• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

What will it take to convince you of climate change?

mrmarklin said:
How much do you make? Be sure to include benefits, like retirement etc.

What are the sources of funding for your job?
Click to expand...

Sorry bud, when you start providing information rather than your snipes, I'll be happy to respond. That said, I work for an engineering firm and do not study climate change. I make decent money, albeit a lot less than the engineers I work for. Not one penny of my salary comes from grants. And while I have applied for grants and worked on projects funded by grants, the amount of money provided by those grants is certainly not a slush fund. I suggest you do some research on the subject :rofl :rofl :rofl.
 
Brokenlink said:
And you think that money is going directly to the scientists? Come on.
Click to expand...

I never said that, please review your reading comprehension skills.

Gabe said:
BZZZZZZZZZT!!!! WRONG-O!!!
https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-223

I read that as $790 million a year, not "billions."

And by the way, that "pork" is reaping massive benefits as renewable energy, battery technology and EVs become increasingly more important. Can you say the same for the hundreds of billions we squander on the most bloated military budget in the history of humanity? Or the trillions we'll spend just servicing the debt for that massive spending?

Where's your outrage about that?
Click to expand...

You honor the speaking points of any angry middle school child. Please behave like a rational adult or I will just stop trying to converse with you. Why on earth would I be talking about the military industrial complex in this thread? It is entirely irrelevant to these speaking points.

Enphase Energy, an American company, currently has a market cap of about $6b. First Solar, another American company has a market cap of about $5b. Neither is as big as Xinyi solar holdings in China.

Sunrun, a Solar company I will be having install about $35m in solar panels at multifamily properties in my portfolio over the next year or so, mostly in SoCal, has a market Cap of about $10b. Just about every single installation I will be doing is being boosted by subsidies from the State.

Solar is grossly inefficient, the entire industry exists for only 2 reasons. The very small sector of, "off the grid," survivalist nutters that have been chasing the tech since the cold war, and almost all the rest is a market invested in Climate Change dialogue.

To suggest that there is not a capitalist motive to pursue greening and that there is not high dollar motives for sustaining the argument is simply a dishonest approach to analysis.

mean dad said:
Yes, lots of money is spent on both sides. One side wants to continue and increase use of fossil fuels which have empirically been shown to cause harm to our ecosystem; while the other side wants to use renewable energy.

He'll need to provide evidence to support his outlandish claim of "the scientists" pulling six figure salaries to pencil-whip the numbers.
But he won't and instead will demand that we eDuCaTe oUrSeLvEs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and both are being driven by greedy economic motives at this point. I don't know about this overpaid scientist stuff, but there are certainly some high dollar investors and executives at play in green energy now.

Unfortunately, nobody in the U.S. wants to touch the best solution for Energy which is next gen nuclear plants, but they are just too efficient and don't offer the sexy marketing that fossil and sustainable models offer.
 
Last edited:
Eldritch said:
I would not go so far as to support the whole statement, but make no mistake, there is literally BILLIONS in wasteful Government funded pork tied up in the Climate Change economy, especially in the Green Energy sector.

There certainly is a lot of wealth being spread around in an economy based on climate change, ESPECIALLY in California.
Click to expand...

True but nowhere near the TRILLIONS invested in continuing the fossil fuel assets.

I have been active in both sides of this for most of my career. I interact at all levels from the scientists and engineers on both sides, with regulators and legislators, up to the enormously powerful low key family offices that hold all the key assets and think generationally.

The latter were had all of their assets in the fossil based economy until a few years ago. Then the tide started to turn.

Fist it was little things, like the escalating cost of insurance for weather impacted properties and facilities. Then it was the inability to insure their generational family summer compounds for fire risks. Around the same time, family holdings in alpine resorts and properties went upside down as the snow line retreated. Finally, the boomers controlling the family offices, started to realize that their kids and grandkids were increasing hostile to where their money came from.

20 years ago, raising capital for renewable energy projects was a very tough slog. Now if your project isn't demonstrably "ESG" you can pretty much forget it.

From where I sit, the big money (the same families funding climate denial), fully accept that climate change is real. A massive transfer of wealth from fossil to renewables is already underway. The reason they are pouring so much into climate denial, is to make sure they can unload their assets to suckers/bag holders.

As a student of history you know this is how it ever was. The golden rule has always been to follow the money and not to listen to what they preach.
 
OldMadBrit said:
True but nowhere near the TRILLIONS invested in continuing the fossil fuel assets.

I have been active in both sides of this for most of my career. I interact at all levels from the scientists and engineers on both sides, with regulators and legislators, up to the enormously powerful low key family offices that hold all the key assets and think generationally.

The latter were had all of their assets in the fossil based economy until a few years ago. Then the tide started to turn.

Fist it was little things, like the escalating cost of insurance for weather impacted properties and facilities. Then it was the inability to insure their generational family summer compounds for fire risks. Around the same time, family holdings in alpine resorts and properties went upside down as the snow line retreated. Finally, the boomers controlling the family offices, started to realize that their kids and grandkids were increasing hostile to where their money came from.

20 years ago, raising capital for renewable energy projects was a very tough slog. Now if your project isn't demonstrably "ESG" you can pretty much forget it.

From where I sit, the big money (the same families funding climate denial), fully accept that climate change is real. A massive transfer of wealth from fossil to renewables is already underway. The reason they are pouring so much into climate denial, is to make sure they can unload their assets to suckers/bag holders.

As a student of history you know this is how it ever was. The golden rule has always been to follow the money and not to listen to what they preach.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY yes, thank you, Sir.
 
OldMadBrit said:
True but nowhere near the TRILLIONS invested in continuing the fossil fuel assets.


From where I sit, the big money (the same families funding climate denial), fully accept that climate change is real. A massive transfer of wealth from fossil to renewables is already underway. The reason they are pouring so much into climate denial, is to make sure they can unload their assets to suckers/bag holders.
Click to expand...

Yes and yes. Especially the part about unloading their assets. :hail :applause
 
Eldritch said:
I never said that, please review your reading comprehension skills.



You honor the speaking points of any angry middle school child. Please behave like a rational adult or I will just stop trying to converse with you. Why on earth would I be talking about the military industrial complex in this thread? It is entirely irrelevant to these speaking points.

Enphase Energy, an American company, currently has a market cap of about $6b. First Solar, another American company has a market cap of about $5b. Neither is as big as Xinyi solar holdings in China.

Sunrun, a Solar company I will be having install about $35m in solar panels at multifamily properties in my portfolio over the next year or so, mostly in SoCal, has a market Cap of about $10b. Just about every single installation I will be doing is being boosted by subsidies from the State.

Solar is grossly inefficient, the entire industry exists for only 2 reasons. The very small sector of, "off the grid," survivalist nutters that have been chasing the tech since the cold war, and almost all the rest is a market invested in Climate Change dialogue.

To suggest that there is not a capitalist motive to pursue greening and that there is not high dollar motives for sustaining the argument is simply a dishonest approach to analysis.



Yeah, and both are being driven by greedy economic motives at this point. I don't know about this overpaid scientist stuff, but there are certainly some high dollar investors and executives at play in green energy now.

Unfortunately, nobody in the U.S. wants to touch the best solution for Energy which is next gen nuclear plants, but they are just too efficient and don't offer the sexy marketing that fossil and sustainable models offer.
Click to expand...

Hm. So "Rational adults" get to engage in ad hominem attacks? Ok.

I'll settle for just you responding to what I actually said in my post instead of adding straw man to ad hominem. YOU wrote that there's "literally billions" (as opposed to figurative billions? Or Monopoly-money billions? Or blue-chip stamps billions? I associate abuse of the word "literally" with middle-schoolers trying to sound sophisticated, but whatever) in government-funded investment, but I showed you solid evidence that the real number is likely far less, maybe not even a billion a year, and then you "won" that argument by citing the market value of some private companies. Ok.
 
The real problem I have with the climate change bullshit is that presumably rational people want to use my taxes to subsidize the green industry.

Every solar panel, every wind machine, every drop of ethanol, etc etc is subsidized by tax dollars. I resent that. None of the so called green industry would exist without those subsidies. Crony capitalism at its finest. Of course old line capitalists want in on it. I would too.

So and until I’m presented with something more than shaky computer modeling and bullshit data gathering I’ll stay a skeptic. :rolleyes
 
Brokenlink said:
Sorry bud, when you start providing information rather than your snipes, I'll be happy to respond. That said, I work for an engineering firm and do not study climate change. I make decent money, albeit a lot less than the engineers I work for. Not one penny of my salary comes from grants. And while I have applied for grants and worked on projects funded by grants, the amount of money provided by those grants is certainly not a slush fund. I suggest you do some research on the subject :rofl :rofl :rofl.
Click to expand...

I’d love to provide you a lot of information, but the reality is there isn’t any. All the statistical models rely on data gathering that is shaky at best. And is constantly modified and “corrected “ by the analysts. You said it yourself. One can Google all kinds of statistics to prove one’s point. Both sides.
Engineers, in my experience tend to be very exact types. But there’s nothing at all exact in so called climate science. :wow
 
Gabe said:
Hm. So "Rational adults" get to engage in ad hominem attacks? Ok.

I'll settle for just you responding to what I actually said in my post instead of adding straw man to ad hominem. YOU wrote that there's "literally billions" (as opposed to figurative billions? Or Monopoly-money billions? Or blue-chip stamps billions? I associate abuse of the word "literally" with middle-schoolers trying to sound sophisticated, but whatever) in government-funded investment, but I showed you solid evidence that the real number is likely far less, maybe not even a billion a year, and then you "won" that argument by citing the market value of some private companies. Ok.
Click to expand...

I will treat kind in kind, yes. You come in ranting nonsense, I will treat you as a person behaving irrationally. I always allow others to set the terms, any challenge I take from you, you will lose. Always, every time.

Your reading of that report is utter nonsense.

Did you even read it?

https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-223

From your link, your report:

Since 1993, OMB has reported over $154 billion in funding for federal climate change activities, spread across the government—raising questions about fragmentation, overlap, or duplication.
Click to expand...

How much does the federal government really spend on climate change programs?

According to Office of Management and Budget reports, federal climate change funding was $13.2 billion across 19 agencies in 2017.
Click to expand...

In its reports to Congress, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reported that annual federal climate change funding increased by $4.4 billion from fiscal years 2010 through 2017
Click to expand...

In light of this fact clearly showing you are wrong, what is worse is that you even suggested that this report was somehow comprehensive as it surveys only federal spending.

To further show how unbearably ignorant you are of that which you pretend to know, feel free to review this article on funding from programs from just the state of CA. Only one State.

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ca...efficiency-funding-to-electrification/560096/

Here is another fun one about $830m in funding just in CA, JUST for Battery Systems through the SGIP program. https://www.greentechmedia.com/arti...le-over-budgets-for-backup-battery-incentives

Here is another program funded with $1b over 10 years ONLY in CA, ONLY for Solar Panels restricted to builds on Multifamily Low Income Restricted Housing https://calsomah.org/waitlist

I came in, because the piling on MrMarklin was uncivil, poor community, and unnecessary. I addressed my weak support of his case in the most civil manner possible, and your hysterical and childish response has leveraged my obligation to expose your inferiority.

I find it distasteful. By all means, own your mistakes, return to civil discourse and let us continue to discuss in a respectful fashion as gentleman should, even with those whom they do not agree or see eye to eye.
 
Last edited:
mrmarklin said:
The real problem I have with the climate change bullshit is that presumably rational people want to use my taxes to subsidize the green industry.

Every solar panel, every wind machine, every drop of ethanol, etc etc is subsidized by tax dollars. I resent that. None of the so called green industry would exist without those subsidies. Crony capitalism at its finest. Of course old line capitalists want in on it. I would too.

So and until I’m presented with something more than shaky computer modeling and bullshit data gathering I’ll stay a skeptic. :rolleyes
Click to expand...

Do you have a problem with them using your tax dollars to subsidize the fossil fuel industry?
 
mrmarklin said:
The real problem I have with the climate change bullshit is that presumably rational people want to use my taxes to subsidize the green industry.

Every solar panel, every wind machine, every drop of ethanol, etc etc is subsidized by tax dollars. I resent that. None of the so called green industry would exist without those subsidies. Crony capitalism at its finest. Of course old line capitalists want in on it. I would too.

So and until I’m presented with something more than shaky computer modeling and bullshit data gathering I’ll stay a skeptic. :rolleyes
Click to expand...

:rofl
What a load of selective crap.
How much of your tax dollars do you think subsidizes fossil fuel?
Over here crying about two bucks going to green energy when three hundred is going to fucking gas and oil corporations.

sHoW mE mOrE
 
mrmarklin said:
NYT. Yeah, that's credible!:rofl

Seems like they cited some six figure salaries in Fly over States no less........
Click to expand...
Says the guy who posts a site that is way out in the lunatic fringe as a source. :rofl

Somehow the word 'real' in front of 'Climate Science' somehow makes it valid! :laughing

You really have to search for your confirmation bias...way out in the lunatic fringes.
 
Last edited:
mrmarklin said:
The real problem I have with the climate change bullshit is that presumably rational people want to use my taxes to subsidize the green industry.

Every solar panel, every wind machine, every drop of ethanol, etc etc is subsidized by tax dollars. I resent that. None of the so called green industry would exist without those subsidies. Crony capitalism at its finest. Of course old line capitalists want in on it. I would too.

So and until I’m presented with something more than shaky computer modeling and bullshit data gathering I’ll stay a skeptic. :rolleyes
Click to expand...

Of all the stupid shit your tax dollars subsidize, green energy is really your biggest concern? :wtf
 
Just curious if after well over a thousand posts in this thread has anyone actually changed their minds?
 
Eldritch said:
I will treat kind in kind, yes. You come in ranting nonsense, I will treat you as a person behaving irrationally. I always allow others to set the terms, any challenge I take from you, you will lose. Always, every time.

Your reading of that report is utter nonsense.

Did you even read it?

https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-223

From your link, your report:







In light of this fact clearly showing you are wrong, what is worse is that you even suggested that this report was somehow comprehensive as it surveys only federal spending.

To further show how unbearably ignorant you are of that which you pretend to know, feel free to review this article on funding from programs from just the state of CA. Only one State.

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ca...efficiency-funding-to-electrification/560096/

Here is another fun one about $830m in funding just in CA, JUST for Battery Systems through the SGIP program. https://www.greentechmedia.com/arti...le-over-budgets-for-backup-battery-incentives

Here is another program funded with $1b over 10 years ONLY in CA, ONLY for Solar Panels restricted to builds on Multifamily Low Income Restricted Housing https://calsomah.org/waitlist

I came in, because the piling on MrMarklin was uncivil, poor community, and unnecessary. I addressed my weak support of his case in the most civil manner possible, and your hysterical and childish response has leveraged my obligation to expose your inferiority.

I find it distasteful. By all means, own your mistakes, return to civil discourse and let us continue to discuss in a respectful fashion as gentleman should, even with those whom they do not agree or see eye to eye.
Click to expand...


No point arguing with you, as I am ignorant, rant nonsense and am irrational. If only we could all be more like you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top