diy solar

diy solar

Can Solar & Wind Fix Everything (e.g., Climate Change) with a battery break-through?

Electric Cars Twice as Lethal for Pedestrians as Petrol or Diesel​


Electric cars kill pedestrians at double the rate of petrol or diesel vehicles, a study in a BMJ journal has found. The Telegraph has more.

Experts said that electric or hybrid cars were twice as likely to be involved in a road accident with a bystander than a petrol or diesel car over the same distance.
The researchers suggested the vehicles’ quieter engines were a significant factor in higher fatality rates and called on the Government to mitigate the risks as it phases out petrol and diesel cars in pursuit of Net Zero.
The study looked at the number of casualties from road collisions in Britain between 2013 and 2017 using Road Safety Data and calculated the number of pedestrians that had been hit by different types of cars.
Over the period, 96,285 pedestrians were hit by a car or taxi. While three-quarters of these people had been hit by a car with a combustion engine, this was because they covered significantly more miles.
To overcome this, the researchers calculated the rate of casualties per 100 million miles covered by electric and hybrid cars compared with petrol and diesel cars.
They found that 5.16 people on average were hit by an electric or hybrid car for every 100 million miles that type of vehicle had driven, compared with 2.4 people for petrol and diesel cars.
The road accident data were cross-referenced with annual mileage figures from the National Travel Survey, with 32 billion miles of electric and hybrid vehicle travel and three trillion miles of petrol and diesel vehicle travel included in the analysis.
Two per cent of the pedestrian casualties were caused by an electric vehicle, while 24% of the accidents did not have a record of the engine type.
The researchers said that even in an “extreme case” scenario where all of these were accidents involving traditional combustion engine cars, the casualty rate would have been 3.16 per 100 million miles, still 63% lower than seen with electric cars.
Worth reading in full.

One potential confounder is that electric cars are more likely to be used on shorter hops in urban areas (due to range constraints) while petrol cars are more likely to be used for long journeys where miles can be racked up with no pedestrians around. It’s not clear how well this issue has been dealt with by the researchers. But still, it makes sense that quieter vehicles will be involved in more incidents with pedestrians.
 

Why Do We Now Think Politicians Can Control the Weather?​

“Never let a good crisis go to waste.”

If in doubt, attribute a quote to Churchill because he probably did say it at one time or another. It’s certainly been stolen many times over, and the mainstream media, BBC, Sky et al. have declared an emergency, broken the glass and pulled the dusty old axiom out of its case as the pictures of bloodied passengers and crew – pure gold to the climate catastrophisers – came in yesterday after the Singapore Airlines accident over Myanmar (Burma in old money). For aircraft accident it was, and as, sadly, a death was involved, and several severe injuries, this is how it will be treated by the Singapore aviation authorities. They are nothing if not thorough there and eventually the exact truth of the sequence of events will come out, but by then the caravanserai of the chattering classes will have emptied and the climate caravan will be somewhere, anywhere else. They only need to borrow the truth for a day or two, they don’t need to own it.

A troublesome incident for sure. A ‘perfect storm’ of events seems to have come together. Geographically, Singapore Airlines flight SQ321 was nearing the end of its journey from London and the passengers were being served ‘breakfast’, or whatever meals are called where local time has overtaken stomach expectations. Trollies were out, galleys were stacked with the detritus of 300-odd meals, and passengers were queuing for the loos to freshen up before the arrival into Singapore. All so normal.

It was approaching mid-afternoon local time, and it’s Monsoon season in that part of the world. Time for the thunderclouds to be developing. Happens every year at this time. Has to happen or it’s a crisis for farmers, fishermen and the local economies around the Bay of Bengal. Yes, if the Monsoon is a bit too vigorous places like Bangladesh suffer loss of life with floods, but sadly, t’was ever thus. It’s no coincidence that if the Monsoon is too (un)damp a squib, then it is described as ‘failed’. It’s that important and has been over the centuries.

It does bring in its wake what the met men describe as ‘chaotic skies’. Clouds everywhere at every level, biblical thunderstorms with electrical activity – and yet hundreds of aircraft full of passengers daily pick their delicate way through the Monsoon without serious incident.

It’s been happening like this since Ponticus was a pilot, as they say. I’ve been navigating these skies since I started commercial flying when I was 20. I learned from the old China-Hands who did it in the early days of what we would today recognise as perfectly normal aviation, not overflying most of the weather, but actually picking their way through it at dead of night with only rudimentary weather warning radar. The already red cockpit lighting turned right down to almost nothing so they could stare out into the night and try to spot the cumulonimbus with their name on it. The Flight Engineer would use a small torch to read the engine instruments so as not to disturb the pilot’s night vision. It was part of the job then. The old captains would joke that it was worse when they were doing this to spot a night fighter that would spoil their evenings more surely than any bloody fluffy white cloud. Yet they (and we) had the greatest of respect for the forces of Mother Nature, then and now. A night fighter will fill your aircraft and possibly you with holes. A cumulonimbus can take hold of you and rip you up like a paper aeroplane.

Planes are stronger now 50 years on, but pilots’ respect for weather ‘events’ remains as ever. The generally troubled atmosphere surrounding the Monsoon also leads to clear air turbulence which, as yesterday proved, can be just as nasty. It occurs when two air masses rub against each other, thrown together by the progress of the monsoon. Think a ship docking, and slightly overcooking its approach to the quay. The bang and shudder as the irresistible force meets the immovable object. Two air masses do the same, but they’re more difficult to spot and therefore prepare for. It’s similar on the North Atlantic. The famous jet streams are separate fast moving tubes of air which similarly rub up against the surrounding air mass and where they meet turbulence occurs. Always has. They tend to lie along the coastlines of New England and up into the Maritimes of Canada, especially in winter. I remember doing this route regularly in the 1970s and getting tossed around in my 707 mercilessly. I was convinced then that it got worse there annually. It didn’t and a decade later it settled down. Apparently sun-spot activity was very high around then, and there was the odd speculation that this may be linked to rougher winds on the North Atlantic. Nothing was proved and life went on. Grumbling, and slightly queasily we made our way back to Europe. Nobody thought of asking the politicians to alter the weather for us. No cult grew up around what was thought to be happening, organised by people it wasn’t happening to. No human sacrifices were made to placate the gods of wind. But, then there was no money sloshing around either. It was enough that we were understanding more about how things were happening, where they were likely to be happening, and the best way to avoid the worst whilst carrying on the essential task of living a normal life. We knew our limitations and inadequacies when dealing with Mother Nature. The thought of a character assassination of MN herself, or that it might be somehow ‘our fault’ would be enough to get you booted out of a position of responsibility. Now it’s the other way round, and only my generation who form a bridge between now and the sane 70s can recognise the huge gulf in attitudes. Two masses of thinking rubbing up against each other causing what seems to be catastrophic turbulence in mankind itself.

Back to Singapore. It’s very doubtful if a big nasty cloud caused the incident. They’re too easy to spot nowadays with sophisticated airborne weather radars. Clear air turbulence – not so easy. It can be and is forecast in the preflight met briefings. Only as a likelihood, though, not as a certainty nor in any one specific place. Occasionally there may be seat-of-the-pants warning. A slight rumble. A tremble going through the aircraft. That’s a signal to start monitoring the outside air temperature, the wind readouts and the skies ahead for slight changes to cloud patterns. I’ve erred on the side of safety enough in the past to annoy the cabin crew by warning them that it might get a bit bumpy soon. This throws their routine out of kilter, and they may decide to stop serving ‘hots’, and start gathering trays in. Anything more than a hunch and I’d tell them to secure the cabin, seat belt signs on, and if it’s getting really bad to sit themselves down and strap in immediately. There will be a mess to clear up after, but hopefully no injuries. Make an announcement to the passengers in best ‘resigned to inconvenience’ pilot voice to the passengers that it may be about to feel uncomfortable for a bit, but having been here many times before I know it won’t last for very long. That last bit is important. We’ve all been here before and lived to tell the tale.

Very rarely there is almost no discernible warning and it’s seatbelt signs on, PA to the cabin crew to be seated and hope that nothing flies around the cabin. Slow the plane down a bit, get on to ATC to request an altitude change as turbulent layers are shallow and a five or six thousand feet change in cruising level can help enormously.

The latter is what seems to have happened to SQ yesterday. No warning, a quick change of height authorised and sadly the damage control begun.

As I said, t’was ever thus. No change. The truth is out there, and it will come with the Singapore inquiry months down the line when it will only merit a brief mention in the mainstream media. They will be after another shibboleth by then.
 

Dutch Farmers Triumph Over Ideological Climate Policies: A Victory for Practicality and Reason​

In a significant victory for conservative values and practical policy-making, Dutch farmers and a new right-wing coalition government have successfully pushed back against wasteful and impractical climate policies. This remarkable turnaround comes after years of top-down, ideologically driven mandates that threatened both the livelihood of farmers and the economic stability of the Netherlands. This victory is not just a win for Dutch farmers but a promising sign for conservatives worldwide who advocate for sensible, science-based environmental policies.

image-117.png
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...-pumps-abolished-net-zero-figght-netherlands/

The Rise of the Right-Wing Coalition​

Geert Wilders, a prominent figure in Dutch politics, has led a coalition that marks a decisive shift in the Netherlands’ approach to climate policy. Wilders, often dubbed the “Dutch Trump,” formed a new government that includes the Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB). This coalition is notable for being the first to prioritize agricultural interests since the EU set its net-zero objectives.

“The Netherlands will tear up rules forcing homeowners to buy heat pumps as part of a war on net zero by Geert Wilders and the Dutch farmers’ party. Six months after his shock election victory, Mr. Wilders this week struck an agreement to usher in a Right-wing coalition government of four parties. ‘We are writing history,’ he said as he announced the program for the new government.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...-pumps-abolished-net-zero-figght-netherlands/
The victory was hard-fought, with mass protests from farmers highlighting the absurdity of the previous government’s policies. The farmers’ movement, which has now found its way into the heart of government, symbolizes a growing discontent with impractical climate mandates.

The Repeal of the Mandatory Heat Pump Rule​

One of the most significant reversals under this new government is the scrapping of the mandatory heat pump rule. This regulation would have forced homeowners to switch to hybrid heat pumps, an expensive and inefficient solution for many. The EU’s goal was to install at least 10 million additional heat pumps by 2027 as part of its 2050 net-zero ambition. However, the reality is that these systems are not only costly but also ineffective in many Dutch homes, leading to higher energy bills and unnecessary financial strain on families.

“The act, introduced shortly after the EU announced its objective to install at least 10 million additional heat pumps by 2027 to hit its 2050 net zero goal, would have made them standard in Dutch homes. Switching to heat pumps would have driven down Dutch household use of natural gas for heating, which is the largest source of its gas consumption, equivalent to about 30 percent in total.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...-pumps-abolished-net-zero-figght-netherlands/
Caroline van der Plas, leader of the BBB, proudly announced, “Thanks to BBB’s efforts, the mandatory heat pump will be abolished.” This statement encapsulates the coalition’s commitment to policies that make sense economically and environmentally, rather than blindly following EU mandates.

Reversing Impractical Agricultural Policies​

The previous government’s approach included compulsory buyouts of farms to reduce nitrogen emissions, a policy that sparked widespread protests and was met with fierce resistance from the agricultural community. The new coalition has replaced these compulsory buyouts with voluntary schemes, respecting farmers’ rights and livelihoods while still addressing environmental concerns.

“Compulsory farm buyouts will now be replaced with a voluntary scheme, which was one of the Dutch Farmer-Citizen Movement’s (BBB) conditions for entering government with Mr. Wilders.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...-pumps-abolished-net-zero-figght-netherlands/
This change is a clear rejection of the EU’s heavy-handed tactics. The Netherlands will now seek to negotiate more realistic nitrogen emission targets, arguing that the previous policies were unattainable and unfairly punitive to Dutch farmers.

A Shift in Subsidy Policies​

The new government also plans to end subsidies for electric cars by 2025, another move that signals a departure from the EU’s blanket approach to climate policy. These subsidies have been criticized for benefiting the wealthy who can afford electric vehicles while doing little to address broader environmental issues. By phasing out these subsidies, the Netherlands aims to create a more balanced and fair approach to environmental policy that considers the economic impact on all citizens.

“The coalition pact includes pledges to reverse green policies introduced under the previous government to hit EU climate targets, including compulsory buyouts of polluting farms. It also plans to end subsidies for electric cars in 2025 and rejects an EU demand that the Dutch reduce livestock numbers to cut pollution.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...-pumps-abolished-net-zero-figght-netherlands/

Resistance from Environmental Groups​

Unsurprisingly, these changes have been met with outrage from environmental groups. The Dutch branch of Greenpeace labeled the new coalition agreement as “an attack on nature.” However, this perspective ignores the fundamental flaws in the previous policies, which often prioritized ideological purity over practical outcomes. The new government’s stance is not an attack on nature but a call for more effective and realistic environmental policies.

The Bigger Picture​

The success of Dutch farmers and the new coalition government is part of a broader trend of conservative pushback against impractical climate policies. Across Europe, similar movements are gaining momentum, driven by a demand for policies that balance environmental protection with economic reality. This shift reflects a growing recognition that environmental, (climate) policies must be grounded in scientific evidence and economic feasibility, rather than driven by ideological dogma.

“The 26-page coalition agreement also states that the Netherlands must no longer pursue ‘a more ambitious environment policy’ than the rest of Europe. ‘We’ll adhere to the existing agreements; only if we do not achieve the goals do we create alternative policies,’ the document, called Hope, Courage and Pride, said.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...-pumps-abolished-net-zero-figght-netherlands/

Conclusion​

The recent policy reversals in the Netherlands represent a significant victory for conservatives and a welcome relief for those who have long advocated for more practical, science-based approaches to environmental issues. By rejecting wasteful and impractical mandates, the new Dutch government has set a powerful precedent for other nations grappling with similar challenges. As this movement gains traction, it holds the promise of more balanced and effective climate policies worldwide, ensuring that environmental protection goes hand-in-hand with economic stability and common sense.
 
To answer that, let's look at Venus
Venus sits in the "goldilocks zone" (ref), where the orbital mechanics and amount of sunshine suggest that the planet could support life. Three million years ago, it was very probably Earth-like with oceans.

Yet today, the planet is so hot that lead melts on it's surface. So, like North America being under ice, what the heck happened? Why did Venus get hotter while Earth cycled back and forth? Turns out that planets in the Goldilocks zone frequently turn out like Venus (ref). We're in the Goldilocks zone... can it happen to us?

A planet's temperature is an energy balance. If there's more energy
retained than emitted it gets hotter. If it emits more than it receives
it get's colder. When we get cold ice forms.

If nothing ever changed, Earth would be at some equilibrium temperature.

But Earth has gone through many natural cycles of climate change base on
orbital mechanics and atmospheric composition that vary the energy balance.

There are only 3 known types of heat transfer: conduction convection and
radiation. As space is a vacuum, the most prevalent way for energy to get
in or out is radiation.
Englander%20420kyr%20CO2-T-SL%20rev-1024x773.jpg

Energy Input = Sun + Milankovitch cycle (Natural Climate Change)
While the sun's output does vary a little, the big driver is the Milankovitch
cycle, which are three orbital mechanics (obliquity, precession, and
eccentricity) with periods of around 100,000 years, 41,000 years, and 26,000
years. We know warming isn't caused by the Milankovitch cycle as we're
currently in a cooling phase (despite temperature going up), this is why some
scientists in the 1950's / 60s predicted an upcoming ice age in the next 20,000
years.

The three effects aren't synchronized, so each cycle is different.

Energy Output
Both Venus and the Earth emit energy back out into space via black-body radiation (e.g., primarily infrared energy).

So, back to what happened to Venus? We know it's temperature went up which we know means more energy was retained than emitted by the planet. We know the sun's output didn't increase and the the planet is still inside the goldilocks zone. So, what else changed?

The atmospheric composition changed. Volcanoes erupted spewing tons of CO2 in the air over the millennia. CO2 is stable, it doesn't break down, so there was nowhere for the CO2 to go and the level built up and up to where it is now 30,000 ppm. Via the greenhouse effect the planet couldn't emit as much energy as it was gaining, so the temperature of the planet increased until it was once again in energy balance and that's pretty hot. (Every so often you see posted that CO2 over 300 ppm can't add to global warming, just laugh when they say that and point to Venus. The greenhouse effect in a layered atmosphere isn't the same as a coat of paint on a barn. How it really works is interesting though, I recommend this video if you want to know more.)

Why didn't what happen to Venus happen to Earth?
Life on Earth happened.

Organic life forms sucked the CO2 out of the atmosphere and sequestered it as coal and oil as fast as Earth could belch it out (e.g., volcanoes). So, CO2 didn't build up like it did on Venus. (This also shoots-down the theory that humans are to insignificant to make a change since life forms have already made a huge change.) Hope that helps!

This is always the most funny claim of all.

It shows how silly libtards are.

They think we could move earth to the same orbital distance from the sun as venus and it would have no impact on planetary temperatures.

Yes, Svetz actually thinks that.
 
This is always the most funny claim of all.

It shows how silly libtards are.

They think we could move earth to the same orbital distance from the sun as venus and it would have no impact on planetary temperatures.

Yes, Svetz actually thinks that.
Just look at the moon and Mars. Does anyone really think we can conquer them and live there given the actual living conditions are so hostile. They want to terra form the moon or mars 1 suggestion was to nuke them. Still take hundreds of years according to those suggestions. Most ppl think we can live on the moon easily but the reality is different. Now ppl like Svetz want to act as if man destroyed those planets too…. Shameless bs.

Hmmmm.. …
 
Stupid ideas bring out stupid results. This is similar to that floating solar platform that some overeducated fool came up with

Insane Footage Shows Tornado Destroying Wind Farm In Iowa​


Shocking footage from Iowa this evening shows multiple tornadoes wreaking havoc on massive wind turbines. This is yet another reminder that wind is not a reliable power source.

A tornado in Iowa just leveled a wind turbine. 🤯

These storms are heading to Illinois and Wisconsin next.

Be safe tonight, everyone. pic.twitter.com/KvH1cAq07f
— Art Candee 🍿🥤 (@ArtCandee) May 21, 2024
Here's the aftermath.


Apocalyptic scenes between Carbon and Greenfield, Iowa. Multiple wind turbines completely shredded, one on fire, power pole stumps left behind with entire poles gone. Strong strong tornado. pic.twitter.com/POvHZf5QXL
— Andrew Pritchard (@skydrama) May 21, 2024
Aerial video shows wind turbines destroyed near Adams County, Iowa, after a tornado moved through the area.

We're LIVE with aftermath: https://t.co/1pcOhXr9Jb @CharlesPeekWX pic.twitter.com/V9vYIxqK9k
— The Weather Channel (@weatherchannel) May 21, 2024
Tornado ripped down multiple wind turbines and left one in flames. Drone video captured by @JordanHallWX shows impact craters almost 6 feet deep north of Prescott, Iowa.#iawx #wxtwitter pic.twitter.com/GGPDSHzk59
— MyRadar Weather (@MyRadarWX) May 22, 2024
Two months ago, a solar farm in Texas with hundreds of acres of ground-based panels was destroyed by a hail storm.

Hail-shattered panels at the solar farm in Fort Bend County, Texas (FOX26 and Houston KRIV via Fox News)
Despite the evident challenges and risks, radical leftists continue pouring billions of dollars of taxpayer funds into unreliable green energy.

... and perfect timing! "Twisters," a standalone sequel to the 1996 film "Twister," is set to debut this summer.
 
Now imagine all of that going to the landfill - some of the most toxic waste produced that can not be recycled
 
while I did sleep good last night, first thing I did in the morning was check my panels.

that first cup of coffee tasted even better once I knew my panels and my new elevated ground
mount system worked all good.

seems a couple lawnmowers work good for ballast :)

IMG_4601.JPG

Capture540.PNG
 
Last edited:

Drowning in Sewage and Dumping Money into a Climate Rathole​


We humans dream of colonizing Mars, building flying cars, and achieving immortality. Yet, amidst this fervent pursuit of futures that sometimes drift into fantasy, we’re neglecting critical problems of the present.

An example is rampant pollution of our waters. This neglect exists even in advanced societies such as the United Kingdom, where untreated sewage spills into the Thames and other rivers, turning them into fetid cesspools.

This isn’t some dystopian vision of the future. It’s happening right now, under the noses of complacent governments and a distracted public. While headlines scream about a fabricated climate emergency decades away, actual environmental crises fester — not to mention potholed streets and collapsing bridges.

Thames filled with Sewage: A Global Problem

The U.K.’s aging sewage infrastructure simply can’t handle the demands of a growing population. During heavy rain, overflows release raw sewage directly into rivers. Recent findings suggest that since 2020, Thames Water—the U.K.’s largest water and wastewater services company—has discharged a minimum of 72 billion liters of sewage into the river Thames, equivalent to approximately 29,000 Olympic swimming pools of water.

In 2024, the company was fined 3.3 million pounds after causing the death of over 1,400 fish with the release of millions of liters of untreated sewage. Despite these incidents, Thames Water continues to discharge sewage into bodies of water.

Numerous images and videos shared on social media depict holidaymakers witnessing the presence of brown-colored sewage-contaminated waters along beaches and river banks in the U.K.

The neglect of river pollution has dire consequences for public health from a range of waterborne diseases, including cholera, dysentery and hepatitis A. The presence of harmful bacteria such as E. coli in rivers and coastal waters poses a direct threat to communities that rely on these sources for drinking, bathing and recreation. In fact, recently, thousands of people fell ill with diarrhoea as they ingested parasites from contaminated water in Devon, U.K.

In Bangladesh, the Buriganga and linked rivers in the country’s capital region receive daily about 60,000 cubic meters of wastes from the nine major industrial clusters. The river is so toxic that locals consider it biologically dead.

In New Delhi, the capital of India, the Yamuna River has been heavily affected by the disposal of harmful chemicals and untreated sewage. As a result, certain parts of the river exhibit a murky appearance, with foamy froth and plastic waste along its banks. Another river in India, the Ganges, is one of the world’s most polluted, receiving every day more than one billion gallons of raw sewage and industrial waste.

The problem is not exclusive to these countries. The list goes on and on. But the elephant in the room is the fact that these nations have allocated billions of dollars towards initiatives aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions—an endeavor that remains scientifically unjustified.

The U.K. has been vocal about it’s desires to implement net zero—an amorphous term used to denote zero greenhouse gas emissions from human activity. India is spending billions on wind and solar, and even Bangladesh has been waxing eloquent on the subject, launching its first ever Climate Action Plan.

Net zero will have zero effect on the climate and threatens devasting consequences for the supply of affordable and reliable electricity. Net zero is perhaps the most futile initiative mankind has ever undertaken and certainly the most expensive. Pouring trillions of funds annually into managing an uncontrollable climate is utterly ridiculous.

Instead of addressing pressing environmental issues such as river pollution, governments are misdirecting resources and energy in response to unsubstantiated claims like the climate crisis.

More people will die from real environmental problems than from the climate in 2050, whether it’s warmer or colder. We need to move beyond attention-grabbing headlines about distant imaginary threats and focus on actual ones.
 
Now imagine all of that going to the landfill - some of the most toxic waste produced that can not be recycled
Thank the Lordy it didn't hit a nuke plant.




Ppl bitch if power bill goes up. The simple solution would been put coal ash back where coal was strip mined. Blame govt interference. Can't make cinder blocks out of all of it.


I will say tornado love trailer parks. Those solar panel may have looked like a trailer park from distance to tornado and the hail. The news media picks the most colorful no teeth southern ppl can find to show the nation. Intentional. Goes back to punishment for civil war. Portrayed as inbred. 1950 Era blonde hair blue eye hero movie star....today cast as villian.

Did you know the elite in this world have family trees without many limbs. They keep money in family. Closer kin deeper in. The dupont got wealthy making gun powder among other things. They lost lot ppl and factories. They used family as employee to cut down on source ignition were basically naked. So they had lot of incest. Royal family in England were similar. Freaky. FDR was freaky too.
Princess Dianne was probably passed around at family reunions.

BTW got a broken solar panel nobody will take it. If had bad lifepo battery how much would it cost get rid of it? Nobody wants one of them either. Strange but ppl take old lead acid all day. Stores charge a core deposit money on the lead acid batteries. They want old lead acid.

You can go to jail for dumping battery in dump here....start fires. Trash fires burn all over the world.
 
Sorry tommy, the book of Job (2500 bc) says that the earth is a globe.
RussNM, you got me there, that was the science of the time. :)

*edit
The first point to understand regarding the “circle” is that the word (Hebrew root chug) does not mean “sphere” but rather refers to a circle or sometimes a dome. A circle is flat like a disc or a dinner plate. Those who hold to the “scientific secrets” approach often think “sphere” when they hear “circle.” In the Old Testament, the word is used once as a verb in Job 26:10: “He has inscribed a circle on the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness” (ESV). If one looks at the earth from space, there is indeed a circular boundary between light and darkness. However, the NIV captures more of the original intent and avoids the use of the word circle altogether: “He marks out the horizon on the face of the waters for a boundary between light and darkness.” If one is looking out at the sea, the horizon does appear to be circular. :unsure:
 
Last edited:
The strength of the earth's magnetic field is shrinking at a rate of 5% per decade .... and based on the fact that scientists previously thought it was 5% per century ..... may be increasing. Another reason the northern lights were visible further south than ever.

What is the greater threat .... This or climate change?

I haven't heard anything from Al Gore or Bill Gates about how we should protect ourselves from this. Maybe they just haven't figured out how to make money or control us based on this information.

1716423772970.png
 
all the people wearing tinfoil hats now are going to be saying I told you so, who's the fool now. 🤪

 
Last edited:
What is the greater threat .... This or climate change?
Why make it about one or the other? Let's toss in asteroid strikes, super-volcanoes, and nuclear war. Oh right! This thread is about climate change. Trying to deny the reality of climate change with other possibly threats doesn't negate the reality of climate change.
...Maybe they just haven't figured out how to make money or control us based on this information....
Hmmm... have to wonder who you think is making money off climate change?

As of May 14, 2024, the average hourly pay for a Climate Scientist in the United States is $44.36 an hour. ref
As of April 2024, Exxon Mobil CEO Darren Woods received $36.9 million in total compensation for 2023, which is a 2.8% increase from the previous year. ref
 
Why make it about one or the other? Let's toss in asteroid strikes, super-volcanoes, and nuclear war. Oh right! This thread is about climate change. Trying to deny the reality of climate change with other possibly threats doesn't negate the reality of climate change.

Hmmm... have to wonder who you think is making money off climate change?
Seems to me that if the earth's protection against radiation is disappearing .... that should trump everything else.
 
How do you think we should outfit all the animals and trees and microbes with one of those?
bob, you only think bill is spraying shit in the sky to make it rain, he could be working
on a spray faraday cage for the plants and animals. 🤪 they can't order from amazon

if it was me I would move the moon into lagrange orbit point L1, then move to the equator. 🤪
 
Last edited:
Why make it about one or the other? Let's toss in asteroid strikes, super-volcanoes, and nuclear war. Oh right! This thread is about climate change. Trying to deny the reality of climate change with other possibly threats doesn't negate the reality of climate change.

Hmmm... have to wonder who you think is making money off climate change?

You burn gasoline in your car dipshit.

If you beleive c02 is a pollutant then it's you who is doing the polluting.

The end user who burns the fuel is the polluter, not the guy who got you the oil. You libtards always try and frame yourselves as altruistic victims. You literally only take interest in a topic when that's the case. You'll twist things around to fit that narrative if you can't then you're not interested.
 
Aren't we due for a pole flip?
That's one of theories for the decreasing magnetic fields ..... That the reason for it is that it is part of the process when the poles flip.

I've also read that the same thing may be happening with the sun.
I noticed during the aurora that the sky looked foggy and I remember reading awhile back about a Nasa scientist who was studying the effects of solar wind and its effects on irradiance and thus climate.

The focus on CO2 seems so entrenched in the climate change narrative that it's not likely anything else can be seriously considered.
 
According to this scientific article I posted the other day .... The location of the magnetic north pole is already moving.

 

diy solar

diy solar
Back
Top