Pictures: Look What a Few Punishing Minutes of Baseball-Sized Hail Did to Massive Nebraska Solar Farm

Hedges said:

Jones, of course.

A modern car driving to LA emits less pollution than a 60's car sitting parked at the curb.

Click to expand...

Perhaps I should have said "Which emits less CO2"

Hedges said:

Majority determines what is truth?

No new (and correct) idea could ever be allowed.

Click to expand...

I don't think its that simple..

First, isn't that mostly what we have now?

But the preliminary idea that came to mind was more of determining what is false, or determination of what was done for ill intent.

I'm probably not qualified to consider such things on that level, but what I do know is that we have a problem and we need to find a solution that doesn't violate everyone's rights.

I'm kind of leaning towards removal of the simultaneous easy access to anonymity and wide audience.

I'm just spit balling here..

Danke said:

Thomas Paine was able to stay anonymous for the first three months after Common Sense was published, a 47-page pamphlet written by Thomas Paine in 1775–1776 advocating independence from Great Britain to people in the Thirteen Colonies.


You cannot read many biographies of men who engaged the American separation from Britain, declaration of an independent nation, and shaping and winning ratification of the Constitution without encountering—repeatedly—references to pamphlets. The pamphleteer’s goal was to write eloquent, fiery prose on controversial ideas that would “go viral,” reprinted without end by people who today might share blog—to spread views they endorsed. This new and potent dissemination of ideas outside “official channels” became so threatening that governments kept banning pamphleteering.

The Federalist Papers is a collection of 85 articles and essays under the collective pseudonym "Publius" to promote the ratification of the Constitution of the United States.

Click to expand...

I wonder how much effort that required.. Couldn't have been easy to create and spread those pamphlets back then..

MurphyGuy said:

Perhaps I should have said "Which emits less CO2"

Click to expand...

You didn't.
You said, "Pollution".

Remember the bad old days before smog check, before fuel injection and catalytic converters?
You could cut the air with a knife. That's pollution. It causes illness and death.
The stuff that promotes plant growth and agriculture is not; it should be called "fertilizer".
Call it "greenhouse gas", if you must. But spare your country's agriculture and economy.

A number of words, with accepted meanings well known for centuries, have recently been co-opted.
(Often to replace common words, simply because those are already understood.)

MurphyGuy said:

I don't think its that simple..

First, isn't that mostly what we have now?

But the preliminary idea that came to mind was more of determining what is false, or determination of what was done for ill intent.

Click to expand...

Sure, make an attempt at determination. Publish your results, data, all discussion.

But silencing voices is another matter. e.g. when Fauci wanted to take control of the narrative on where Covid came from. Knowing that he authorized funding of research some would consider illegal. Here are those definitions, again. According to Fauci, according to experts, what they had funded was not "gain of function", therefore not illegal. I think he defined as "gain of function" taking a virus already able to infect human lungs and increasing its effectiveness. But, if the virus was unable to infect human lungs, and the breeding or gene editing gave it an entirely new function (infecting human lungs), that isn't "gain of function." Did I get his position (when testifying under oath before congress) correctly?

So the government made a concerted effort to silence people who promoted the lab leak theory. By paying private companies to exercise their editorial discretion on behalf the the government (which is bound by the first amendment)?

MurphyGuy said:

I'm kind of leaning towards removal of the simultaneous easy access to anonymity and wide audience.

Click to expand...

That is certainly worth considering.
But we need a way for people to expose criminal activity (e.g. US spying on its citizens in violation of its laws) without putting the leaker at risk.
Same goes for reporting on gangs smaller than the US government.

MurphyGuy said:

I'm just spit balling here..

Click to expand...

Ditto.

Hedges said:

Sure, make an attempt at determination. Publish your results, data, all discussion.

But silencing voices is another matter. e.g. when Fauci wanted to take control of the narrative on where Covid came from. Knowing that he authorized funding of research some would consider illegal. Here are those definitions, again. According to Fauci, according to experts, what they had funded was not "gain of function", therefore not illegal. I think he defined as "gain of function" taking a virus already able to infect human lungs and increasing its effectiveness. But, if the virus was unable to infect human lungs, and the breeding or gene editing gave it an entirely new function (infecting human lungs), that isn't "gain of function." Did I get his position (when testifying under oath before congress) correctly?

So the government made a concerted effort to silence people who promoted the lab leak theory. By paying private companies to exercise their editorial discretion on behalf the the government (which is bound by the first amendment)?



That is certainly worth considering.
But we need a way for people to expose criminal activity (e.g. US spying on its citizens in violation of its laws) without putting the leaker at risk.
Same goes for reporting on gangs smaller than the US government.



Ditto.

Click to expand...

Just remember Murphy means everyone else not himself when wanting ppl doxxed and limited. Typical. He has stated uses a VPN and tries to hide online as much as possible. So….. you need consider the source For some of his statements. Murphy is a sorry sneaky being.

Hedges said:

Sure, make an attempt at determination. Publish your results, data, all discussion.

But silencing voices is another matter. e.g. when Fauci wanted to take control of the narrative on where Covid came from. Knowing that he authorized funding of research some would consider illegal. Here are those definitions, again. According to Fauci, according to experts, what they had funded was not "gain of function", therefore not illegal. I think he defined as "gain of function" taking a virus already able to infect human lungs and increasing its effectiveness. But, if the virus was unable to infect human lungs, and the breeding or gene editing gave it an entirely new function (infecting human lungs), that isn't "gain of function." Did I get his position (when testifying under oath before congress) correctly?

Click to expand...

I am not one to advocate for quelling free speech, even such speech I find grossly offensive.

But I am one that advocates for responsibility and accountability. The combination of easy anonymous access to a wide audience is a breeding ground for those with less than honorable intentions and it removes any requirement for either responsibility or being accountable. That seems like a big problem to me.

Fauci had a wide audience, but zero anonymity.

On Facebook, it was found that something like 90% of the anti-vaccine postings came from just a small handful of accounts.. Like less than a dozen or something. That's not free speech, that's a misinformation campaign by what was probably a single individual.

I am also not a supporter of a nanny state where government is responsible for our safety. If an adult is too stupid or ignorant to make responsible choices, then let Darwinism rule. However, with some misinformation, those concerns extend to children, and I'm sure you can see where this is going.

Hedges said:

So the government made a concerted effort to silence people who promoted the lab leak theory. By paying private companies to exercise their editorial discretion on behalf the the government (which is bound by the first amendment)?

Click to expand...

That's a tricky one.. Paying private companies to exercise their editorial powers is not the same as creating a law or "abridging" free speech, and therefor not a violation of the 1st amendment under law.
That said, I would agree that it results in government "sneaking one over the line", and I think SCOTUS did the right thing by squashing such practices. In fact, I agree with the SCOTUS decision so much so that whoever authorized any such payments from the tax payer coffers, should be forced to reimburse the tax payers from their own funds. Another example of why qualified immunity is a bad idea.

Hedges said:

That is certainly worth considering.
But we need a way for people to expose criminal activity (e.g. US spying on its citizens in violation of its laws) without putting the leaker at risk.
Same goes for reporting on gangs smaller than the US government.

Ditto.

Click to expand...

I agree..

Murphy is also this guy and he has made post after post about christian religion. He has moved directly into middle of christian conservatives and wants to complain. Granted he knowingly moved there. No one tricked him. But whatever. This is very common for claimed atheist: I bet he thinks antisemitism laws limiting 1st amendment should be passed. But if christians ask for same he will drop nukes.


this is also common among white liberal democrats



He also supports insanity of transgender surgery unless it is his 10 yr old daughter Then his view point changes. Ppl that want to do away with 2 A often want to be allowed to keep their guns. So on so on. Murphy wants to control everyone - feel sorry for his family.

MurphyGuy said:

I agree that Zuckerberg did influence the election.. What's your problem with that exactly? He owns facebook, he can make facebook do whatever he wants.
Both Zuckerberg and Facebook have 1st amendment rights and can control, influence, delete, censor, audit, or even edit, anything on their website because THEY OWN IT.

So, beyond the obvious that you prefer to vote differently, what exactly is your problem with his actions? Are you suggesting we strip people of their right to free speech?

If someone planted a BIDEN sign on your front lawn, would you want the right to remove it?

You seem to be confused.. I have never once denied that Facebook influenced the election.. You seem to think that what they did was somehow illegal, which is kind of cute.. a show of ignorance, but cute..

You might want to brush up on how our 1st amendment works.

Click to expand...

He thinks Zuckerbucks was him exercising free speech. Did you look at a single one of those links?
He bought the fucking election you numbskull. Paid democrat activists to infiltrate election offices, and gave public officials slush funds to spend as they please so theyd look the other way.
More proof that youre just here to troll and have zero interest in progressive discourse. Theres no way you even glanced at a single one of those links yet you just spouted off as it you knew what you were talking about.

MurphyGuy said:

LOL.. are you confused or did you fail the grade school mathematics where they gave you short story problems to solve? You seriously missed the point with that one..

Click to expand...

Youre in denial.
Most climate change mitigation penalizes developed countries and even rewards 3rd world countries with measures that seek to industrialize them. How are you fighting climate change by increasing industrialization of the larger 3rd world populations?

This is why IPCC publishes rhetoric like "climate justice" and "carbon equity".
Are you pretending they dont say these things? Are you too stupid to understand plain English?
They arent fighting climate change, theyre advancing global socialism.

"Here’s how it worked. Zuckerberg gifted nearly half a billion dollars to two left-wing groups that then gave the money to government election offices. One of these two groups was the Center for Technology and Civic Life. By the September before the election, Zuckerberg and his wife had given it $350 million, meaning the small organization’s prior revenues of $1.8 million exploded by roughly 20,000 percent.

The cash, or “Zuckerbucks,” wasn’t an unconditional donation, however. There were strings attached, which amounted to Democrat get-out-the-vote efforts, mass mail-in voting, and ballot “curing,” whereby election workers “fix” mail-in ballot problems after the ballot has been submitted.

These dollars also didn’t flow indiscriminately to needy areas of the country but largely to government election offices in the biggest cities of swing states, where the majority of Democrat voters are concentrated. Those funds were used for Democrat voter outreach, designing and translating ballots, and staffing ballot harvesting, curing, and counting operations."


They bought the election. Rigged it. Infiltrated and corrupted it.

Batvette said:

"Here’s how it worked. Zuckerberg gifted nearly half a billion dollars to two left-wing groups that then gave the money to government election offices. One of these two groups was the Center for Technology and Civic Life. By the September before the election, Zuckerberg and his wife had given it $350 million, meaning the small organization’s prior revenues of $1.8 million exploded by roughly 20,000 percent.

The cash, or “Zuckerbucks,” wasn’t an unconditional donation, however. There were strings attached, which amounted to Democrat get-out-the-vote efforts, mass mail-in voting, and ballot “curing,” whereby election workers “fix” mail-in ballot problems after the ballot has been submitted.

These dollars also didn’t flow indiscriminately to needy areas of the country but largely to government election offices in the biggest cities of swing states, where the majority of Democrat voters are concentrated. Those funds were used for Democrat voter outreach, designing and translating ballots, and staffing ballot harvesting, curing, and counting operations."


They bought the election. Rigged it. Infiltrated and corrupted it.

Click to expand...

You conservatives wanted big business to be involved in politics, you went all the way to the supreme court to get it done.. you got what you asked for.. you got what you demanded.. stop complaining about it, its kind of pathetic.

MurphyGuy said:

You conservatives wanted big business to be involved in politics, you went all the way to the supreme court to get it done.. you got what you asked for.. you got what you demanded.. stop complaining about it, its kind of pathetic.

Click to expand...

When did conservatives give money directly to public election officials? When did they send partisan activists in to tamper with ballots, and access voter rolls?
Again youre purposely misstating what happened to pretend it didnt.
The sheer dishonesty youre now displaying is disgusting.

Batvette said:

He thinks Zuckerbucks was him exercising free speech. Did you look at a single one of those links?
He bought the fucking election you numbskull. Paid democrat activists to infiltrate election offices, and gave public officials slush funds to spend as they please so theyd look the other way.
More proof that youre just here to troll and have zero interest in progressive discourse. Theres no way you even glanced at a single one of those links yet you just spouted off as it you knew what you were talking about.

Click to expand...

No, I didn't look at a single one of your links.. You are not capable of posting links from reputable websites. The only thing you post is misinformation, fake news, and websites so biased that they qualify for fake news.

I stopped looking at your links a long LONG time ago.

Batvette said:

When did conservatives give money directly to public election officials? When did they send partisan activists in to tamper with ballots, and access voter rolls?
Again youre purposely misstating what happened to pretend it didnt.
The sheer dishonesty youre now displaying is disgusting.

Click to expand...

ROFLMAO..

The conservatives fought hard and long to get big business into our politics so they could influence our elections with the money big business could provide.. Now you're mad because the democrats are better at playing that game?

Oh that's cute.. But I suspect you don't understand so I'll spell it out for you...

The conservatives wanted to cheat the system, and now you're upset because the democrats became better cheaters... Oh man.. Not quite on the level of space probes spreading life thru the galaxy, but a good solid 2nd place.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, because I know you haven't.. That one SCOTUS decision, bought and paid for by the conservatives, has already destroyed and killed this country.. destroyed everything it stood for and everything it represented. We just haven't fallen yet.

MurphyGuy said:

ROFLMAO..

The conservatives fought hard and long to get big business into our politics so they could influence our elections with the money big business could provide.. Now you're mad because the democrats are better at playing that game?

Oh that's cute.. But I suspect you don't understand so I'll spell it out for you...

The conservatives wanted to cheat the system, and now you're upset because the democrats became better cheaters... Oh man.. Not quite on the level of space probes spreading life thru the galaxy, but a good solid 2nd place.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, because I know you haven't.. That one SCOTUS decision, bought and paid for by the conservatives, has already destroyed and killed this country.. destroyed everything it stood for and everything it represented. We just haven't fallen yet.

Click to expand...

This has absolutely no relevence to zuckerbucks rigging 2020. Stop patronizing us. Youre full of shit.
First you question my links. Then you equate it (falsely) to what conservatives did.
You cant even get your argument straight.
Were the links fabricated lies or was it okay because the other side did it?
Mr. Say anything. Typical troll.

Batvette said:

This has absolutely no relevence to zuckerbucks rigging 2020. Stop patronizing us. Youre full of shit.
First you question my links. Then you equate it (falsely) to what conservatives did.
You cant even get your argument straight.
Were the links fabricated lies or was it okay because the other side did it?
Mr. Say anything. Typical troll.

Click to expand...

Whatever you say genius boy, I get that you don't understand.. And I'm sorry that stupid can't be fixed.

Sit tight and buckle up, there's more to come in the next election and future elections. Both sides will be up to whatever shenanigans big corporate money will allow.

MurphyGuy said:

Whatever you say genius boy, I get that you don't understand.. And I'm sorry that stupid can't be fixed.

Sit tight and buckle up, there's more to come in the next election and future elections. Both sides will be up to whatever shenanigans big corporate money will allow.

Click to expand...

Your obvious dishonesty =/= my ignorance.

Youre so full of shit you need a laxative just to talk.

Your argument started as this:

"None existed.. it was a hoax in an attempt for Trump to hang on to power."

Now its both are doing it? And of course plenty of personal insults to deflect from your errors and dishonesty. What else to expect from a lowlife shitweasel sausage masseuse.

It must be easy buying gifts for your sister, wife, and mother... When theyre all the same person.

Batvette said:

Your obvious dishonesty =/= my ignorance.

Youre so full of shit you need a laxative just to talk.

Your argument started as this:

"None existed.. it was a hoax in an attempt for Trump to hang on to power."

Now its both are doing it? And of course plenty of personal insults to deflect from your errors and dishonesty. What else to expect from a lowlife shitweasel sausage masseuse.

It must be easy buying gifts for your sister, wife, and mother... When theyre all the same person.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I get it..
The election was stolen, climate change is a hoax, covid19 conspiracy, fake moon landings, big foot, 911 was an inside job, the Earth is flat, bla bla bla.

Its kind of pathetic... and also funny at the same time watching folks rationalize their conspiracies. But, as they say, stupid can't be fixed.

Here I am designing my system and we just had Tornadoes and 4" Hail nearby AGAIN smh.
I've been in very bad hail where the hail was traveling at enough of an angle to hit my passenger side window an deposit it's glass on my lap in while I was parked and behind the steering wheel. I have to wrap my head around doing totally off grid solar or hooking up to the grid vs ROI esp since I'm already 57 years old arghhh. Factoring in Hail is a PIA, was already going to favor a winter angle (Colorado), Hail increases the idea of a winter angle bias.

damo green said:

Here I am designing my system and we just had Tornadoes and 4" Hail nearby AGAIN smh.
I've been in very bad hail where the hail was traveling at enough of an angle to hit my passenger side window an deposit it's glass on my lap in while I was parked and behind the steering wheel. I have to wrap my head around doing totally off grid solar or hooking up to the grid vs ROI esp since I'm already 57 years old arghhh. Factoring in Hail is a PIA, was already going to favor a winter angle (Colorado), Hail increases the idea of a winter angle bias.

Click to expand...

I don't think there is anything that can be reasonably done to protect an array of solar panels from 4 inch hail...

They sell a deer netting that is pretty inexpensive.. I have to wonder if it could be stretched out and suspended about 2 to 3 feet above an array and held tight with springs.. It might not completely stop the 4 inch hail, but I bet it would slow it down enough to prevent damage to the panels.

The netting is made of very thin plastic strands with 1 inch square holes. Under many conditions, its not even visible to the naked eye at distance so it shouldn't interfere with sunlight much. It is tough stuff.. a 8 ft x 100ft roll probably cost less than $20

MurphyGuy said:

I don't think there is anything that can be reasonably done to protect an array of solar panels from 4 inch hail...

They sell a deer netting that is pretty inexpensive.. I have to wonder if it could be stretched out and suspended about 2 to 3 feet above an array and held tight with springs.. It might not completely stop the 4 inch hail, but I bet it would slow it down enough to prevent damage to the panels.

The netting is made of very thin plastic strands with 1 inch square holes. Under many conditions, its not even visible to the naked eye at distance so it shouldn't interfere with sunlight much. It is tough stuff.. a 8 ft x 100ft roll probably cost less than $20

Click to expand...

For cars, I have built 1/4" mesh galvanized hardware clothe "roofs" I did this rather than a rain proof roof because it requires less structure since it is less of a "sail", it probably all suffers less impact because of the egg slicer effect ;-) . Hard to say what size hail it will help with definitely did not guestimate it's specs for 4" hail, lol. Hopefully I never find out what size hail my design is good for, but I probably will . SMH If I do go solar, it's even more reason to use used panels, I very likely will make permanent or deployable hardware cloth protection. My PV demands are less during Hail season since I really never use AC . Even though I have lots of Cactus (climate indicator 80817) on my property it's breezy and nights are usually cool so I'm fine... who knows about the future though.

damo green said:

For cars, I have built 1/4" mesh galvanized hardware clothe "roofs" I did this rather than a rain proof roof because it requires less structure since it is less of a "sail", it probably all suffers less impact because of the egg slicer effect ;-) . Hard to say what size hail it will help with definitely did not guestimate it's specs for 4" hail, lol. Hopefully I never find out what size hail my design is good for, but I probably will . SMH If I do go solar, it's even more reason to use used panels, I very likely will make permanent or deployable hardware cloth protection. My PV demands are less during Hail season since I really never use AC . Even though I have lots of Cactus (climate indicator 80817) on my property it's breezy and nights are usually cool so I'm fine... who knows about the future though.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that you want something that is in place permanently, or at least semi permanently. Maybe something you put up for the storm season (spring through fall?), then take down in winter?

If you have to "deploy" it on demand, its pretty likely that your panels are going to get hit before you have a chance to actually protect them.

Get yourself a PVC pipe and make an ice ball for it... then use a bit of hair spray or starting fluid to shoot the ice ball at whatever you're trying to use for protection and see how much deflection it has. Any decent security camera set up for 30 frames per second should allow you to accurately measure speed..

I'd probably leave the protection up year round as I doubt it will effect output much (could always add a few panels instead). If I did deploy/remove it would just be seasonally. The framework of the structure would probably be the more significant shadow caster vs the mesh. Tensioned cable might be the best way to hang the material vs shadowing, Also nice for impact absorption.

If you get hail and have solar panels please help the community by taking this quick hail poll: https://diysolarforum.com/threads/solar-panel-hail-data-request.67214/