Environment & Energy

One way to identify them is when they demonstrate contempt for science, defining reference to scientific literature as "propaganda" for instance.

Another "tell" is an inability to comprehend numbers, not only in scientific settings, but in economic settings. The squandering of trillion dollar sums of money on unsustainable solar and wind junk isn't merely "cutting in" on the construction of the only form of sustainable form of energy there is, nuclear energy, it's over ten times higher. In fact the useless and environmentally destructive solar and wind industry soak up more money than any other form of energy investment and yet produces trivial amounts of energy.

Now I recognize that antinukes, including the most dishonest fraction of that benighted class of energy vandals, the "I'm not an antinuke" antinukes, are disinterested in addressing fossil fuels, as the German antinuke's literally pyrrhic "victory" over nuclear sense demonstrates quite clearly and irrefutably, but were they interested they might wish to explain whence the copper, lithium, cobalt, dysprosium, nickel, neodymium might come to match the energy output from coal, or for that matter, gas.

They don't and they can't since they're handwavers with contempt for the environment, for humanity - in particular future generations- and as so readily displayed in the current case for science.

I've been at DU for 22 years listening to the anti-intellectual pablum of antinukes. In general they are always willing to demonstrate just how shallow their bourgeois affectations are. Thanks again for obviating as much.

I note that in the early days they claimed that if as much money as was spent on so called "renewable energy" as on nuclear, an energy nirvana would break out. Two decades later, here we are, with a collapsing atmosphere.