Quantcast
$30 barrel oil? - Page 48 - Beyond.ca - Car Forums
Page 48 of 53 FirstFirst ... 38 47 48 49 ... LastLast
Results 941 to 960 of 1056

Thread: $30 barrel oil?

  1. #941
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Silverado
    Posts
    2,379
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 01RedDX View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well aside from all the NG, Alberta could rival Brazil in ethanol production if it wanted to but I digress. I just mean accepting and learning from things we've known about for a long time but don't like to acknowledge.
    People who live near transport hubs - airports, train yards, ports, highways - have a much higher rate of cancer and other nasty diseases from NoX and carbon particulates. But instead we focus on "CO2 global heating and "saving the planet." What about saving people and society from the burden of disease? It's one good reason for doing something instead of waiting and I also believe this coming tech will scale very quickly once implemented, so time is not necessarily on our side.
    Doesn't mean the oil industry is going anywhere, but it will grow more efficient, which doesn't always increase the job rate, unfortunately. But then, Saudi Arabia got bombed.
    I wonder how much rainforest Brazil had to cut down to grow all the feedstock for that ethanol. Citing them as a bastion of environmentalism is hilariou
    Quote Originally Posted by Gestalt View Post
    Im the one with a learning disability....

  2. #942
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Silverado
    Posts
    2,379
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 01RedDX View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well obviously a country like China will have different reduction targets than Canada and will always do what's best for China. Which at the moment means investing more than anyone else in clean energy because they kinda have to.

    But I am not advocating forced government intervention in markets and public opinion (like this gov't is doing) and I am not really talking about climate change or global heating either. To me it's more about innovation, new technologies, increasing efficiency, improving public health. I think these things are good and just because we are in the early stages of it doesn't mean there's not obvious trend toward sustainability and efficiency. Waiting around seems like a good way to get left behind the innovation curve and waste/lose a lot of money on resisting change and we certainly should not wait until we absolutely have to do it, which is where China is at.


    We are certainly enabling them while ostensibly fighting "misinformation" funny isn't it?

    @killramos "crazy" is denying reality and repeating old mistakes. Crazy is how you guys come across to the rest of the world.
    Is this the same China that just got caught using banned CFCs and was creating detectable harm to the ozone layer?
    Quote Originally Posted by Gestalt View Post
    Im the one with a learning disability....

  3. #943
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    C
    Posts
    2,655
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by killramos View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    lol based on your past few posts it is pretty rich to claim to have an understanding of anything resembling reality.

    But that’s fine, enjoy being a sheep fed at the trough by special interests groups and the corrupt trying to desperately squeeze more control out of an ever more fearful populace. Today it’s CO2, last year it was the Russians, next year it will be eating meat.

    The idea that humanity has anything resembling control of the climate is the height of hubris. The level of arrogance we have reached is truly astounding.

    I can’t wait to see what a boondoggle your beloved solar farm will become, the law of unintended consequences is a bitch and it will probably be far worse for the environment than any of the CO2 it displaces. I’m just sad that these stupid pet projects all inevitably end up with taxpayers holding the bag and the “well intentioned” gone with the wind.

    LOL like the drivel coming from your sheltered narrow perception of reality and the endless droning from the safety of your beyond bubble day in, day out?
    Look, before you started gaslighting me, I was having a somewhat enjoyable debate with people who are capable of having a mature discussion without throwing out childish jibes, calling me names and being an edgelord. So given that, I'm afraid I have nothing further to discuss with you.




    Moving on, I am really just interested in the future of technological disruptions, especially as they pertain to how we produce and consume energy. I think the future is exciting and don't mean to come across as negative or disparaging of the oil industry but some people seem to take it very personally or turn it into a political discussion. Just to give you a small example, I work for an major oil co and we recently lost a back end app that runs some kind of data consolidation once a month, something that used to take a team of production accountants a month of work. I found the server, an ancient G5 DL380 that failed and chucked it out, within a couple of hours the app was moved to a VM and now there's one less server to take care of, meaning less need for people like me in the future. This is happening on a large scale on in all facets of the industry today, so I'm taking the idiom "learn to code" very seriously. Just a small example of how new tech is creating uncertainties and we should be able to have honest discussions without resorting to petulant tantrums.

  4. #944
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    2006 Nissan Titan
    Posts
    44
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 01RedDX View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well obviously a country like China will have different reduction targets than Canada and will always do what's best for China. Which at the moment means investing more than anyone else in clean energy because they kinda have to.

    But I am not advocating forced government intervention in markets and public opinion (like this gov't is doing) and I am not really talking about climate change or global heating either. To me it's more about innovation, new technologies, increasing efficiency, improving public health. I think these things are good and just because we are in the early stages of it doesn't mean there's not obvious trend toward sustainability and efficiency. Waiting around seems like a good way to get left behind the innovation curve and waste/lose a lot of money on resisting change and we certainly should not wait until we absolutely have to do it, which is where China is at.


    We are certainly enabling them while ostensibly fighting "misinformation" funny isn't it?

    @killramos "crazy" is denying reality and repeating old mistakes. Crazy is how you guys come across to the rest of the world.
    So should places like Canada help places like China when the goal is global reduction? At the end of the day, no one is saying a change in the energy we use is needed, but it's so mind boggling I want to cry that people are spouting off about the wold ending within a decade or 2 of we don't stop using fossil fuels. How much clean tech comes from the OG industry? How much money to help further a cleaner future comes from the current demand of OG? "The world needs more Canadian oil and gas" truer words have never been spoken.

    So by this logic, we have also been funding the activists against the Canadian OG sector up until a few months ago? That's a funny way to look at it, but I can see the correlation.

    Also, I'm no more involved in oil and gas than anyone has to be by living in Calgary. But it's clear as day to me how to view all the facts and make an educated decision. That's what I have done and will continue to do as new information/actual science comes out.
    Last edited by arcticcat522; 09-16-2019 at 09:33 PM.

  5. #945
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Technically the NE
    My Ride
    ‘Berta Special
    Posts
    4,189
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 01RedDX View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    LOL like the drivel coming from your sheltered narrow perception of reality and the endless droning from the safety of your beyond bubble day in, day out?
    Look, before you started gaslighting me, I was having a somewhat enjoyable debate with people who are capable of having a mature discussion without throwing out childish jibes, calling me names and being an edgelord. So given that, I'm afraid I have nothing further to discuss with you.
    You certainly enjoy your ivory tower of childish Naïveté, where everything new or different is better without any consideration of depth or consequence. Your shallow view of the world reflect your clear lack of understanding of reality, spend a bit less time in your own internet social echo chamber reading over and over again what you want to hear and with people who actually know what they are talking about and you might inject your mentality with a semblance of depth. But that’s fine be a contrarian for the sake of being contrary just don’t pretend it makes you smarter or more interesting for it, bit of a glass house to be running around calling people Edgelord
    Last edited by killramos; 09-16-2019 at 09:39 PM.
    Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

    If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
    Originally posted by Toma
    fact.

  6. #946
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    2006 Nissan Titan
    Posts
    44
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    QUOTE=01RedDX;4818179] Moving on, I am really just interested in the future of technological disruptions, especially as they pertain to how we produce and consume energy. I think the future is exciting and don't mean to come across as negative or disparaging of the oil industry but some people seem to take it very personally or turn it into a political discussion. Just to give you a small example, I work for an major oil co and we recently lost a back end app that runs some kind of data consolidation once a month, something that used to take a team of production accountants a month of work. I found the server, an ancient G5 DL380 that failed and chucked it out, within a couple of hours the app was moved to a VM and now there's one less server to take care of, meaning less need for people like me in the future. This is happening on a large scale on in all facets of the industry today, so I'm taking the idiom "learn to code" very seriously. Just a small example of how new tech is creating uncertainties and we should be able to have honest discussions without resorting to petulant tantrums.[/QUOTE]

    that we agree on. New tech is coming faster every day. Who knows what the future holds, but until the day is here, tested, verified, I'm not cutting off my nose to spite my face. We can move in tandem, design, build, testing new tech with advancing fossil fuel tech can't we? Why is it one or the other? That's the way the "green" " world ending in a decade if thing don't change" side is making it.
    Last edited by arcticcat522; 09-16-2019 at 09:44 PM.

  7. #947
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cowtown
    My Ride
    10' 4Runner SR5
    Posts
    5,985
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Regarding energy usage, renewables are expected to continue to accelerate (projected to 2050 anyways). However, that total usage from the total energy pie of the world still remains incredibly small -- less than 10%. What's quite disheartening to me is that coal usage doesn't change one bit. I can only assume it is because for developing nations it still remains to the cheapest means of energy.

    As for the whole climate change business, this forum is by and large 'woke, bro' about it, incredibly open-minded and also hold PhDs in multiple fields. Waste of everyone's time to bother "discussing" it further.

    Back to the topic at hand, Canada should be the shining star of the world for what up/downstream oil and gas should look like. But instead we're the laughing stock on the world stage. Hell even Norway is probably busting a gut of how dumb our government is.
    Follow me on Instagram and Facebook!

  8. #948
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    C
    Posts
    2,655
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dirtsniffer View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I wonder how much rainforest Brazil had to cut down to grow all the feedstock for that ethanol. Citing them as a bastion of environmentalism is hilariou
    Actually we were discussing biofuels but gasoline and NG and other hydrocarbons also make excellent feedstock for fuel cell power generation. It's just that ethanol is probably the best storage media for hydrogen. Already we can envision eliminating all that NOx and SO2 and all the lives that would save while stretching and conserving our non-renewable resources. It is a great thing but it will continue to (slowly) cut into oil demand.

    Quote Originally Posted by dirtsniffer View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Is this the same China that just got caught using banned CFCs and was creating detectable harm to the ozone layer?
    Like I said, China is scrambling to invest in clean energy now because they have to, because their people are dying of cancers and lung diseases brought on by their breakneck pace of industrialization and lack of regulations. But then why are companies like Daimler and Cummins already mass producing long distance etrucks and ebuses? Are they stupid, paranoid, are they "virtue signalling" or maybe they're smart enough to see where things are going?

    Quote Originally Posted by arcticcat522 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So should places like Canada help places like China when the goal is global reduction? At the end of the day, no one is saying a change in the energy we use is needed, but it's so mind boggling I want to cry that people are spouting off about the wold ending within a decade or 2 of we don't stop using fossil fuels. How much clean tech comes from the OG industry? How much money to help further a cleaner future comes from the current demand of OG? "The world needs more Canadian oil and gas" truer words have never been spoken.

    ...


    that we agree on. New tech is coming faster every day. Who knows what the future holds, but until the day is here, tested, verified, I'm not cutting off my nose to spite my face. We can move in tandem, design, build, testing new tech with advancing fossil fuel tech can't we? Why is it one or the other? That's the way the "green" " world ending in a decade if thing don't change" side is making it.
    Fair enough but notice I never once said it's "one way or the other" I am just talking about embracing innovation, the mere mention of which elicits such a visceral reaction in certain people that they immediately write you off as some unhinged environmentalist. As far as the world ending in a decade or two, I really don't know but don't buy into all the doomsday talk, as I see it as more of an imperative to spur innovation, making reasonable efforts, that's all. Calling for the complete and immediate abolition of the fossil fuel industry is obviously not reasonable or realistic, not now or even in the near future, which is why I never brought it up.

    Quote Originally Posted by msommers View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Regarding energy usage, renewables are expected to continue to accelerate (projected to 2050 anyways). However, that total usage from the total energy pie of the world still remains incredibly small -- less than 10%. What's quite disheartening to me is that coal usage doesn't change one bit. I can only assume it is because for developing nations it still remains to the cheapest means of energy.

    As for the whole climate change business, this forum is by and large 'woke, bro' about it, incredibly open-minded and also hold PhDs in multiple fields. Waste of everyone's time to bother "discussing" it further.

    Back to the topic at hand, Canada should be the shining star of the world for what up/downstream oil and gas should look like. But instead we're the laughing stock on the world stage. Hell even Norway is probably busting a gut of how dumb our government is.
    Yes!

  9. #949
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Vancouver/Calgary
    My Ride
    '13 GT1R
    Posts
    40
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I love technology and cool stuff. We've hit a wall with the old stuff. It's dirty, and we can't seem to improve much. The new stuff is advancing by leaps and bounds. That's exciting to me. I was reading about the newest generation of wind turbines on my Seattle flight and the progress from just years ago is staggering. They are now building turbines that can run at a 65% capacity factor. And they are already designing the next gen turbines that will dwarf the 850 foot mega turbines being built today Imagine a single turbine powering 30,000 homes. Now that's something.

    As for pollutions and particulates. We are already seeing tremendous cost increases to Canada's health care as a result. Who is subsidizing that?
    GT1R. [email protected]
    Mission

  10. #950
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    S.E. (not the drrty south)
    My Ride
    Blandness
    Posts
    7,044
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by killramos View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The idea that humanity has anything resembling control of the climate is the height of hubris. The level of arrogance we have reached is truly astounding.
    Jesus dude, are you seriously a climate change denier? Were you not around when humans ripped mother nature a new asshole in the ozone layer with 30 years of CFC use? Or how about all that lead we used to burn in ICE engines? Yeah, we kind of have an affect on the planet's ecosystem.

  11. #951
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Technically the NE
    My Ride
    ‘Berta Special
    Posts
    4,189
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tik-Tok View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Jesus dude, are you seriously a climate change denier? Were you not around when humans ripped mother nature a new asshole in the ozone layer with 30 years of CFC use? Or how about all that lead we used to burn in ICE engines? Yeah, we kind of have an affect on the planet's ecosystem.
    What because I don’t believe the hysteria around the impending climate apocalypse if we don’t stop emitting CO2 by next week? Because I don’t believe the climate models that have never been correct? Because I am not so myopic as to realize that we have been coming out of an ice age for the entirety of humanities written history? Because a single geophysical event has a greater emissions and climate impact than our entire society? Because documented evidence of our planets history demonstrates that we have been at far higher, and far lower temperatures as well as far higher and far lower levels of atmospheric CO2? Or that the same records confirm that solar activity is the direct cause of such swings in temperature and CO2?

    Anthropromorphic climate change IS hubris. I don’t believe in bankrupting our society over virtue signalling parlour tricks when no real economically viable alternatives exist.

    As for your examples, last time I checked lead was in gas was mostly killing ourselves not the planet. The hole in the ozone is a great example of hysteria and horror stories, I remember when it was permanent and was going to kill us all within a decade or 2, turns out it was far more resilient and regenerative than any of the experts thought and is essentially a non issue. Claimed global warming via CO2 isn’t even a similar or comparable mechanism.

    I’ll leave it with a wonderful quote on the situation you are so eager to get behind from our dear environment minister:
    But you know, I actually gave them some real advice. I said that if you actually say it louder, we’ve learned in the House of Commons, if you repeat it, if you say it louder, if that is your talking point, people will totally believe it.
    Last edited by killramos; 09-17-2019 at 07:29 AM.
    Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

    If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
    Originally posted by Toma
    fact.

  12. #952
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    2006 Nissan Titan
    Posts
    44
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    What Kill is saying isn't wrong....the climate is changing, but what effect mankind has is debatable.

  13. #953
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Technically the NE
    My Ride
    ‘Berta Special
    Posts
    4,189
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arcticcat522 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    What Kill is saying isn't wrong....the climate is changing, but what effect mankind has is debatable.
    I’m just more sick of all the bullshit than most.
    Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

    If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
    Originally posted by Toma
    fact.

  14. #954
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pallet Town
    Posts
    485
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Actually, Lithium is significantly better than carbon in one gigantic way.

    You don't burn lithium, it does not oxidize and go up into the upper atmosphere. When the battery loses capacity in about 5 years or so, you simply melt it back down, rearrange the molecules back to a "non-dendrite" formation and you can use it again just like a fresh battery. Arguably, once you have about maybe 5,000 "18650" battery cells per person - that will be enough lithium to last them a lifetime. Lithium low melting point basically makes it nearly free to recycle (unlike silicon needed for solar panels)

    Carbon on the other hand is a constantly losing race, where combusted materials and resources are literally burning money, if oil is money. This is also what has historically made Alberta rich, the USA burning money.

    The whole idea of carbon emissions destroying the planet does actually have an endpoint according to some. By the time we have burned another 100+ years of carbons - we should be at 0.08% carbon in the atmosphere, its actually quite difficult to achieve anything higher than that just due to the limitation of available oil on earth.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth

    Jeebus birth (0 AD) had a 0.025% carbon and it took 2,000 years to get to 0.04%. We will literally run out of "realistically pumpable oil" before it can hit 0.08%. To say humanity has enjoyed burning carbon to improve their life really only "greatly" benefitted ONE generation - the generation born in 1960's, where its ok to spend hundreds of millions of kilograms of combustible material for one man to play one round of golf on the moon. Lets not forget that if Robert Falcon Scott actually had a vehicle and a few tanks of gasoline back in 1912, the trip to the South Pole would have been trivial. And don't say the industrial revolution, because you could have generated heat to make steam in a number of different ways.

    Did they corner the future generations to electric scooters that burn the equivalent of 1/10th a litre of gas? Sure seems like it to me. Damn selfish boomers, damn you NASA, lol.

    Psssh, PHD. Scientists nowadays are worse that the NASA scamsters of the previous generation.
    Last edited by ZenOps; 09-17-2019 at 08:58 AM.
    Greta Super Saiyan.

  15. #955
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    My Ride
    2016 MB C450
    Posts
    8,128
    Rep Power
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsu3000gt View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah I am surprised it didn't have airport-grade anti drone stuff. For that kind of facility and operation, it wouldn't have even been a noticeable cost and would pale in comparison to the cost of their existing AA systems for full size aircraft. I suspect it's on their shopping list now and someone is out of a job haha.
    https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...fired-by-whom/

    The propeller-driven UAVs use a Chinese-built two-cylinder gasoline engine, and they have a one-way range of up to 250 kilometers (155 miles). The Qaseth-1 can carry a payload of roughly 30 kilograms (66 pounds)—equivalent to a small-diameter bomb or small air-to-ground missile, which is effective mostly against smaller targets.

  16. #956
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    A slow bike & an even slower car.
    Posts
    6,240
    Rep Power
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by killramos View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I’m just more sick of all the bullshit than most.
    The effect mankind is quantifiable and far from debatable. Only dumbass North Americans seem to think otherwise.

    FFS, the Pentagon is making plans due to climate change.

    But yea: human effect on our environment is minimal and also debatable.

    Aside from nuclear disasters.

    Also massive environmental change.

    Also pollution.

    Also ozone layer.

    Also fucked up waterways, soil, etc.

    Also climate change, which is a thing that is broadly accepted by the global scientific community.

    But yea, fuck all that: human impact on the environment is debatable. The ignorance of some people is so fucking astounding that it's almost hilarious. But then they stand there defiantly as if they have a valid point or even a scientific leg to stand on. Mind boggling.

  17. #957
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Flying the friendly skies
    My Ride
    100% SAVAGE
    Posts
    6,201
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xtrema View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah, even small explosive warheads will do sufficient damage to industrial facilities. It doesn't take a big hole to render a pressurized vessel useless and incredibly difficult to repair.
    The pics show that the hits were very well targeted too. High precision, small but effective damage.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-49718975
    Double-meat sub dreams.
    Public Mobile referral code: 88M4Y9
    Smiles for free: https://forums.beyond.ca/threads/411...something-nice

  18. #958
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    S.E. (not the drrty south)
    My Ride
    Blandness
    Posts
    7,044
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by killramos View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    As for your examples, last time I checked lead was in gas was mostly killing ourselves not the planet. The hole in the ozone is a great example of hysteria and horror stories, I remember when it was permanent and was going to kill us all within a decade or 2, turns out it was far more resilient and regenerative than any of the experts thought and is essentially a non issue.
    It became a non-issue because we severely curbed it's usage to the point of banning it, giving the ozone time to regenerate. But I mean hey, I guess if you're wrong, you won't care because you'll be dead like 99% of the planet. Then the environment can start to regenerate itself.

  19. #959
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    A slow bike & an even slower car.
    Posts
    6,240
    Rep Power
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tik-Tok View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It became a non-issue because we severely curbed it's usage to the point of banning it, giving the ozone time to regenerate. But I mean hey, I guess if you're wrong, you won't care because you'll be dead like 99% of the planet. Then the environment can start to regenerate itself.
    "Remember that problem that was globally recognized and actioned to fix? Well its not a problem anymore, therefore climate change isn't real."

    Can't argue with stupid, mate.

  20. #960
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Technically the NE
    My Ride
    ‘Berta Special
    Posts
    4,189
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Lol people were making hysterical claims about the ozone long after the CFCs were banned, people said it was going to kill us all well into the late 90’s. And people ate it up just the you morons are with the current climate hysteria, everyone is afraid of the invisible boogeyman they don’t understand. Turns out that problem was nowhere near as drastic or permanent than all the experts predicted either.

    It’s funny, I find most people who have the most passionate positions on this have absolutely no background in such or any real knowledge (myself included).

    However, my opinion stands from that I have seen more than enough bullshit on the topic and plenty of healthy contrary points to many of the “100% definitive” claims to be healthily skeptical of the politically motivated crap that seems to be so easily accepted as fact by the uncritical sheep of the world who are only interested in hearing what they want. Seriously, the level of certainty that is Carved in stone in your guys heads is astounding.

    But that’s fine if you want to run around being a mouthpiece for the morally corrupt IPCC. No way we hit any of their targets anyways and 20 years down the road big shocker the world will not end as the biased “climate scientists” around the world are claiming.

    Worlds going to get warmer, nothing we can do will change that. We would be far better off investing money in dealing with that problem ( hint energy infrastructure ) than the childish gambit of trying to stop the sun from setting. Because we are no more capable of preventing the planet from warming than we are stopping the earth from turning.

    But yea. Stupid is as stupid does.
    Last edited by killramos; 09-17-2019 at 11:45 AM.
    Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

    If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
    Originally posted by Toma
    fact.

Page 48 of 53 FirstFirst ... 38 47 48 49 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 1.8B barrel oil found in Afghanistan

    By Xtrema in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 9
    Latest Threads: 08-17-2010, 09:13 AM
  2. Why we have $150/barrel of oil...

    By Xtrema in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 1
    Latest Threads: 06-20-2008, 03:29 AM
  3. Is $200/barrel oil around the corner?

    By trev0006 in forum Cars, Bikes, Machines
    Replies: 2
    Latest Threads: 03-12-2008, 04:23 PM
  4. Brazil announces new 5-8billion barrel light oil find...

    By Toma in forum Real Estate / Finance
    Replies: 24
    Latest Threads: 11-10-2007, 09:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •