Mark Blyth, the economist who's making sense

Status
Not open for further replies.
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
Like I'd read any shit you idiots post.

Given up on the solar thing? Realized you're unequipped to debate it?
Click to expand...
Hmmmmmm. Willfully ignorant since he's clearly unwilling (unable?) to read any point of view other than that fed to him on his knees.

Then taunts because he's so woefully unqualified to have a conversation about solar power that he doesn't realize he's already been owned, used to wrap the fish and tossed out like yesterday's news.

You aren't worth my time any longer.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Hmmmmmm. Willfully ignorant since he's clearly unwilling (unable?) to read any point of view other than that fed to him on his knees.

Then taunts because he's so woefully unqualified to have a conversation about solar power that he doesn't realize he's already been owned, used to wrap the fish and tossed out like yesterday's news.

You aren't worth my time any longer.
Click to expand...
You think I got owned in that discussion?

You always give me a hearty laugh in the early hours.

Dog Kennels of Boundless Delusion...
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
No source just plagiarism in an attempt to look smart.

Fogdog is obviously gone soft on your retards, it's a shame he liked the copy/paste of a known psycho racist, I thought his judgement was better than that.
Click to expand...
It wasn't a fucking you-tube video thought guide, so there is that. Also, I agreed with the message. I only oppose what I disagree with, Sneeky. Just saying, save the vitriol for when it's appropriate.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Hmmmmmm. Willfully ignorant since he's clearly unwilling (unable?) to read any point of view other than that fed to him on his knees.

Then taunts because he's so woefully unqualified to have a conversation about solar power that he doesn't realize he's already been owned, used to wrap the fish and tossed out like yesterday's news.

You aren't worth my time any longer.
Click to expand...
LOL

You were the one who went on and on about how efficient Concentrated Solar Power is and missed why it isn't competitive with alternatives. Don't get excited, you didn't own anybody in that conversation.
 
mr sunshine

mr sunshine

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Hmmmmmm. Willfully ignorant since he's clearly unwilling (unable?) to read any point of view other than that fed to him on his knees.

Then taunts because he's so woefully unqualified to have a conversation about solar power that he doesn't realize he's already been owned, used to wrap the fish and tossed out like yesterday's news.

You aren't worth my time any longer.
Click to expand...
Why do you want to own everybody? Total control is just an illusion.....in fact, you can only control what people allow you to control, which defeats the purpose of control. You feel me dawg?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
mr sunshine said:
Why do you want to own everybody? Total control is just an illusion.....in fact, you can only control what people allow you to control, which defeats the purpose of control. You feel me dawg?
Click to expand...
You have it backwards. I don't want to control anyone, I want others to do controlling us.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
LOL

You were the one who went on and on about how efficient Concentrated Solar Power is and missed why it isn't competitive with alternatives. Don't get excited, you didn't own anybody in that conversation.
Click to expand...
I didn't miss anything.

You called The Scientific American magazine 'click bait' and have pointedly ignored the facility's ability to manufacture solar power at night using stored heat.

Stick to your keyboard and mouse, Stinkydigit.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I didn't miss anything.

You called The Scientific American magazine 'click bait' and have pointedly ignored the facility's ability to manufacture solar power at night using stored heat.

Stick to your keyboard and mouse, Stinkydigit.
Click to expand...
I said the article was from your Facebook timeline...

But it doesn't matter, you couldn't debate it from a physics/engineering standpoint and got rekt.

It was basically advertising a slightly improved yet old technology to try drum up support and sell it to rubes because PV and lithium battery storage has overtaken it by such a vast degree.

We've lithium cells now with 4400mAh and the $ per watt of PV is actually less than fossil fuels now.

But again, you don't actually know what you're talking about so you don't even know how impressive that is.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
I said the article was from your Facebook timeline...

But it doesn't matter, you couldn't debate it from a physics/engineering standpoint and got rekt.

It was basically advertising a slightly improved yet old technology to try drum up support and sell it to rubes because PV and lithium battery storage has overtaken it by such a vast degree.

We've lithium cells now with 4400mAh and the $ per watt of PV is actually less than fossil fuels now.

But again, you don't actually know what you're talking about so you don't even know how impressive that is.
Click to expand...
Your physics is weak and engineering unstable.

I know how well PV is doing. I don't think we need to put all of our eggs into one basket.

May the best tech win. In the early 1900s, electric vehicles were more common than gas powered cars. Gas took over because the tech was better at the time. That calculation may have shifted in cars, the jury is still out. The jury is back for power generation; solar and wind are better. To finish killing fossil fueled power we still need to generate electricity at night when the wind isn't blowing and this could be a viable option. That's why they built the molten sodium prototype.

Longer term, a former NASA engineer has put forward a plan to ring Yellowstone with geothermal power plants and generate electricity while reducing the threat of eruption. That's a plan worth doing, whatever it costs...
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Your physics is weak and engineering unstable.

I know how well PV is doing. I don't think we need to put all of our eggs into one basket.

May the best tech win. In the early 1900s, electric vehicles were more common than gas powered cars. Gas took over because the tech was better at the time. That calculation may have shifted in cars, the jury is still out. The jury is back for power generation; solar and wind are better. To finish killing fossil fueled power we still need to generate electricity at night when the wind isn't blowing and this could be a viable option. That's why they built the molten sodium prototype.

Longer term, a former NASA engineer has put forward a plan to ring Yellowstone with geothermal power plants and generate electricity while reducing the threat of eruption. That's a plan worth doing, whatever it costs...
Click to expand...
All of our eggs into one basket?

In engineering the most efficient solution is always the best solution, period.

"To some the glass is half empty, to others it is half full. But to the engineer the glass is twice the size it needs to be."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top