LDS Freedom Forum

In ancient times, priest learned about astronomy and knew how to predict eclipses and other heavenly phenomenon. Prior to an eclipse, they would tell the populace that God was angry, and when the eclipse occured they had the influence that they were able to offer up human sacrifice. In a sense they gained power and authority over the people by evoking fear about natural phenomena.

I wonder if this is not exactly what is happening with the climate change movement? The leaders of the movement surely know about solar cycles and the effects these cycles have on temperature. It is interesting that they have gone from predicting global warming to global freezing and back again multiple times over the past decades back to at least the late 19th century.

Just like those ancient priests, the blame is always said to be some misbehavior of mankind and the effect they are having on the environment. Recently, even the naturally occurring and vitally necessary substance carbon dioxide was categorized as a POLLUTANT. The foolishness that people will fall for in the name of following science!

The priests of climate change, who now have abandoned predictions of warming and cooling now simply warn of change. Thus, any short-term fluctuation of weather, which have been occurring since time immemorial, are proclaimed to be dire indications of man's destruction of the planet. Through their priests and priestesses, they demand that man must change (in the way that they prescribe) they seek to levy taxes based on our carbon footprint, demand that we drive supposedly “green” electric vehicles, curtail use of fossil fuels and depend as much as possible on wind and solar energy.

Wind and solar I believe in time MAY become viable, or at least lessen our reliance on fossil fuels. But as things currently stand, wind turbines require more fossil fuel to create than they ever save over the time that they are functional. The electricity to power electric vehicles is largely produced in coal burning power plants, and indeed when all is considered, they too are more damaging to the environment than the internal combustion engine. It becomes clear that the goal is not saving the environment, but simply the ability to exercise control over the people in the same way that the priests of the past did thru fear.

Yes, we should strive to be good stewards of this earth and leave a better world for our future generations. But we are also here to master and use the resources of this world to the benefit of all mankind. The environmental movement somehow financially benefits the very few, and those few are the very ones promoting their agenda
.
Nuclear energy has its problems such as disposing of the waste material created. But, at this time, nuclear appears to be the solution that could actually help make electric vehicles a viable alternative which could significantly reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. But the environmental movement has deemed it too harmful and too dangerous. Perhaps it would produce too much cheap energy which seems to be anathema to them. In fact, it seems they would like nothing more than to simply reduce the earth's population by 95% and return to a feudal lifestyle with of course them as our feudal lords and in the religious sense our saviors and our gods.

BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 9:34 am It came down to a choice between OPEC and OTEC, and we chose wrongly.

mes5464 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 10:05 am Study: World Has Less Than 10 Years of "Carbon Budget" Until Climate Catastrophe - The New American

Another day, another arbitrary deadline by which the world community must act to avoid the worst of global warming brought on by mankind’s carbon emissions.

Original_Intent wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 8:51 am I appreciate any feedback - both positive and negative.

Wind and solar I believe in time MAY become viable, or at least lessen our reliance on fossil fuels. But as things currently stand, wind turbines require more fossil fuel to create than they ever save over the time that they are functional. The electricity to power electric vehicles is largely produced in coal burning power plants, and indeed when all is considered, they too are more damaging to the environment than the internal combustion engine. It becomes clear that the goal is not saving the environment, but simply the ability to exercise control over the people in the same way that the priests of the past did thru fear.

Original_Intent wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 8:51 am I appreciate any feedback - both positive and negative.

Wind and solar I believe in time MAY become viable, or at least lessen our reliance on fossil fuels. But as things currently stand, wind turbines require more fossil fuel to create than they ever save over the time that they are functional. The electricity to power electric vehicles is largely produced in coal burning power plants, and indeed when all is considered, they too are more damaging to the environment than the internal combustion engine. It becomes clear that the goal is not saving the environment, but simply the ability to exercise control over the people in the same way that the priests of the past did thru fear.

Fred wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 11:46 am

Original_Intent wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 8:51 am I appreciate any feedback - both positive and negative.

Wind and solar I believe in time MAY become viable, or at least lessen our reliance on fossil fuels. But as things currently stand, wind turbines require more fossil fuel to create than they ever save over the time that they are functional. The electricity to power electric vehicles is largely produced in coal burning power plants, and indeed when all is considered, they too are more damaging to the environment than the internal combustion engine. It becomes clear that the goal is not saving the environment, but simply the ability to exercise control over the people in the same way that the priests of the past did thru fear.

You are incredibly uninformed about wind energy. The fossil fuels to build a wind turbine are no more than to create an alternator for your car. You keep thinking like a socialist trying to create power for a city. God has already given us more free energy than we could ever possibly use.

As for fossil fuels, there is no shortage. New oil is constantly being found as long as the evil prick in the white house allows it. Last I heard, the USA had more oil RESERVES than will be used in over 100 years at the expected rate of increased consumption over that time.

I might suggest you quit reading the journals of lies produced by prevaricators. Perhaps if you checked your faith in God, you would realize that He knew how many resources the earth project would take. To deny this is to deny God. Also, by the time 100 years goes by, if Jesus hasn't returned, we will be using something more star trek like instead. But let nature take it's course. Don't force it will illegal legislation. We already have 16,000 too many laws now.

Original_Intent wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 11:56 am

Fred wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 11:46 am

Original_Intent wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 8:51 am I appreciate any feedback - both positive and negative.

Wind and solar I believe in time MAY become viable, or at least lessen our reliance on fossil fuels. But as things currently stand, wind turbines require more fossil fuel to create than they ever save over the time that they are functional. The electricity to power electric vehicles is largely produced in coal burning power plants, and indeed when all is considered, they too are more damaging to the environment than the internal combustion engine. It becomes clear that the goal is not saving the environment, but simply the ability to exercise control over the people in the same way that the priests of the past did thru fear.

You are incredibly uninformed about wind energy. The fossil fuels to build a wind turbine are no more than to create an alternator for your car. You keep thinking like a socialist trying to create power for a city. God has already given us more free energy than we could ever possibly use.

As for fossil fuels, there is no shortage. New oil is constantly being found as long as the evil prick in the white house allows it. Last I heard, the USA had more oil RESERVES than will be used in over 100 years at the expected rate of increased consumption over that time.

I might suggest you quit reading the journals of lies produced by prevaricators. Perhaps if you checked your faith in God, you would realize that He knew how many resources the earth project would take. To deny this is to deny God. Also, by the time 100 years goes by, if Jesus hasn't returned, we will be using something more star trek like instead. But let nature take it's course. Don't force it will illegal legislation. We already have 16,000 too many laws now.

You raise some good points, point out some legitimate faults but in others I think you misread me. I am honestly all for wind and solar, hydro, whatever on a small scale for a family or even for a small community. It is the massive wind turbines that have such a terrible carbon footprint.

I am definitely interested in solar and have been my entire life. And again, putting some panels on your roof or wherever, and maybe even a Tesla battery for storage I think is fine. I am with you though (I think) that big wind and solar farms and the infrastructure to deliver it are a net loss.

I would be interested on your solar do you use passive, photovoltaic, other, or a combo? I think passive solar is greatly overlooked. I'd love more details on what you have found affordable and useful.

ajax wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 10:25 am Just curious, why the assumption that we need to lessen our reliance on fossil fuels?

Original_Intent wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 9:50 am

BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑March 25th, 2022, 9:34 am It came down to a choice between OPEC and OTEC, and we chose wrongly.

I had to look up OTEC, is it the Ocean Thermal Energy Capture? (Seems likely)