Tesla gets sporty with new electric car, the Model 3

[CookinFlat6]

Liar liar, pants on fire

YOU ARE A LIAR LYING SPANKEE - TWIST AND SHOUT BABY

explain yourself moderator of

WoW! Such articulation! Such skill! No one debates better!

I had to pitch it at the lowest common denominator

Such glowing feedback means there is a lot to be said for dumbing down parts of a debate to garner a wider appreciation

[sagi58]

Liar liar, pants on fire

YOU ARE A LIAR LYING SPANKEE - TWIST AND SHOUT BABY

explain yourself moderator of

WoW! Such articulation! Such skill! No one debates better!

I had to pitch it at the lowest common denominator

Such glowing feedback means there is a lot to be said for dumbing down parts of a debate to garner a wider appreciation

I agree to such an extent that I actually bothered to make the comment in the first place!
I guess the smiley rolling its eyes didn't make the impression it was intended to!! Sigh...

[CookinFlat6]

Did you have anything to add to the electric car debate or do you want to wait till after you have finished the ad hominem stuff. take your time the thread is only 19 pages long, still time for you to actually add ANYTHING AT ALL beyond commenting on those paricipating

[spankyham]

I havent been blasé about people being used for slave labour, I haven't mentioned it

Exactly. Despite it being mentioned and graphic pictures displayed, yet you still haven't mentioned it.

But I did mention oragutans as did DD.

Again, exactly right, yet the topic has been raised of people working in slave labor and forced to live in contamination, yet as you say, you haven't mentioned it.

We should be protecting wildlife not making them extinct in the pursuit of biofuels I don't think that's being hypocritical.

I believe the greatest threat comes from the incredible dangers we will face from the use of nuclear energy in the generation of electric power. Closely followed by the carbon imbalance we have created. But I'm smart enough to be able to separate good sources of electric power generation versus nuclear. Biofuel is no different, there are good and not so good methods. I see the merit in algae and switch/perennial grasses because of the carbon negative aspects and they do not complete for arable lands. That is proven and supported by a mountain of research and scientific opinion.

Each time you charge a battery you are releasing carbon into the atmosphere from the power plant that generated the electricity, plus, putting everyone at risk of a Chernobyl/Fukushima/3Mile-Island disaster. That is a fact today and tomorrow.

[CookinFlat6]

I havent been blasé about people being used for slave labour, I haven't mentioned it

Exactly. Despite it being mentioned and graphic pictures displayed, yet you still haven't mentioned it.

Each time you charge a battery you are releasing carbon into the atmosphere from the power plant that generated the electricity, plus, putting everyone at risk of a Chernobyl/Fukushima/3Mile-Island disaster. That is a fact today and tomorrow.

your mobile phone batteries rare earth materials come from the same place, I didnt hear you mention those before, how hypocritical is that? RC didnt mention it neither did you, so you have just got spanked yet again

Do you have a mobile phone or a laptop?, stop embarrassing yourself, if you want to continue getting spanked by everyone you carry on with your lame lying

I see the merit in algae and switch/perennial grasses because of the carbon negative aspects and they do not complete for arable lands. That is proven and supported by a mountain of research and scientific opinion.

what about the huge quantities of nitrogen and phosporus required to do it on any scale at all?

give your arse a break

[Hammer278]

So he's gone back to ignoring the questions and answering RCs questions...which weren't really questions in the first place.

This guy is funny as f**k. Maybe he just answered your questions in the MIA lounge....ask WB to have a look see.

[spankyham]

I was positively salivating to get back online tonight. Part of me was a little sad thinking, well there is no way cookin could possibly say anything dumber - surely he reached the apogee of dumbness with "Plants extract and store carbon If we dont grab them to use the carbon remains extracted from the air"

So I explained basic high school science - that plants don't actually last forever, that they decompose, and carbon is indeed returned to the atmosphere. Anyone with an IQ greater than their shoe size would know it or could research that in minutes.

So, you can imagine my delight when I read, not 1, not 2, but the following 5 repetitions of cookin's magical disappearing carbon formula

it DOESNT END UP BACK IN THE AIR - thats the ecosystem, its used by other things etc

If we dont grab them to use the carbon remains extracted from the air

If we dont grab them to use the carbon remains extracted from the air

it DOESNT END UP BACK IN THE AIR - thats the ecosystem, its used by other things etc

If we dont grab them to use the carbon remains extracted from the air

I love that scientific "its used by other things etc"

On a serious note, quite a while ago in this thread, I did mention the dangers to the permafrost that has already melted and is continuing to melt. That covers thousands of years of frozen plant matter that will now decompose. This alone will release an ever increasing amount of carbon into the atmosphere (sorry cookin, it really does go into the atmosphere not your "other things etc"). So the simple fact is we have to find ways to go carbon negative. Biofuels like algae and switch/perennial grasses can do this. Also experiments like those of Sergei Zimov (I can almost see cookin scurrying off to try and find a way to discredit him and his team ) to try and prevent and, perhaps retreat the warming permafrost are IMO very important and should be understood and supported.

Of course practical methods of sequestration need to be found. We can't rely on something suddenly freezing or deeply burying a few trillion tons of carbon. There certainly are plenty of construction uses as well as char in farming which in turn helps another major contributor to GHG, farming whilst also aiding us find ways to feed an ever growing population of people and orangutans (hopefully).

[spankyham]

I'm not sure which statement is dumb or dumber. A gems like "it DOESNT END UP BACK IN THE AIR - thats the ecosystem, its used by other things etc" or the "that's right boss" afterwards

[Hammer278]

Hey spanked, thats nice of you to snap a a pic of your expression while writing that post. At least we got a face to your 3 accounts now.

[CookinFlat6]

Spankee you really think you can do any moderating when you have been proven to be a bare faced liar?

Your lied about algae not needing much nutrients when that is the biggest block to scaling algae up in any way at all, you can't plead ignorance because it was in the article you paid for.

You lied to us and you think you are still a moderator in anyway?

[stonemonkey]

Give it 20 years and we'll have fusion then we can use energy from that to synthesise hydrocarbons from seawater to run our ice's.

[CookinFlat6]

And in the meantime, lets continue paying the oil companies for oil to burn in our ICEs, mixed with moderator's magical algae that doesnt need nutrients and start REDUCING the carbon in the atmosphere 1 car journey at a time - yup, each time we drive with petrol in our ICEs we are gonna reduce the carbon in the air

[racechick]

I havent been blasé about people being used for slave labour, I haven't mentioned it

Exactly. Despite it being mentioned and graphic pictures displayed, yet you still haven't mentioned it.

But I did mention oragutans as did DD.

Again, exactly right, yet the topic has been raised of people working in slave labor and forced to live in contamination, yet as you say, you haven't mentioned it.

We should be protecting wildlife not making them extinct in the pursuit of biofuels I don't think that's being hypocritical.

I believe the greatest threat comes from the incredible dangers we will face from the use of nuclear energy in the generation of electric power. Closely followed by the carbon imbalance we have created. But I'm smart enough to be able to separate good sources of electric power generation versus nuclear. Biofuel is no different, there are good and not so good methods. I see the merit in algae and switch/perennial grasses because of the carbon negative aspects and they do not complete for arable lands. That is proven and supported by a mountain of research and scientific opinion.

Each time you charge a battery you are releasing carbon into the atmosphere from the power plant that generated the electricity, plus, putting everyone at risk of a Chernobyl/Fukushima/3Mile-Island disaster. That is a fact today and tomorrow.

Not mentioning slave labour does not mean I'm blasé about it. How do you arrive at that conclusion? Slave labour is a whole other bad situation, it happens in lots of places sadly where poor people are exploited. Why are you linking it solely to this discussion and then saying I'm blasé about it. I'm not blasé about it.

Orang utans I know a lot about and they have been specifically affected by biofuel production to the point of almost extinction, so I mentioned them.

[spankyham]

Spankee you really think you can do any moderating when you have been proven to be a bare faced liar?

Your lied about algae not needing much nutrients when that is the biggest block to scaling algae up in any way at all, you can't plead ignorance because it was in the article you paid for.

You lied to us and you think you are still a moderator in anyway?

Can't seem to make any points, don't want to have to deal with the questions raised, what to do?? Ah yes, lets resort to abuse

These lies you're referring to, would they be something like posting that "plants hold their carbon forever". Or would they be more like "when plants decompose they don't release carbon into the atmosphere". Perhaps you mean posts like nuclear disasters are nothing to fear? BTW how are tickets sales going for you and shadow on your eco tours to Chernobyl and Fukushima?

Of course I can't let this one slip - if you had actually read my posts and the articles I referenced you would know how silly it is to ask what food we would use primarily for algal growth. The answer is of course staring you in the face in every post.

[spankyham]

Not mentioning slave labour does not mean I'm blasé about it. How do you arrive at that conclusion?

The thread had discussed poor treatment of people and orangutans. I pointed out that you had commented on the orangutans but not the people.

Orang utans I know a lot about and they have been specifically affected by biofuel production to the point of almost extinction, so I mentioned them.

So you are claiming that the palm oil production from the 60's until today for food and glues had no impact on the orangutans but the relatively meager additional biofuel palmoil pushed them to the edge of extinction. That has zero credibility. Sounds to me more like a desperate attempt to discredit biofuels by trying to associate that destructive farming practice with biofuels.

What has happened to the orangutan, largely from the palm oil industry is terrible and cannot be justified. If we cannot treat them with respect we can't expect to learn how to respect humans. It disturbs me when some look at people in slave conditions forced to live in contamination zones and then make inhumane comments like, he's ok, he has a cigarette.