaiting mobile networks and phones in Europe

BadThad

Posts: 1,223   +1,485
You asked for it...you got it! Freeze to death in the dark you environmentalist whack jobs.
You have access to a LOT of coal, oil & gas, but because you are woke and believe all of
this nonsense about man made global warming, now you are going to suffer.

Thanks, what I wanted to say but the crack-pot libs get quite old in their defense of the religion of "man made global warming". Amazing they don't see it's nothing more than an angle to get $$$. There's no abating it, the earth does what it does regardless of the presence of humans.
 

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 697   +574
You are wrong about those things, and you know it. I have told you many times, with proof, that you are masterfully cherry-picking and I'm not wasting my time now. So I will repeat myself with a copy\paste. Call this a rerun:

Everyone knows the mining has to stop. We also are aware of the phrase "Temporary bad for a permanent good".

"So why don't you led by example now. Toss your phones and laptops, TV's, cosmetics and fireworks. Be gone with your cordless tools. Wait. Cordless everything! PC peripherals, bluetooth....everything with a battery. Who owns a digital camera? Tablet PC? Are you a gamer? Best chuck the cordless controller. Throw away your smoke\gas detectors."

Next, once again:

And a fairly new one. I have only shown you this 3 or 4 times:

Last. Since we are such good forum buddies :D I hope you had a great vacation brother.
I'm not the one pushing for pseudo green energy while not having a problem with open pit mining.

btw from your link:

'Digging into the data a little more showed some variation on bird deaths depending upon the season. During spring and autumn, fewer bird deaths were recorded at the painted turbines. But in summer, bird deaths actually increased at the painted turbines, and the authors note that the small number of turbines in the study and its relatively short duration both merit longer-term replication studies, both at Smøla and elsewhere.'
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,837   +3,096
TechSpot Elite
I'm not the one pushing for pseudo green energy while not having a problem with open pit mining.
Good God, I can't believe you did it again!

In the post of mine that you quoted, I said:

Everyone knows the mining has to stop. We also are aware of the phrase "Temporary bad for a permanent good".

Damn man, what is wrong with you!?!?

Amazing they don't see it's nothing more than an angle to get $$$
You always have such a big mouth, but never prove yourself. So prove yourself now. I challenge you to even try. Scientific facts!

And by the way. It's the CONServative mind that is pseudo.
 

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 697   +574
Good God, I can't believe you did it again!

In the post of mine that you quoted, I said:

Everyone knows the mining has to stop. We also are aware of the phrase "Temporary bad for a permanent good".

Damn man, what is wrong with you!?!?


You always have such a big mouth, but never prove yourself. So prove yourself now. I challenge you to even try. Scientific facts!

And by the way. It's the CONServative mind that is pseudo.
If you stop mining cobalt then what happens with those EV's?
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,837   +3,096
TechSpot Elite
If you stop mining cobalt then what happens with those EV's?
We wont until we can.

But until then, the same thing that will happen to everything else with batteries containing lithium and cobalt.

No more EVs, phones and laptops or anything else with a rechargeable battery.
 

BadThad

Posts: 1,223   +1,485
'Digging into the data a little more showed some variation on bird deaths depending upon the season. During spring and autumn, fewer bird deaths were recorded at the painted turbines. But in summer, bird deaths actually increased at the painted turbines, and the authors note that the small number of turbines in the study and its relatively short duration both merit longer-term replication studies, both at Smøla and elsewhere.'

TYPICAL! It's in the fine print, just like the pseudo science behind the pointy heads crafting the "man made" theory. It's being done to scare populations into government conformance with their rule and for $$$$$$ and their ignorant leaders tell them it's true. Believe them, they are the scientists and government. All bow now!

Most of the lobby for "green power" are get-rich scientists that depend on it to live $$$ and governments for control and $$$. It's the biggest business on earth today - fear is good for business. The rest of the believers are non-scientific minions that follow because of all the mumbo-jumbo the scam scientists spit out.

I've been a scientist in industry for 35 years - I can easily convince the ignorant by using with jargon and topics for which they know nothing....their eyes glaze over, they trust me and believe me....even when I'm being facetious. Scientists can be very convincing but that doesn't mean they're right or telling you fact. They tell you exactly what they want you to know. That's how we survive. The shroud of science is a very effective cloaking device. If you're smart and use it wisely, it creates an insurmountable buffer against the ignorant regardless of their stature. How can you beat 'science'?

When you spend a enough time pouring through vast archives of data, you can find a lot of correlations, relationships, statistical anomalies, etc. and create various hypothesis'. Mankind has been doing it for centuries (spend some time reading old 1700-1800 science articles and books - today they make you LOL). Present day is no different with science. The climate guys make their living doing 'climate analyses', they will defend it vigorously and call you a 'science denier' if you don't agree and the minions follow in line....but the bottom line for all of it is $$$$$ and not fact. They're only telling you want they want to.
 
Last edited:

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,837   +3,096
TechSpot Elite
When you spend a enough time pouring through vast archives of data, you can find a lot of correlations, relationships, statistical anomalies, etc. and create various hypothesis'. Mankind has been doing it for centuries (spend some time reading old 1700-1800 science articles and books - today they make you LOL). Present day is no different with science. The climate guys make their living doing 'climate analyses', they will defend it vigorously and call you a 'science denier' if you don't agree and the minions follow in line....but the bottom line for all of it is $$$$$ and not fact. They're only telling you want they want to.
So prove yourself. It should be easy for you.
You are good at writing $$$$$. But nothing else?

Anyway to @BadThad @AlaskaGuy @passwordistaco

I get it. Say what you are told to say, and it's easy for you.
That is the most important thing, after all. Actually working to get answers is hard, and you can't have that.

So your easy, practiced answer is it's the Lee-Bruuls!
Beyond that, where do you think their info is wrong on climate issues?
Who is lying to them?

Is it NASA?

Is it NOAA?

Is it the mounds of studies for evidence?

Is it the EPA?

Maybe the AAS?

Or some of the best minds in the world.

Let me see that your evidence is as big as your mouths.
 
Last edited:

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 697   +574
So prove yourself. It should be easy for you.
You are good at writing $$$$$. But nothing else?

Anyway to @BadThad @AlaskaGuy @passwordistaco

I get it. Say what you are told to say, and it's easy for you.
That is the most important thing, after all. Actually working to get answers is hard, and you can't have that.

So your easy, practiced answer is it's the Lee-Bruuls!
Beyond that, where do you think their info is wrong on climate issues?
Who is lying to them?

Is it NASA?

Is it NOAA?

Is it the mounds of studies for evidence?

Is it the EPA?

Maybe the AAS?

Or some of the best minds in the world.

Let me see that your evidence is as big as your mouths.
OMG you actually posted a link to an overtly racist university. Shame on you!

 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,837   +3,096
TechSpot Elite
OMG you actually posted a link to an overtly racist university. Shame on you!

That must be it!!! All that climate proof leads to racism!!!
Though you claim racism because it is easy, you don't have to do any work.
The CONservative way.

But I'm not so sure, since it appears that everything was in favor of African Americans. Perhaps you just don't know the difference between racism and a general scandal. Unfair and sleazy though it is.

Yeah. I'm definitely going with that.
 

passwordistaco

Posts: 411   +948
So prove yourself. It should be easy for you.
You are good at writing $$$$$. But nothing else?

Anyway to @BadThad @AlaskaGuy @passwordistaco

I get it. Say what you are told to say, and it's easy for you.
That is the most important thing, after all. Actually working to get answers is hard, and you can't have that.

So your easy, practiced answer is it's the Lee-Bruuls!
Beyond that, where do you think their info is wrong on climate issues?
Who is lying to them?

Is it NASA?

Is it NOAA?

Is it the mounds of studies for evidence?

Is it the EPA?

Maybe the AAS?

Or some of the best minds in the world.

Let me see that your evidence is as big as your mouths.
Hey, I don't own any fossil fuel stocks - go ahead and quit using them. Nuclear power produces 0 carbon, but the same people telling us combustion is evil are shutting down reactors and keeping new ones from being built. Hydroelectric produces 0 carbon, but when was the last dam built in the West?

If the goal was really to meet the needs of the people, then new power plants would be exceeding the capacity of decommissioned fossil fuel and nuclear plants. The EU would be using historically friendly sources for imported energy. That's not happening.

If the goal was even to reduce carbon emissions, then there would be no free pass for "developing" nations that are the biggest polluters, like China and India. Cap and trade is a farce.

If things go as badly as predicted, this energy crisis will kill far more people than global cooling global warming "climate change" has.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,837   +3,096
TechSpot Elite
Nuclear power produces 0 carbon
I'm 100% in favor of nuclear power.
but the same people telling us combustion is evil are shutting down reactors and keeping new ones from being built
And I agree, they are also full of it in my opinion.
If the goal was really to meet the needs of the people, then new power plants would be exceeding the capacity of decommissioned fossil fuel and nuclear plants. The EU would be using historically friendly sources for imported energy. That's not happening.
That is something I don't know much about, so I will take you at your word.
But I do want to say that with the incredible heat California had this summer for the first time in years there was not one brown out, so maybe some are coming along, just not near enough.
If the goal was even to reduce carbon emissions, then there would be no free pass for "developing" nations that are the biggest polluters, like China and India. Cap and trade is a farce.
Again, I agree completely, but the world can't just step in and tell them not to use dirty fuel and not help them with an alternative.
If things go as badly as predicted, this energy crisis will kill far more people than climate change has.
I can't say I know what you mean by that. Do you mean because worldwide, some folk's won't be able to heat their homes because of the cost?
 

hwertz

Posts: 198   +115
Harsh man. Not to brag, but in US we give T-Mobile some crap for only having 30 minute backup on their sites; since Verizon Wireless' predecessor company Bell Atlantic Mobile started in hurricane-prone part of the country, they are paranoid about this kind of thing and have generator backups on almost every macro site with battery backups on the microcells.

Hopefully you have a mild winter, having power cuts in winter is a bummer!
 

passwordistaco

Posts: 411   +948
I can't say I know what you mean by that. Do you mean because worldwide, some folk's won't be able to heat their homes because of the cost?
Without natural gas from Russia (which Germany was hellbent on buying), people in some EU nations might not be able to hear their homes. Solar and wind aren't capable of meeting demand. Several years ago, a sitting US president warned of the dangers of reliance on Russian gas and offered to sell Europe, and was ridiculed. Instead of building the infrastructure to buy from the US, Germany made a deal with the devil.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,837   +3,096
TechSpot Elite
Without natural gas from Russia (which Germany was hellbent on buying), people in some EU nations might not be able to hear their homes. Solar and wind aren't capable of meeting demand. Several years ago, a sitting US president warned of the dangers of reliance on Russian gas and offered to sell Europe, and was ridiculed. Instead of building the infrastructure to buy from the US, Germany made a deal with the devil.
I wonder what they have in mind for the winter. They say they have enough reserves, but I can't see how they could have stored enough, especially if the winter is harsh. And we in the US can only do so much to help.

Anyway, I thought I might link what you mentioned about our President's warning years ago to the EU about reliance on Russian energy for those that want to read about it:



We can even go back 40+ years:

EDIT - I had to link a new source to Reagan's warning about Russian energy because the original link was to a pay site. Oops.
 
Last edited: