ronharmless
The far side
Senior Member
Joined: 12/15/2008
View Profile
 Offline
|
RambleOnNW wrote:ronharmless wrote:You’ve also posted peer reviewed studies that said masks prevented covid. Guess what. I guess science changes as time goes on and you learn more and more. Now to figure out if Pluto is really a planet as was the science for the last 90 years.
Pluto has not changed in the last 90 years. What has changed is that the classification system has changed as more similar planetoids like Pluto have been spotted by more powerful telescopes.
Some science is completely settled and no longer changes. Sure there is incremental engineering refinement but the basic science stands.
For example, Albert Einstein received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1921 for discovering and explaining the PhotoElectric Effect. 100 years later we have billions of solar panels utilizing that PhotoElectric effect worldwide. "What has changed is that the classification system has changed as more similar planetoids like Pluto have been spotted by more powerful telescopes."
Thank-you for making my point: As scientist learn more through the years, science evolves and changes what was once "settled science".
For the rest of ya'll, my post wasn't about masks and Pluto (masks and Pluto were used as examples of changing science), my post was about peer reviewed studies.
Can we get back on topic?
* This post was
last
edited 02/21/23 11:21am by ronharmless *
View edit history
|
RambleOnNW
Pacific Northwest
Senior Member
Joined: 08/06/2010
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
|
ronharmless wrote:RambleOnNW wrote:ronharmless wrote:You’ve also posted peer reviewed studies that said masks prevented covid. Guess what. I guess science changes as time goes on and you learn more and more. Now to figure out if Pluto is really a planet as was the science for the last 90 years.
Pluto has not changed in the last 90 years. What has changed is that the classification system has changed as more similar planetoids like Pluto have been spotted by more powerful telescopes.
Some science is completely settled and no longer changes. Sure there is incremental engineering refinement but the basic science stands.
For example, Albert Einstein received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1921 for discovering and explaining the PhotoElectric Effect. 100 years later we have billions of solar panels utilizing that PhotoElectric effect worldwide. "What has changed is that the classification system has changed as more similar planetoids like Pluto have been spotted by more powerful telescopes."
Thank-you for making my point: As scientist learn more through the years, science evolves and changes what was once "settled science".
For the rest of ya'll, my post wasn't about masks (masks were used as an examdple), my post was about peer reviewed studies regarding the eelctric grid. Can we get back on topic?
You ignored part 2. The understanding of the PhotoElectric effect has not changed in 100 years. The photoelectric effect is settled science.
Similarly the understanding that carbon dioxide traps heat in the atmosphere has not changed in 100 years. All that has happened since is refining the scientific predictions.
The grid? Convert electricity to green hydrogen and pipe through existing or re-lined natural gas pipelines. Don’t add more ugly power transmission towers. A single hydrogen pipeline can transmit 15 gigawatts, the same as 10 384 kV wire pairs.
* This post was
edited 02/21/23 11:36am by RambleOnNW *
|
3 tons
NV.
Senior Member
Joined: 03/13/2009
View Profile
Offline
|
“ You ignored part 2. The understanding of the PhotoElectric effect has not changed in 100 years. The photoelectric effect is settled science.”
Huh??… Really?…definition there’s no such thing as ‘settled science’ period - that phrase is a textbook oxymoron since the science is ‘never’ settled…
3 tons
|
RambleOnNW
Pacific Northwest
Senior Member
Joined: 08/06/2010
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
|
It is only in the minds of non-scientists that there is no settled science. Show me a change in the understanding of the photo-electric effect in the last 100 years.
Exxon scientists nailed their global warming predictions in the 1970’s. Dispute that.
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2........rch-accurately-predicted-climate-change/
|
RambleOnNW
Pacific Northwest
Senior Member
Joined: 08/06/2010
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
|
Scientists feel no need to debate non-scientists. Over and out.
|
|
|
MDKMDK
Free(er), for now, until the next "variant"
Senior Member
Joined: 10/15/2008
View Profile
|
Just got the announcement email from MB about the new eSprinter. NO mention in it anywhere about range or recharge time, so I did a search and found this. Looks pretty dire for someone considering it for commercial use, and worse for motorhome upfitters and their customers. Travel and camping within a few hundred miles of home might be the "new normal". Oh, goody!
https://www.mbvans.com/en/esprinter
Ultimately, we the people will get screwed, while the woke crowd bulldozes their way forward in search of their Utopian world.
Mike. Comments are anecdotal or personal opinions, and worth what you paid for them.
2018 (2017 Sprinter Cab Chassis) Navion24V + 2016 Wrangler JKU (sold @ ????)
2016 Sunstar 26HE, V10, 3V, 6 Speed (sold @ 4600 miles)
2002 Roadtrek C190P (sold @ 315,000kms)
|
dave54
Northeast CA.
Senior Member
Joined: 02/12/2004
View Profile
|
California's problem is not limited to EVs.
The state is also proposing to end heating homes with natural gas. Presumably electric heat will replace it.
The non-highway ICE engine ban.
The state wants all electric power produced in state. Currently about half.
The state wants all energy from renewable sources. Currently about a third.
The state just changed the solar panel net metering rules. This has effectively eliminated any financial incentive for homeowners to install panels on their existing homes.
The state is removing hydroelectric dams from the Klamath River, with more planned. These are old obsolete dams that no longer produced very much power, but they still produced some. That power will need to be replaced.
The only nuclear power plant is ending its life and will be decommissioned.
The state population is projected to increase 25% by 2050. Electric power demand will increase proportionately.
All combined, in the next 20 years California needs to at least triple its current in-state power production.
Very laudable goals taken individually. I doubt the state can meet all of them.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
So many campsites, so little time...
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
|
MEXICOWANDERER
las peñas, michoacan, mexico
Senior Member
Joined: 06/01/2007
View Profile
Offline
|
Final post in this quagmire.
If government were the least interested in chopping quadrillions in thermal transmissions they would offer incentives in developing vacuum panel insulation development with emphasis on durability. A one inch vacuum panel has the thermal qualities of many inches of fiberglass or closed cell foam. Can you imagine a motor vehicle sitting in 40°C sunlight and gaining 3° C interior heat? Yes the have AU coated (laminated) glass that along with vacuum panel insulation (wrecking yard recoverable) that can do all this with ease. 2,500 sq ft homes in August Phoenix or January Minneapolis with 200 kWh energy expenditures.
The above is low priority subject to tax exemptions so it is nauseatingly ignored. This leaves me disinterested to an almost unimaginative degree.
|
2oldman
NM
Senior Member
Joined: 04/15/2001
View Profile
Offline
|
propchef wrote:CO2 has risen more in the last 100 years under industrialization than in the last 5k years. There's a direct link, clear and undeniable. Science has no other plausible explanation other than our own Co2 emissions. Pretty simple.
|
3 tons
NV.
Senior Member
Joined: 03/13/2009
View Profile
Offline
|
To propchef:
Google search - huh?? (a tacit attempt to discredit the messenger??)…Ha, I must have hit an Eudite Ph.D gate-keepers ‘knowledge monopoly’ nerve - though I don’t know you, I’m more than happy to allow that your Ph.D is BIGGER than mine - lol…(Note, we are witnessing the institutionalized ‘death by salutations’ of common sense…)…
With an estimated 50% of so-called white papers reported to be fraudulent, why should anyone conclude a random ‘climate white’ paper does not represent a product of Gov’t funded ‘outcome based’ science product (University sanctioned scientism for grants), or would you claim that such fraudulent white papers don’t really exist?? (Please, Yes or No Sir…).
BTW, your claim that earth greening is the result of crops is merely one academic theory among others, so doesn’t meet the standard of a fact - truth is that we know very little about earths climate cause and effect, and in particular, the increased greening is occurring in the mid-arid regions - some climate humility might apply, eh? - and FWIW, be advised Sir that I do know the difference between carbon and carbon dioxide (duh!!)
Recent studies by the Universities of Finland and Japan state the the primary cause of global warming is due to the random propagation cosmic rays from distant sources (not sink liberated carbon dioxide), but curiously you’ve not mentioned this?
https://phys.org/news/2020-01-planet-greener-global.html
Either way, you Sir are allowed the prerogative to believe what you like…
3 tons
|
|
|
