The narrative of climate change as we're being told isn't science. They've made shitloads of predictions and they've never materialized. They've claimed for 30 years we have 10 years before we can never reverse it.. every 10 years they say we have 10 years to reverse it. None of their models work. Nothing they predict happens. Now they're threatening to jail people for disagreeing with the established narrative. No matter how wrong they turn out to be they've never been more sure they're correct. At that point its not science.. its a religion.

I wonder what it would take to change the name of the USA.
I literally have no idea if that idea has been legit discussed before

jesus fucking christ

Which power source releases the most toxins in the enviroment? Any guesses?

why does everything on the internet have to be a goddamn dick measuring argument on the internet?

If they'd been able to get you fired, they'd make sure you never get hired anywhere else for the rest of your life, wait until you're broke and homeless, and then stalk you to find out which shelter you're staying in and get you kicked out for being a Nazi

forget I even fucking spoke up in here.

Because it’s the internet

No one is dick measuring, feel free to speak your mind

Sorry wrong one

first day on the internet @killall9firefox ?

Seems to be a free for all here

Solar is the most damaging and destructive power (Photo-electric) the matereial in it is horrible

no, just a little pissy given the situation

what's the situation?

https://i.imgur.com/n5ATZyV.jpg

ah

yeah, that's gay af

:/

I hate how the pro-alt transportation/urbanist type groups are dominated by left politics like that.

Which is heavier a kg of feathers or a kg of steel

they're both the same

lol oh god

one is denser than the other

Pretty sure we've moved on from photoelectric to photovoltaic (not sure on that spelling)

^

Well he is an ass Killall

you're right

No the steel is heavier steel is heavier than feathers

a lot of the research is in organic squaraines (spelling?). they absorb more of the UV spectrum and convert it into electricity

https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2015/ta/c5ta01879j#!divAbstract

@taekahn those are the same, the other solar is "Solar-hydro" where your roof boxes heat water pipes. It is the rare earth elements in them that turn light to power that are toxic as hell

I like riding a bike and don't need a car, so I sold it and generally lean towards better (as in less car-dominant) road infrastructure

Breaking any current Photo-electric cells requires a hazmat response

but then you get people like seen in the screenshot

Until they figure out storage of solar energy i don't think its going to replace nuclear or fossil fuels for electricity

@Khanclansith she, unsurprisingly

And we should be suprised that the Dems banned research into Recycled Fuel Reactors to further reuse our nuclear waste so it sits around at power plants.

no

I thought they were different. Not gonna google it, cause its not really important to me

the only difference with the dems is that they lie and act interested, but largely aren't.