Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

PamW

(1,825 posts)
12. WRONG!
Mon Oct 21, 2013, 09:04 AM
Oct 2013

Last edited Mon Oct 21, 2013, 09:57 AM - Edit history (3)

kristopher,

The latest NAS study is from 2009; which kristopher now calls "outdated". How often do you think the laws of physics change?

All I can say is "Where is your university degree in physics or engineering?"

Please tell us what credentials you have for understanding what the National Academy of Science says.

It's as if there is a report from the American Medical Association, and your doctor tells you what it means, and your friend down the street who has no medical degree, no medical training, no familiarity with medicine whatsoever, tells you that the AMA study says the exact opposite of what your doctor tells you it says.

Who would the intelligent person believe with regard to an AMA report; the doctor; or the person without any medical knowledge whatsoever?

Then the person without medical knowledge complains about how unethical the doctor is. Sigh.

Face it; the scientists are just NOT on your side on this issue. BTW have you seen this from ABC News today:

"Wind Turbine Syndrome" Blamed for Mysterious Symptoms in Cape Cod Town

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wind-turbine-syndrome-blamed-mysterious-symptoms-cape-cod/story?id=20591168

Evidently wind power is very good at annoying people. I guess it's OK if it's not near you. Just as long as it's somebody else's backyard.

The good thing about science is that it is true, whether or not you believe in it.
--Neil deGrasse

PamW

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Wonderful. Cleita Oct 2013 #1
Some governments see things in perspective.. PamW Oct 2013 #2
Find another way to boil water. wundermaus Oct 2013 #3
I'll let a scientist tell you what the problem is... PamW Oct 2013 #4
And I'll Let Max Planck rebut: Demeter Oct 2013 #5
You mean we have to let a generation of environmentalists die out? PamW Oct 2013 #6
NO, I mean we have to let a generation of nuclear sell-outs die off Demeter Oct 2013 #7
Sweetheart deal on price controls FogerRox Oct 2013 #8
£92.50 is the level they've set muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #11
The prediction for gas when the plant comes online is £74 FBaggins Oct 2013 #18
That's a sweetheart deal? FBaggins Oct 2013 #19
It's a lot less than offshore wind is getting Yo_Mama Oct 2013 #22
Then the analogy doesn't hold.... PamW Oct 2013 #9
No scientist would pervert a study like you have here. kristopher Oct 2013 #10
WRONG! PamW Oct 2013 #12
The credentials required are English language comprehension caraher Oct 2013 #14
WRONG too!! PamW Oct 2013 #15
Specifically which laws of physics are being violated? caraher Oct 2013 #16
Conservation of Energy PamW Oct 2013 #17
20% is at most a rough limit with no grid upgrades and no storage caraher Oct 2013 #20
That's not "at most"... it's exactly what they're saying. FBaggins Oct 2013 #21
Try to find the 1992 National Academy Energy Study PamW Oct 2013 #24
Well said & well sourced. FogerRox Oct 2013 #26
Well said K. FogerRox Oct 2013 #27
So many assumptions... I am sad for you. wundermaus Oct 2013 #23
So is the Hindenberg PamW Oct 2013 #25
Look, the only way we can sustain modern industrial society without fossil fuels is nuclear power. hunter Oct 2013 #13
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Britain to build Europe's...»Reply #12