Clean electricity overtaking fossil fuels in Britain (2025 Update)

Apparently either you haven't seen the many studies that have shown that for people with elevated LDL and heart disease risk, statins significantly reduce the death rate? Or you just don't care?

The cheap LDL test everyone takes is meaningless and the fake statin study numbers published by bigPharma reported relative risk, not absolute risk.  Statins are just another bigPharma con job.

Is there any science, any scientific methods that you trumptards believe is valid? The fundamental problem I see is you all form your opinions first, then totally reject all the science that disagrees with it. Instead of looking at all the studies the 90 that show some strong results, you find use the 10 that show something else, no matter how flawed. Or you find some "scientist", usually one that's not even in the field, who says what you want to hear.

And then we have the crowning example, Rush, the college dropout, who decides things like global warming based on nothing more than the position that the earth is too big for man to be able to have any effect. He says that even when we have ice core samples that absolutely prove that CO2 has gone up by 30% in the last 100 years, that it's now higher than it has been for 2.6 mil years and that the previous up cycles took tens or hundreds of thousands of years.

Why do you think that is true? It is somewhat true in developing countries but in the 3d world it isn't even close. The only limit on population was infant mortality and short life spans. Guys like Bob are in a campaign to lower infant mortality and increase life spans in those countries. Those are also the people most likely to be burning rain forests and plowing up prehistoric turf land to feed themselves and provide housing. Of the 4 scenarios proposed by the UN data, 3 have the population increasing by either 48% (11.18b), 102% (16.4b) or 248%(26.33b) by

The earth will recover just fine. It might just have to scrub a few billion off the population of humans. People are disturbing the balance of the planet and the planet will respond. I doubt seven and a half billion humans will no matter what 10% of them think.

The only thing more arrogant than thinking man IS controlling the climate is thinking man CAN control the climate, particularly when the effects are caused, merely by us being here.

The best case scenario is we will push down on our effect on one area but we are going to have it pop up somewhere else.

Thanks, my error but you see how easy it is to overstate the issue. I am sure plenty of people believed that.

Keto diet guy huh?

So you won't mind if you're one of the scrubs? Well, you'll likely be dead in a few years anyway of old age or heart disease, or drowning due to sea-level change in florida[*], so it may not matter to you at all...

It is easy to underestimate the effect of a one degree (celsius) change in mean global temperature on the planet. It's not insignificant. The IPCC projections for 2100 range from 2.5 to 10 degrees F (1.8 to 5.4 degrees C) warmer than 1990 with the confidence levels highest round 2.5 degrees C and depending on the scope of future emissions of greenhouse gasses, both anthropogenic and caused by e.g. emissions of CH4 by thawing tundra and potential deep ocean methane hydrate releases caused by warmer deep waters.

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote

Because birth rates are dropping EVERYWHERE now except where the birth rate is already right down in the noise.

Yep. India and China combined arent even self replacing now and those two are by far the largest two populations in the world.

The birth rate has dropped there too.

Its actually the birth rate that matters.

And the birth rate keeps dropping there anyway.

That's wrong too. That mostly happens in Brazil etc.

Sure, but the population is predicted by them to top out at the end of this century.

No need for that. We no longer see any famine anymore except where the place has deteriorated into the most obscene levels of civil war and civil chaos or where they have been stupid enough to let some fool like kim jong il rule the roost.

There is no balance. The planet keeps changing due to various factors like ice ages etc.

They will too, with the dregs of the world ending up with better situations than the dregs had centurys ago, as always.

That isnt what happened with the industrial revolution.

Nope. I do the same thing, no diet involved at all.

You are right I will be long dead. The reality is my grand kids will be dead before rising seas flood my house and I am on the water.

So your attitude is basically "I've got mine, who cares about everyone else"?

Nope, that its very unlikely that enough will get enough of a clue to do the obvious thing, use nukes to generate electricity and produce hydrogen to use a fuel in cars and trucks and that we survived much greater sea level rises in the past and can obviously do so again if needed.

In much more recent times we have also seen well over a billion people move from one side of the world to another and do fine there, so moving to higher ground if that does become necessary is also just as doable.

I might be more willing to do something if it made sense but if I can accept the enormity of the problem and the financial impact of pin prick solutions I am going to worry about a debt crisis that could crush us in a decade or less far more than a climate crisis 50 or 100 years from now.

And just like the tobacco companies, the fossil fuel companies knew decades ago that increased CO2 would increase heat retention, thereby warming the climate. And just like the tobacco companies, after their research made that conclusion, they decided it would cost them profits if the word got out, and they suppressed their own research, and began lying to the public in huge ad campaigns, denying the truth they had found.

So you sold your car and bought a bicycle?