@livingston started this thread - How much energy powers a good life? Less than you're using, says a new report . Quite an admission by the "Green Agenda" terrorists.
(Starting a new thread because I didn't want to step on his thread with my usual verbosity.)
Was thinking a bit about this propaganda and, it may be a stretch, but, is this a tacit admission by proponents of the "Green Agenda", considering all its bellicose bullshit over the years, that said "Green Agenda" is, and always has been, in fact, complete and utter bullshit?
The above article essentially says that in enigmatic and obscure language.
Personally, I doubt any of the "head morons" of the "Green Agenda" cult believed it had any chance of success. Thus, it was a fraudulent construct to milk money out of people, via taxes, in one aspect, but the more insidious aspect is the use of this fabricated voo-doo bullshit to control people.
Limiting how much energy you can "have" in a set time frame is a very controlling measure.
In point of fact, IIRC, it was @livingston or @tirwin1 who stated in another thread, that this was a means to force people from rural settings into the cities, where control is much more easily done.
Add in a central bank-defined digital currency, along with the abolition of cash and precious metals, and control is complete.
Thus, it was interesting to read a section of my Early Warning today where it mentioned a "scientist" at Columbia (first warning sign of danger) proposing a phenomenon called "energy drought".
What is an "energy drought"?
New study suggests renewables susceptible to ‘energy droughts’
Original article here - DEFINE_ME
"Research conducted by Upmanu Lall, a professor at Columbia Engineering and the Columbia Climate School, New York, shows that fluctuations in the elements involved in renewable energy systems could leave nations vulnerable to ‘energy droughts’.
Simply put, no two years on the planet are the same, and this includes the number of sunshine hours, wind (and therefore tidal) strength – key factors that dictate the efficiency and effectiveness of renewable power. As such, the new study, published in Patterns, suggests that alternative power sources will be needed to avoid ‘dry spells’ in energy supply."
So, all of a sudden, not only is there a push for "equity" in energy consumption, only expressed in electrical terms, but now there is another "study" that says that the 2 mainstays of "green energy" (solar and wind) can NOT supply the amount of energy these fuckwits said it would.
And why?
Because of the natural changes that any person with common sense can see and understand, without having to do a "...k-nearest neighbor space-time simulat[ion]...".
Somewhere on this forum, there was a thread about the fact that the earth's poles are moving. Indeed, they are...
It would follow that changes in the magnetic poles could have a myriad of effects, and none of them could be attributed to the use of petroleum or cow farts.
(Starting a new thread because I didn't want to step on his thread with my usual verbosity.)
Was thinking a bit about this propaganda and, it may be a stretch, but, is this a tacit admission by proponents of the "Green Agenda", considering all its bellicose bullshit over the years, that said "Green Agenda" is, and always has been, in fact, complete and utter bullshit?
The above article essentially says that in enigmatic and obscure language.
Personally, I doubt any of the "head morons" of the "Green Agenda" cult believed it had any chance of success. Thus, it was a fraudulent construct to milk money out of people, via taxes, in one aspect, but the more insidious aspect is the use of this fabricated voo-doo bullshit to control people.
Limiting how much energy you can "have" in a set time frame is a very controlling measure.
In point of fact, IIRC, it was @livingston or @tirwin1 who stated in another thread, that this was a means to force people from rural settings into the cities, where control is much more easily done.
Add in a central bank-defined digital currency, along with the abolition of cash and precious metals, and control is complete.
Thus, it was interesting to read a section of my Early Warning today where it mentioned a "scientist" at Columbia (first warning sign of danger) proposing a phenomenon called "energy drought".
What is an "energy drought"?
New study suggests renewables susceptible to ‘energy droughts’
Original article here - DEFINE_ME
"Research conducted by Upmanu Lall, a professor at Columbia Engineering and the Columbia Climate School, New York, shows that fluctuations in the elements involved in renewable energy systems could leave nations vulnerable to ‘energy droughts’.
Simply put, no two years on the planet are the same, and this includes the number of sunshine hours, wind (and therefore tidal) strength – key factors that dictate the efficiency and effectiveness of renewable power. As such, the new study, published in Patterns, suggests that alternative power sources will be needed to avoid ‘dry spells’ in energy supply."
So, all of a sudden, not only is there a push for "equity" in energy consumption, only expressed in electrical terms, but now there is another "study" that says that the 2 mainstays of "green energy" (solar and wind) can NOT supply the amount of energy these fuckwits said it would.
And why?
Because of the natural changes that any person with common sense can see and understand, without having to do a "...k-nearest neighbor space-time simulat[ion]...".
Somewhere on this forum, there was a thread about the fact that the earth's poles are moving. Indeed, they are...
It would follow that changes in the magnetic poles could have a myriad of effects, and none of them could be attributed to the use of petroleum or cow farts.