lee wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 9:03pm:


I did.  You merely cried

lee wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 9:22pm:


Read the thread, you ran from my questions and cried bullshit.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 9:40pm:



Have you any evidence NONE of the old ones have been done?

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 9:40pm:



Nope. There are no new ones in Oz.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 9:40pm:



Labor lost votes, the Coalition lost votes. Australia doesn't make up MOST of the world's population.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 9:40pm:



Nope. Dated 21 May 2022.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 9:40pm:


So you only want those who agree with you.

The green vote is probably most of those new voters who don't have STEM subjects either.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 9:40pm:



So you haven't found that elusive paper yet.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 9:40pm:



You refuted nothing. Assertions aren't even close to rumour level.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 9:40pm:



And still no evidence from you. Thegreatdivide - the evidence free zone.

Edit: PM2.5 has been around since 1997. And still not one recorded death.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 10:36pm:



And nothing to do with retrofitted scrubbers. 

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 10:36pm:


So you admit you were wrong AGAIN. And they would have had scrubbers.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 10:36pm:


You have made this claim multiple times and never produced one study that says so. Why is that?

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 10:36pm:


Is that all. Nothing about how they have invested so much in renewables and they signally failed to deliver? Remember that wind drought over UK and Europe? Weather dependent renewables.



thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 10:36pm:


Biden is already responsible for increasing prices, what more do you want him to do?


And yet you haven't provided any proof.

.thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 10:36pm:


Ok. Once we finish with fossil fuels - How do we maintain furnaces for iron and aluminium. They need constant heat. It is very expensive to clean solidified pipes.

So we have no iron and steel, no aluminium but they can all sit on the ground - get paid sit down money and the world will continue. All those fossil fuel products - over 6000 that won't be available for manufacture. And then of course there is the building of semi-conductors - very intensive in energy use. All the remaining industry will go to China.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 10:36pm:


They haven't found ANY evidence of PM2.5 deaths.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 10:36pm:



There you go again conflating two different issues. Tobacco has been FOUND to cause health problems. So that is NOT rumour. However as there is no EVIDENCE of PM2.5 deaths that is rumour.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 25^th, 2022 at 10:36pm:


Really which industry is so proscribed? Which country has proscribed it? The fossil fuel industry continues. I think the word proscribed does not mean what you think it means.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 1:37pm:


Germany is heavily invested in renewables.



They still couldn't handle the wind drought.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 1:37pm:

Ah your wish list again, Every problem has an engineering solution.

"The technology to convert power to hydrogen and back to power has a round-trip efficiency of 18%-46%, according to data that Flora presented from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and scientific journal Nature Energy."

https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlin...

So you would need at least 3 to 6 times the power input just to get the same out.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 1:37pm:



You have come up with absolutely nothing except all problems have an engineering solution. A real numpty.

.thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 1:37pm:



Nope gave up in 1973.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 1:37pm:


And yet you still can't find that elusive paper to prove your point. Why is that?

thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 1:37pm:



Oh dear. Seamlessly moves from PM2.5 to lead.

"EPA’s assessment of the PM2.5 science is a case study in science fraud.

First, the PM epidemiology is not science — it’s just statistics and dishonest statistics at that.

Statistical associations by themselves are not science.

EPA admitted in federal court with me that the PM epidemiology alone is inadequate for determining causality."

"Studies show that smokers who quit by age 40 will have inhaled thousands of times more PM than nonsmokers – yet both groups have the same life expectancy.

PM levels in Chinese and Indian cities can be 100 or more times greater than US outdoor air – but there are no reports of actual deaths from inhaling Chinese or Indian air."

"Coal miners and diesel workers have relatively large exposures to PM – but they have greater life expectancy than workers not occupationally exposed to PM.

And guess what, when PM levels are reduced, deaths don’t go down. "

"There is not a single toxic substance known to science that operates on the principle that a little exposure is worse than a lot. Not a single one.

All the foregoing is indisputable. At least I have no seen anyone dispute it."

https://junkscience.com/2021/11/milloy-to-epa-casac-pm-subpanel-epas-assessment-...

Because obviously you can't research.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 1:37pm:

Rubbish

thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 1:37pm:



Wrong again.

"pro·scribe  (prō-skrīb′)
tr.v. pro·scribed, pro·scrib·ing, pro·scribes
1. To prohibit; forbid: foods that are proscribed by religious dietary laws. See Synonyms at forbid.
2. To denounce or condemn: "The small sins of natural pleasure that we see ... mildly proscribed in the confession manuals of the late Middle Ages" (James Turner).
3.
a. To banish or outlaw (a person): "Emperors took it on themselves to proscribe heretics" (Garry Wills).
b. To publish the name of (a person) as outlawed."

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/proscribed

It hasn't been prohibited , banned or outlawed.

So another of your fallacies. Why do you lie so much?

FutureTheLeftWant wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 2:35pm:



Really weird that he said "Obviously governments have proscribed a profitable industry for..."

They haven't been proscribed, anywhere. Note the use of the current tense.

Don't you think that answers the statement? If not why?

thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 3:45pm:



Very good

thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 3:45pm:



Because you used the word proscribed.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 3:45pm:



Coal plants haven't been condemned either. They are still in operation. No country has denounced them.

Frank wrote on May 26^th, 2022 at 4:30pm:


Of course not, you haven't been following the debate; many compounds emitted by fossil fuel combustion (hence "filthy fossil")  are injurious to human (and enviromental) health.

Quote:


I'll be generous and thank you for the  lesson on photo-synthesis, but it's an irrelevant interjection to the post to which you thought you were replying.