Bill Gates' new book is free to claim for a limited time. Just enter any temp email address and a school (I used my little bot's primary school) and the ebook will download. epub reader is required to read.
The Kindle version of this book is a #1 best seller and currently $17.99 on Amazon.
@[Deactivated]: Then why don't those pandemic control measures work on COVID, genius?
Because flu cases have been rebranded as COVID cases, is the correct answer.
Watching you fumble your way through this mental gymnastics routine is quite entertaining, I have to say.
@Gnostikos: Delta strain, population unwilling to lockdown = outbreak.
Flu rebranded as COVID cases… can't tell if you're being serious or not.
population unwilling to lockdown = outbreak.
Lol, unwilling to lock down? What planet are you living on?
Melbourne has been locked down under harsher restrictions for longer than anywhere in the world, with Sydney's record following not too far behind.
Both states combined contain half of Australia's population.
You sociopaths who keep chanting the "wE nEeD tO lOcKdoWn eVeN hArDeRrR!!1!" mantra are absolutely ridiculous.
At what point do you admit the lockdown measures are not having any appreciable effect in containing this bullsh*t?
Flu rebranded as COVID cases… can't tell if you're being serious or not.
The annual flu season killed an average of 3,000 - 4,000 people in Australia per year before COVID.
COVID, even with the supposedly super scary Delta Plus Gamma Lambda 49th wave variant has still claimed less than half of the annual flu death toll over nearly a 2 year period now. Mutations can only have lower fatality rates compared to the original strain.
The documentation for the PCR testing kits themselves will state that a positive test result doesn't mean that you have COVID-19 and that you may in fact have any of the other viruses in the coronaviruses family, like common strains of influenza, since their genomes are incredibly similar. That's without even touching the subject of the ridiculous amplification cycles used in most PCR testing laboratories worldwide that are likely producing far more false-positives that genuine cases.
Then why don't those pandemic control measures work on COVID, genius?
.
Melbourne has been locked down under harsher restrictions for longer than anywhere in the world, with Sydney's record following not too far behind.
Both states combined contain half of Australia's population.
.
COVID, even with the supposedly super scary Delta Plus Gamma Lambda 49th wave variant has still claimed less than half of the annual flu death toll over nearly a 2 year period now.
You asked why pandemic control measures do not work, and then you outlined the extreme pandemic measures taken in Vic and NSW (half of Australia's population), and then you correctly state that we've managed to keep our Covid deaths down to about 1500 in total.
You've just outlined exactly how well our pandemic control measures have worked on Covid. Infact at about 67 deaths per million capita, our pandemic control measures have worked better on Covid than almost every other first world country on the planet.
Nice job.
@Nom: Yes, he's not only moved the goal posts, he's boxed the ball in with no chance of getting close to any goal posts. No facts you provide will satisfy.
Classic motivated reasoning.
Rubbish
We are not the US. You cannot equate their abysmal health care system to our health system and then claim "correlation does not equal causation".
You post heaps and heaps of "stats" and then extrapolate bullshit from them.
TLDR - Billy boy wants to bomb the atmosphere with dust - https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2021/01/11/bill-gate…
Not much different to the chemtrails they spray now just higher up, if a weakening magnetic field doesn't effect the earths climate why are they putting in so much work to block solar radiation?
Why does Bill Gates insists on blocking out the sun in so many different ways? Unless he is like Mr Burns and wants to make us pay for the sun lol.
Why does Bill Gates insists on blocking out the sun in so many different ways?
It's hardly limited to Bill Gates and he's far from the first and only evil, so-called "genius" to suggest it.
Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering is the technical term for spraying reflective, albedo-lowering materials like aluminium, titanium, barium or sulphur into the stratosphere as a supposed means of combating "climate change" to induce the phenomenon we've seen after large-scale volcanic eruptions, called "Global Dimming".
Canadian climate scientist David Keith was doing the rounds years ago promoting this idea and was even on Stephen Colbert's show, where Stephen surprisingly ridiculed him.
Of course all of the proposed materials to be used for these aerosol spraying programs are severely toxic to human, animal and plant life, especially aluminium which has been strongly linked to neurological diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and Dementia. Funnily enough, Monsanto engineered some aluminium-resistant seeds back in 2008 but that's probably just a coincidence.
What all of these technocrats conveniently leave out of the discussion is that scientific institutes like the NOAA have observed that there's been an unexplained doubling of stratospheric aerosols of undisclosed origin in recent decades:
To say nothing of numerous independent scientific sample collections and laboratory analyses all over the world (but particularly in the US and Europe) which have confirmed ridiculously high amounts of heavy metal nanoparticles like aluminium, barium and strontium being found in soil and water samples, well-above maximum safe thresholds for human exposure and with no logical source.
These "proposed" climate change experiments went live decades ago and now they're trying to retroactively explain away the glaring anomalies being seen all over the world with the incremental conditioning of the public into accepting these radical ideas as necessary solutions to the climate change "catastrophe" that have to be adopted because we'll be dead in 10 years or some sh*t.
@Gnostikos
What all of these technocrats conveniently leave out of the discussion is that scientific institutes like the NOAA have observed that there's been an unexplained doubling of stratospheric aerosols of undisclosed origin in recent decades:
NOAA has released a statement outlining the results of the study, and in it Daniel, says, “stratospheric aerosol increased surprisingly rapidly in that time, almost doubling during the decade,” which forms the basis of the teams conclusions that such aerosols are responsible for the slowdown in increased temperatures that scientist around the world have been expecting due to greenhouse gas emissions.(phys.org)
You forgot to quote the very next paragraph which says :
The surprising aspect of the study is the large amount of aerosols found during a period when there weren’t any giant volcanoes going off, which leads researches to wonder if the aerosols are from the combined effects of multiple small eruptions, or human activity, such as the particles emitted from coal fired power plants, particularly in Asia, where such plants have multiplied in recent years. One thing the research is not able to tell us is what impact aerosols will likely have in the future, because of the uncertainty of their origin, which means there is no way to tell at this point if there will be more, or less of them, which means scientists can only guess if the temperature muting will continue to offset global warming from current and future carbon emissions.
And then from that sentence, speculating small volcanic eruptions and and new coal fired plants as the source, you make a spectacular leap to :
These "proposed" climate change experiments went live decades ago and now they're trying to retroactively explain away
You're missing a rather large step here - where's the evidence to show the likely source of volcanic activity and coal burning is actually less likely than "manmade climate change experiments" ?
Sick reptilian imp.
Funny enough there was time when scientists were planning to cover Arctic ice with ash to warm up Antarctica and slow down ice growth. It was only in 1970s when they were as much concerned about global cooling as they're concerned about global warming now. Opposite problem requires same solution, apparently.
Really?
Love to read more about this. Do you have a link to credible information?
I looked it up and there is a wikipedia article about it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
It looks like they thought the planet would cool due to the cooling effect of aerosols but very few published papers talked about it and it was figured out quite quickly that warming would actually be the long term issue.
The only people talking about it in the 70s were some people in the media and not scientists.
@PiratePete1911: I'll tell you one short story hoping you'll understand what I'm talking about.
You know very well that Greenland ice sheet is rapidly melting since human appeared on this planet, right? I mean, it's a well established in scientific literature fact. And you can't question science, not climate one anyway.
On 15 July 1942, due to poor weather and limited visibility, six P-38 fighters of 94th Fighter Squadron/1st FG and two B-17 bombers of a bombardment squadron were forced to return to Greenland en route to the British Isles during Operation Bolero and made emergency landings on the ice field.
All the crew members were subsequently rescued, but Glacier Girl, along with the unit's five other fighters and the two B-17s, were eventually buried under 268 feet (82 m) of snow and ice that built up over the ensuing decades.
Fifty years later, in 1992, the plane was brought to the surface by members of the Greenland Expedition Society after years of searching and excavation.
The end.
@PiratePete1911: "The only people talking about it in the 70s were some people in the media and not scientists."
DREAM ON …
FLASHBACK 1976: CIA Warns of "Frequently Freakish Weather" Due To GLOBAL COOLING!
https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/43179829/
CLIMATE SCIENTIST Schneider Went From COOLING ALARMIST To WARMING ALARMIST In Just 4yrs!
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/02/24/schneider-went…
NOAA chief “scientist” played key role in BOTH global cooling & warming scares
http://www.nytimes.com/1986/10/31/us/warming-of-alaskan-arti…
EXCELLENT VIDEO: The Ministry Of Climate Truth, Erasing The 1970’s Global Cooling Scare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC_fVuJWZoY&feature=youtu.be
https://youtu.be/dC_fVuJWZoY
GLOBAL COOLING COVERUP Global Cooling and Wikipedia Fake News
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/12/25/global-cooling-and-wi…
@PiratePete1911: "The only people talking about it in the 70s were some people in the media and not scientists."
Another victim of the massive global cooling CONSENSUS cover up …
FLASHBACK 1976: Every major climate organisation endorsed the ice age scare,NCAR, CRU, NAS, NASA,& the CIA
a CONSENSUS!
@PiratePete1911: "The only people talking about it in the 70s were some people in the media and not scientists."
HMMM …
FLASHBACK 1976: Top Climatologists Upset: US not taking GLOBAL COOLING Seriously!
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F40D13F9355E1…
Still waiting…..
But fascinating story about "Glacier Girl" 😮
@jackspratt: "Still waiting….."
Wait no more …
FLASHBACK 1977: Climatologists Hoped Cold US Winter Would Convince Govt To Take Action Against GLOBAL COOLING! http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/02/04/february-1977-…
"Do you have a link to credible information?"
YES
FLASHBACK 1974: GLOBAL COOLING TO INCREAE FREQUENCY OF EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS
Der Spiegel 1974 – New Ice Age Approaching. Odds Of A Warm Future “At Best 1 in 10,000”
An increased frequency in extreme weather events, a cooling North Atlantic, and growing Arctic sea ice were viewed as signs of climate change. The odds of a warmer climate in the future, according to one scientist, were “at best 1 in 10,000” (see below).
Sample quotes on the perils of global cooling …
“If the current worsening of the climate continues, all of humanity will suffer — a billion people will starve.”
Reid Bryson, Scientist, University of Wisconsin
“The chances of a rash return to the optimum climate of the [WARM] 1930s are at best 1 in 10,000″.
James McQuigg, US Weather Researcher
“Only a rapid aid program can prevent the catastrophe, fears Ehrlich.
But the rich countries of the west, he complains, proved themselves to be failures during the crisis management of the 1973 oil crisis.”
Überpessimist Paul Ehrlich on the consequences of global cooling:
http://notrickszone.com/2010/12/17/der-spiegel-1974-new-ice-…
@jackspratt: "Still waiting for the link to ash in the Arctic."
Wait no more …
FLASHBACK 1912: Experts Wanted To Melt Nth Pole, To Improve Earth’s Climate! http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/39914783
@jackspratt: " Still waiting for the link to ash in the Arctic."
Wait no more …
FLASHBACK 1924: Melt Greenland To Save The Planet!
http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=s…
@Gekov: And still waiting.
But feel free to keep floundering - it is in equal parts amusing and pathetic.
But what happened to DainB?
It was only in 1970s when they were as much concerned about global cooling as they're concerned about global warming now.
The "they" you refer to were non-scientific press reporters who did not accurately reflect the scientific literature. Total straw man.
And those non-scientific press reporters from 1970s were totally making it all up, like they do it now, too?
Or maybe the well established fact that we are living in the current "Holocene" interglacial, which began about 11,500 years ago is press speculation too? Do you know what inter means in interglacial?
"The "they" you refer to were non-scientific press reporters who did not accurately reflect the scientific literature."
DELUDED!
MASSIVE COVER-UP OF 1970’s GLOBAL COOLING CONSENSUS 5 PARTS
http://notrickszone.com/2016/09/13/massive-cover-up-exposed-…
"The "they" you refer to were non-scientific press reporters who did not accurately reflect the scientific literature."
OH REALLY?
EXPERT EYEWITNESS: Climate scientist Dr Ball witnessed the 1970’s ICE AGE CONSENSUS & says so in this video at about 7mins, debunking warmster denial https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO08Hhjes_0#t=328
"The "they" you refer to were non-scientific press reporters who did not accurately reflect the scientific literature."
Here, let a climate scientist set you straight ….
“We’re on a definite downhill course for the next two centuries” Prof Hubert Lamb, Director & FOUNDER Climate Research, University Of East Anglia, 1972
The good professor forecasts a new ice age.
"The "they" you refer to were non-scientific press reporters who did not accurately reflect the scientific literature."
YEAH RIGHT …
FLASHBACK 1972: Climate Research Unit Chief SCIENTIST Said Earth Would DEFINITELY Cool Next 2 Centuries. SETTLED SCIENCE!
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=lzI_AAAAIBAJ&sjid=PlEMA…
"The "they" you refer to were non-scientific press reporters who did not accurately reflect the scientific literature."
REALLY?
FLASHBACK 1974: International Atomic Energy Agency: Earth has entered a new “little ice age” http://www.iaea.org/publications/magazines/bulletin/16-5
@Gekov: Thanks champ, for linking to lots of non-scientific press reports. Of all the ones you shared with us, the one credible scientific source was the IAEA. And to be fair to it, even this piece is just a scientific organisation's press release, not a peer-reviewed paper.
In that very edition you linked to by the IAEA, on the first page:
Not all climate experts agree, however, that this is so. Because of this difference of view there is a clear and pressing need for a major new thrust of basic and applied research on climate change. In this respect it is most encouraging that the Global Atmospheric Research Program, at a special meeting in Sweden this summer, is dedicating heightened attention to the pursuit of a fundamental understanding of the causes and predictability of world climate changes.
Great, so more research has since been done, a better understanding achieved, and a greater consensus was reached. Sounds like the scientific process in action.
And further demonstrations of how easy it is for second hand press reports to take the headline, remove the nuance, and sensationalise.
@TimeOrMoney: " non-scientific press reports"
HUH?
Those press reports are reporting CLIMATE SCIENTISTS baby!
BUT NOT ONLY PRESS REPORTS!!
Climate scientist Schneider even wrote a book "The genesis Strategy" warming about the perils of global cooling.
CLIMATE SCIENTIST Schneider Went From COOLING ALARMIST To WARMING ALARMIST In Just 4yrs!
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/02/24/schneider-went…
HH LAMB CLIMATE SCIENTIST & Founder of the East Anglias climate research unit perdicted a new ice age.
VERBATIM QUOTE
“We’re on a definite downhill course for the next two centuries” Prof Hubert Lamb, Director Climate Research, University Of East Anglia, 1972
The good professor forecasts a new ice age.
FLASHBACK 1972: Climate Research Unit Chief SCIENTIST Said Earth Would DEFINITELY Cool Next 2 Centuries. SETTLED SCIENCE! http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=lzI_AAAAIBAJ&sjid=PlEMA…
We even have a climate scientist EYEWITNESS to the GLOBAL COOLING CONSENSUS at the time
EXPERT SCIENTIST EYEWITNESS: Climate scientist Dr Ball witnessed the 1970’s ICE AGE CONSENSUS & says so in this video at about 7mins, debunking warmster denial https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO08Hhjes_0#t=328
WTF ARE YOU SMOKING NOT TO SEE THIS?
@TimeOrMoney: "so more research has since been done"
ROTFLMAO
It was the birth of the GLOBALIST #globalwarming agenda that occurred … and up came the current propaganda.
The Birth of the Global Warming Scam – How One “Scientist” SINGLE-HANDEDLY Reversed The Conclusions of 28 IPCC Scientists & Created “a discernible human influence on global climate.” Santer was appointed the convening Lead-author of Chapter 8 of the 1995 IPCC Report titled “Detection of Climate Change and Attribution of Causes.” In that position, Santer created the first clear example of the IPCC manipulation of science for a political agenda. He used his position to establish the headline that humans were a factor in global warming by altering the meaning of what was agreed by the committee as a whole at the draft meeting in Madrid.
28 SCIENTISTS CONCLUDED THAT THERE IS NO DISCERNIBLE HUMAN INFLUENCE ON GLOBAL CLIMATE
1. “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed [climate] changes to the specific cause of increases in greenhouse gases.”
2. “While some of the pattern-base discussed here have claimed detection of a significant climate change, no study to date has positively attributed all or part of climate change observed to man-made causes.”
3. “Any claims of positive detection and attribution of significant climate change are likely to remain controversial until uncertainties in the total natural variability of the climate system are reduced.”
4. “While none of these studies has specifically considered the attribution issue, they often draw some attribution conclusions, for which there is little justification.”
“When will an anthropogenic climate be identified? It is not surprising that the best answer to the question is “We do not know.”
BUT … Santer wasn’t happy with this, so he rewrote the above OBJECTIVE conclusions …
SANTER SINGLE-HANDEDLY CREATED A “DISCERNIBLE HUMAN INFLUENCE ON GLOBAL CLIMATE”
1. “There is evidence of an emerging pattern of climate response to forcing by greenhouse gases and sulphate aerosols … from the geographical, seasonal and vertical patterns of temperature change … These results point toward a human influence on global climate.”
2. “The body of statistical evidence in chapter 8, when examined in the context of our physical understanding of the climate system, now points to a discernible human influence on the global climate.”
As Avery and Singer noted in 2006,
“Santer single-handedly reversed the ‘climate science’ of the whole IPCC report and with it the global warming political process! The ‘discernible human influence’ supposedly revealed by the IPCC has been cited thousands of times since in media around the world and has been the ‘stopper’ in millions of debates among non-scientists.”
On July 4, 1996, the apparently compliant journal Nature published, “A Search for Human Influences on the Thermal Structure of the Atmosphere” with a familiar list of authors – Santer, Wigley, Jones, Mitchell, Oort and Stouffer. It was meant to confirm a “discernible human influence.” on climate BUT THE DATA WAS CHERRYPICKED to show steady warming while omitting the full picture which contradicted this, as shown in the attached charts!
John Daly produced a graph of the wider data set and explained,
“we see that the warming indicated in Santer’s version is just a product of the CHERRYPICKED dates chosen”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/24/a-history-of-dr-ben-s…
"The "they" you refer to were non-scientific press reporters who did not accurately reflect the scientific literature."
REALLY & TRULY?
1974: SCIENTISTS at NAS proposed Evacuation of 6Million People To Save Them From GLOBAL COOLING!
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1346&dat=19741229&id=f…
I think we have passed the point of no return few decades back. We are like a freight train accelerating and the edge is close.
Sorry to break it to you but flat earth is not a thing. There's no edge.
It obviously is, Australia doesn't exist and we're all just bots and actors.
Not that type of edge. It's like the edge of the volcano entrance or the Inferno (Dante Alighiery).
It's the path to new life on Earth after the people destroy most of life & the humans disappear.
However, the point is not in reading books/free speech/promising but doing. Something that the conservative government is not keen to understand.
Who cares for life when money is at stake.
Doing what? Something? Please be specific, what are you proposing to do?
Are you prepared reduce your own carbon footprint to the level they have in rural Kongo? Do you understand that your lifestile will be reduced to same level too, meaning you won't have cooling, heating or even electricity and will have to grow your own food?
"I think we have passed the point of no return few decades back. We are like a freight train accelerating and the edge is close."
HMMM … another victim of relentless climate propaganda ….
MORE OVERBLOWN PROPAGANDA FROM THAT LEFTIE RAG THE GUARDIAN …
Have You Seen The Guardian’s Climate Disaster? It Appears To Have Gone Missing!
The more the push back against Net Zero grows, the more desperate the propaganda becomes:
The Earth is already becoming unliveable, they claim!
Funny, perhaps somebody should tell the 7.9 billion people living on it.
It’s the usual mix of cherry-picking heatwaves, floods, droughts, crop failures and wildfires, dressed up in fraudulent fancy graphics, and assisted by the hopelessly discredited Katherine Hayhoe.
So, let’s look at some examples:
Prolonged multi-decadal droughts in the Sahel
The “Year of the Flood” in Catalonia
Record droughts followed by catastrophic floods in India
Major drought in Chile
500,000 deaths in Japan in just one winter, due to poor harvests
Record floods year after year in parts of Europe, but record droughts in other parts
1000-Year drought in Aegean/Black Sea region
Around the world, millions died from famine
Crops regularly devastated around the world
Sounds bad? Yes, it does, but THIS ALL HAPPENED IN THE MID-17th CENTURY!
Similar catastrophic events occurred in the 19th, before the Little Ice Age gave up its grip.
The Guardian has clearly lost its grip as well!
They’ll probably try to tell us next that we all died last year.
After they cannot get much more ridiculous.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/10/26/have-you-seen-the-gua…
"I think we have passed the point of no return few decades back. We are like a freight train accelerating and the edge is close."
BOOGA BOOGA!
Which "sheeple" do you refer to?
Those who listen to, or digest, reports from fact and science based media?
Or those who who live day-to-day informing themselves from Facebook and Youtube?
reports from fact and science based media?
The Guardian lol. This is what passes for science in clown world.
Go punch a horse
Thank you.
Damn, I didn't know Gates was a hot topic here
Anti-vaxxers hate him for some reason.
Even though he and his now ex wife contribute a lot via charities and other humanitarian projects.
It's pretty obvious that all we're seeing is years of jealously getting mixed with conspiracies
Anti-vaxxers hate him for some reason.
Mate, A lot of people hate him.
Even though he and his now ex-wife contribute a lot via charities and other humanitarian projects.
His Philonthraphy is for a tax write-off. And all money will go to sister companies. Why the same people don't hate Elon Musk? Bill Gates is the evilest person in any Hollywood movie(next in line will be Mark Psycoberg and Jeff Pita). Now previous employees are accusing him of sexual harassment. They are not anti-vax. His wife divorced him because of his close contact with Jeffery Epstein. She is not a conspiracy theorist.
It's pretty obvious that all we're seeing is years of jealously getting mixed with conspiracies
Actually, it's the opposite. People who admire him want to become like him. But they never. Because if you want to become Bill gates, you have to steal intellectual property, you have to kill somebody, you have to bribe governments, you have to evade taxes, you have to molest. His life is a big PR stunt, which is unraveling now.
Quite literally everything you have said is wrong. You need to lay off the conspiracy theory echo chambers.
I hope not so many people hate me.
Why dont he just send the book to us via the microship?
Need mmWave 5G to activate that unfortunately. Get a Google Pixel 6 Pro and voilà…
Did you get fully vaccinated? One dose is just not enough to establish stable connection🤪
Wrong you need 3 including booster haha and another booster in another 4 months to maintain connection
ongoing boosters every 6 months for years to come to keep a valid vaccine passport… that is what is currently being considered for Australians
Have this book, haven't had a chance to read it, it is really well reviewed however.
My uneducated thoughts before reading it are we will likely go more nuclear and start producing blue hydrogen (ie not using renewables). So Uranium prices will continue to skyrocket and so will the Aussie dollar.
Nuclear is more expensive than other energy options, and it takes much longer to get a nuclear powerplant built and operational than other options as well.
The only reason nuclear is being pushed at the moment is because it involves buying stuff that gets dug out of the ground and helps the LNP's mates to make money.
What other energy options are out there?
Older nuclear technology has all the problems you’ve pointed out. Slow & expensive. Newer designs and technologies are working to solve much of this. The main argument for nuclear is that it provides the base load required to support the huge increase in power demands over the next few decades with far fewer carbon emissions. It’s not a silver bullet but provides an option that may give some time for other purely renewable technologies to be invented and scaled.
Main problem that even with no red tape and funding ready to go, build time is still 15 years, on the other hand a team of 5 guys can build a 5MW solar farm in 6 months. Definitely seems more likely to see hundreds of 5MW solar farms and a few much bigger wind farms popping up as you can start recouping your investment straight away.
Government cycles mean that anything not built in 3 - 4 years probably won't happen.
On top that, while Solar & Wind are getting towards there price floor, batteries could trend down in cost a decent amount in 15 years.
The grid of 2035 is going to look a lot different than 2021,
As Dain said: what else can currently replace coal as a reliable low emissions technology? Nuclear is it so we better get cracking.
You've forgotten the important point that nuclear power, much like coal and oil, is extremely manly. Wind and solar cannot compete in terms of masculinity.
(/s, but basically the position most nuclear advocates retreat to once you point out the favourable cost argument for renewables)
once you point out the favourable cost argument for renewables
Sadly, this massive lie is being shoved down our unsuspecting throats. No, “renewables” are not cheaper.
Let’s factor in the environmental cost of manufacturing solar panels. Whoops… no net zero reached even at the end of their lifespan.
Lithium mining is far dirtier than all the wood, coal, etc. burnt to supply the world’s thirst for energy. These “renewable” batteries also can’t be recycled. Damn.
Ever wonder why your power bill is going up? “Renewables.” No, they are not cheaper in the short, medium, or long term.
@tharlow: I have to call you out in this, because it sounds like anti renewables drivel. Can you please provide citations or scientific references to support your claims?
@GeneralSkunk: Busted. You got me. But there is a disturbing paucity of research dealing with the carbon emissions and environmental impact through the entire life cycle of ”renewable” energy infrastructure.
@tharlow: I agree with GeneralSkunk, where's a reliable study illustrating your argument?
Am I wrong in remembering South Australia having too much energy from renewables that it overloaded their grid?
@SpainKing: I think they have the world’s biggest battery now that lasts… 7 minutes. Bottom line is that when the wind stops blowing, the lights go out.
@tharlow: iT's PrOgReSs BiGoT!!1!
Not having a reliable power grid is just part of the utopian future our technocratic overlords seek to create for us.
Along with the whole… eat bugs, live in pods, own nothing and be happy agenda.
My suggestion is to discuss it with earth, energy and climate scientists to hear their opinion. I think you'll find that the majority of them back nuclear as the primary source with renewables supporting in areas where they are needed.
"The only reason nuclear is being pushed at the moment is because"
… it is the only viable emissions-free baseload power source.
If this #climatechange scam was truly as "existential" a threat as the warmunists claim …
AND
if the #climatechange scam was really about the environment and not part of a political agenda …
AND
if warmunists really believed in their crap and dud predictions
… then they would falling over themselves to utilise it.
It’s worth the read. Many people like to hold uneducated opinions and debates about the climate problem. If nothing else this will enable more constructive conversations as to what options remain for us and the pros and cons of them all.
These billionaire duck heads are preaching about the environment to normal people. On the other hand they are living in massive (multiple)estates and private jets and yatchs. And they are making products with planned obsolesce and make us buy every year. They will visit to Jeffery Epstein island and sing lullabies with underaged girls. We don't know what they eat at their home but acting like meat is the worst thing to eat to increase their investments in plant-based meat companies. They have investments in oil companies, synthetic fertilizers, drug companies. Sometimes I feel we are heading towards a scenario like the hunger games movie in the future where normal people will become like lab rats or guineapigs
This is the guy who has donated billions of dollars to help develop vaccines and supply vaccines to 3rd world countries.
He also, somehow, managed to double budget of his foundation by donating billions of dollars. Look it up if you don't believe me.
Ah ok help develop vaccines eh? and making money in the process? billionaires have so called "foundations" so they can get tax concessions, Andrew twiggy Forrest has one too haha , he secured "much needed" covid test kits from china through his foundation and spent $300 million, government never used them and sent them to national stockpile(not that they can be used anyway, they are Chinese) but they did pay his foundation $300 million hahah, does it make sense you now? still no?
Why would bill gates be the person to stop poor countries getting covid vaccine patents? since you dont get it let me tell you why, so he can make the vaccines with drug companies in the west and sell it to poor countries. you probably still don't get it lol cos you see some nice headline in a paper and you tell us about it haha. nothing is what it seems pal.
@sammyla: Totally agree, money makes the world to go around. Pharmaceutical companies require subscription income like Netflix and Microsoft 365. How do they do it, via vaccine. Every year, new variant will come out and every year will have new vaccine. Companies will grow year by year with population.
@sammyla: Looks like you ignored the part where he donated billions of dollars providing vaccines to those 3rd world countries, and where he changed his stance on the patent.
He initial stated that he didn't believe it was a good idea to lift IP rights as they couldn't monitor quality control of the manufacturers in those countries, which could result in bad vaccines. But he changed his stance 1 week later and supported lifting the patent protection during the pandemic.
Maybe you should avoid getting your information from far right media and conspiracy blogs.
@GunnerMcDagget: There is no point arguing with conspiracy theorists. I found this out long ago. They are not interested in information that does not align with their current beliefs. They are over-confident in their opinions, while simultaneously ignoring or rejecting the most reliable data, the most comprehensive analyses, and alternative viewpoints. This indicates they are not genuinely interested in truth, but only interested in the sugar-rush (dopamine) they get from having their current beliefs validated by selective information and circular arguments.
But I’ll try once more to get through to them:
Over-confidence is the enemy of truth. The success of empirical science over the past 400 years has shown us again and again and again that the only reliable way to discern truth and probability is though self-directed skepticism. The highest quality scientific studies and experiments are those that are designed to falsify the scientist’s current working hypothesis that attempts to explain the data. This is how we get closer to truth: by questioning what we (i.e. you) think is true. Again and again. The data/hypotheses/explanations that withstand such questioning are the most reliable. Don’t assume you understand an issue perfectly if you’ve only read 0.01% of the available data interpreted by a biased non-expert.
@GunnerMcDagget: haha word Donation means saving tax, i dont get my info from far right media at all,dont jump in to conclusions, it funny how some of you quickly label a person anti vax or far right when they have a different view, its a free country mate and i dont need to be on your side.i am person who can think and have my own view.
So this smart man Bill Gates doesn't believe in giving developing countries a chance to advance in the field of vaccine development in fear of bad vaccines being produced, well tell me are the vaccines available for COVID now the silver bullet? some people die from Covid vaccines so what does that tell you? they need improvement,and who made them? Developed countries haha, funny isn't it?
Yup Billionaires care so much about you and me lol.
Cannot solve the problem from the system that created it - the Industrial Revolutions'a inventors (capitalists) that accelerated the population from millions to billions & decimated the wildlife. Now the viruses & Covid have not much choice but to switch to humans from tastier wildlife.
The solution is to get out of consumerism & think about real life with collaboration & TRUST. Competition/individualism & free speech (as replacement for full democracy where the people rule - not money) is for narrow-minded animalistic adict$.
Capitalism is the problem. Communism is the solution.
"Communism is the solution"
Don’t you guys ever give up?
“Socialism has been tried 41 times in the last 100 years … and there are exactly 41 failures,” Whole Foods CEO John Mackey, author of “Conscious Capitalism.”
Capitalism is the greatest anti-poverty program ever devised!
Capitalism is not a perfect system.
But socialism has been an utter disaster everywhere it has been tried.
It leads to massive deprivation, chronic shortages and a greatly diminished standard of living.
Look south to Cuba and Venezuela to see a couple of real-time examples
Friedrich Hayek was right, trying to improve the world by inflicting your ideas on others does more harm than good.
CONSPICUOUS CONSERVATION
Too often the “debate” over the environment is about LOOKING GREEN rather tha BEING GREEN.
Witness, for example, “green” consumers willing to pay more for a car that looks like a hybrid instead of one that is inconspicuous!
“Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head.”
French Premier Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929)
Milton Friedman always said, watch how people vote with their feet - they choose capitalism over socialism every time!
Competition/individualism & free speech (as replacement for full democracy where the people rule - not money) is for narrow-minded animalistic adict$.
Take your NAZI ideology elsewhere, not welcome in this country !
this guy doesn't care about the world, he only cares about money. he is a pathetic individu who said poor countries shouldn't get COVID vaccine ip rights so he can help drug companies sell vaccines to poor countries.
Do you really think poor countries manufacturing their own vaccines is a good idea? Think of the outcomes
Also the IP that you’re talking about was given to Astra Zeneca because they made a non profit agreement to produce it. All they’ve gotten from it is that people don’t trust AZ even though the adverse effects are from the original IP and not production issues. How exactly do you feel Bill Gates helped them?
would you rather they live in a hut?
![[eBook] Free - How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and The Breakthroughs We Need @ Gatesnote](https://files.ozbargain.com.au/n/34/659434.jpg?h=f9d265d2)
@Gnostikos: Lockdowns. No contact.