Given the thousands of comments made here weekly, I’ve decided to add a new feature to WUWT: Quote of the Week. It will be posted on Sundays.
A commenter on WUWT summed up Earth Hour in a succinct way:
I will be thinking about the 1.8 billion people on Earth who have no access to electricity, and how insane they must think we are.
From commenter “007” on the WUWT Poll: What are you going to do for “Earth Hour”? thread.
Anyone that wants to submit a better feature logo that the simple one I cobbled together above is certainly welcome to do so. – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I like the concept. It may improve some of the comments.
I would like to suggest a Question Of the Week. Every Monday post a question. Then the following monday re-post the question with the best answer.
Sample questions;
Peat and fossil fuels coal, oil, and natural gas contain carbon, where did the carbon come from?
Water vapor makes up 95% of the GHGs, why due the warmest temperatures on earth occur in the driest deserts where 95% of the GHGs are absent?
The answers would be infromative and stir up interest.
DLL: “DJ: Let’s see, $500/12 = $41.67 per month.
My electric bill per month averages $52 and I pay one of the higher rates in the country – $.18/KWH.
Either you have your house lit up like a Christmas tree or your paying something like $1.00 per KWH.”
Yes. In fact, at average US electric rates of 11.3 c/Kwh, and typical 65% savings for alternative bulbs, DJ would have to have had 275 11-watt bulbs lit from dusk to midnight every night of the year to save $500 annually. Hey, DJ, maybe buying the old Bijou Theater wasn’t such a hot idea, after all. Didn’t anybody show you where the marquee switch is?
I did not turn off the lights. I did take my family (5 people) to Florida for the weekend by airplane. Sorry we couldn’t swing the charter fee for a private plane.
Saturday night, we went out to dinner. We drove to the restaurant. I and Daughter #2, ordered the 30 oz. Tuscan Steak. My son joined in after he finished his cioppino. We drank beer.
I know it is not much, but we are doing what we can.
My nomination is JimB’s response to the rhetorical question below:
“Climate AGW Skeptic blinded by Cynicism and mistrust. Does it matter?”
Blinded! Oh no!
I thought it was just dark in here!”
Yes, it matters greatly.
How about web search of the week? Or, if I list it here, then it can be a quote from WUWT, right?
When you follow links from search engines, the target http server usually gets information that includes the search string, and some web site owners have low enough traffic so they can check daily. Like me. Here’s a good one from yesterday:
17:51:15 http://wermenh.com/climate/science.html
stakahama-wireless.dynamic.ucsd.edu
Science in The Age of Models: Is theory still relevant in climate research?
http://www.google.com/search?q=Science+in+The+Age+of+Models%3A+++++Is+theory+still+relevant+in+c…
The people who can most benefit from that page are typically not people who search for it. However, a lot of people have found it because I have a cartoon of the Leaning Tower of Pisa and Galileo’s experiment there. The previous reference for my page came from a search for “galileo and the leaning tower of pisa”. The next came from an image serach for “leaning tower of pisa drawing”. Piza works, even pizza works!
This innovation suggests another one: retroactively (after a month or so) assign one or two gold stars to outstanding posts in these threads. The purpose would not be to encourage posters to do better, although it might have that effect, but to make it easier for newcomers and journalists to skim the site, and for our side to highlight its better arguments and facts.
Star assignments could be made by people who have good judgment and lots of knowledge of the issues, like Pamela Gray, etc.
PS: I also nominate Lucy Skywalker for the job of star-giver.
What most alarmists don’t seem to fathom is that real people want balance in their decision/learning process. Balance arrives on the wings of debate.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/30/lindzen-on-negative-climate-feedback/#comment-109292
jorgekafkazar (16:45:54) :
DLL: “DJ: Let’s see, $500/12 = $41.67 per month.
My electric bill per month averages $52 and I pay one of the higher rates in the country – $.18/KWH.
Either you have your house lit up like a Christmas tree or your paying something like $1.00 per KWH.”
Yes. In fact, at average US electric rates of 11.3 c/Kwh, and typical 65% savings for alternative bulbs, DJ would have to have had 275 11-watt bulbs lit from dusk to midnight every night of the year to save $500 annually. Hey, DJ, maybe buying the old Bijou Theater wasn’t such a hot idea, after all. Didn’t anybody show you where the marquee switch is?
So the cognitive dissonance has extended this far, eh? Wow. I think this is called rationalization.
I have no idea what my electric bill is, but my overall utility bill (CO Springs aggregates it) is around $200/month. Since I live in CO, that means nearly 6 months of heating, however, which is all NG. In the summer we use the AC for July and August, and the electric bill spikes then, but I’d be willing to bet $500 a year is on the high side of my total electrical bill. Much of that is from the summer AC time, too. In order to save $500… hehe, riiiiiiight.
Mark
FYI I decided to use all the Quote of the Week art submissions, they will rotate
Anthony