Comments by "Solo Renegade" (@SoloRenegade) on "Sabine Hossenfelder" channel.

  1. "S", because "A" and "a" were already taken? A=area a=acceleration Probably not, but worth a shot. Also, there are language differences going on among scientists back then.
    1
  2. the only true science values honesty
    1
  3. Not only does Gasoline outperform hydrogen in weight/volume, it outperforms Lithium too. If you don't compare it to lithium, then this complaint against hydrogen is invalid. lithium electric cars are heavier than gasoline cars too, and I don't hear you complaining about lithium. Not a valid criticism of hydrogen EV. hydrogen suffers from a lack of supporting infrastructure, but is better than batteries for aircraft and cold climates. More people would buy them if there were actually hydrogen filling stations.
    1
  4. Quantum computing was always snake oil to begin with. Nobody in the supercomputing industry takes Quantum computing research seriously. Nobody even talks about it. But everyone has been investing heavily into AI for years now.
    1
  5. We don't NEED Dark Energy, people who've invested their entire identity/career into failed theories WANT Dark Energy.
    1
  6. genetics is not a major factor. all you have to do is look at historical people to see that.
    1
  7. quantum computing is vaporware
    1
  8.  @rusty6172  nope, we have documented proof. Obama's own climate advisor was on a National Geographic TV show in teh 1970s advocating the US and USSR nuke the polar ice caps to melt the ice and stave off an ice age. We have doom predictions in newspapers going all the way back to teh dawn of the Industrial revolution and the use of steam/coal power. We have decades of doom predictions by "climate scientists" and alarmists about Fiji being underwater, about famines, about ice ages, about extreme weather, no more snow, etc. and they have never come true in over 200yrs of trying to predict it. None of Greta's nor Al Gore's predictions have come true, nor have any climate model predictions come to pass as they've all vastly overestimated. " MIT's models predicted the world would end in 16 years so you should still be open ears if your reasoning goes the way you say" wow, that is a stupid statement. So they are demonstrably untrustworthy and wrong, but you see that as confirming evidence they are right and that you should listen to them anyways? I have a bridge I want to sell you, let me know if you're interested.
    1
  9.  @russmarkham2197  there is no existential threat, and it is slowing down if anything. you've been lied to, and no real science supports the lies they are feeding you.
    1
  10. rounded edges is already well understood by engineers.
    1
  11. "Boy Who Cried Wolf" is a cautionary tale for a reason.
    1
  12. I'd argue F=ma is still more famous than E=mc^2 E=mc^2 does get put on random posters and such though, making it seen more often visually. But more people are probably familiar with F=ma as they are actually taught that one and how to use it.
    1
  13.  @voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885  you first...
    1
  14. In years past I used to enjoy reading science magazines, now I haven't read but maybe a handful of articles in recent years. I think this is due to a number of factors. 1) I know more about science than I used to and can recognize BS or bad articles, or I just already know the topic the article is about. 2) better writers are retiring and being replaced by worse writers. lots of bot written content, gimmicks, sensationalism, click bait, some writers who don't seem to have a clue what they are talking about, etc. 3) articles are no pushing agendas, and they keep writing articles about the same stuff over and over again rather than discussing all the new stuff. but this requires understanding and awareness of new developments. 4) lack of objectivity, failure to adhere to the core fundamentals of the scientific method. (sample size, placebo, data, double blinds, sample diversity, complicating factors, controlling for variables, etc.) 5) etc.
    1
  15. Methane is more potent perhaps, but the sun doesn't emit enough energy in our solar system to matter. Thus in the end it has even less effect on earth than CO2 would, and CO2 has far less effect than claimed due to logarithmic effect and saturation.
    1
  16. SMRs increase volumes, reduce time to bring online, can be more distributed
    1
  17. 17:40 banning drugs increases crime
    1
  18. and people claim video games will "rot your brain". Sabine proves otherwise.
    1
  19. And this is why people have a trust problem with scientists, just saying. They are as human and fallible (and some are even corrupt) as the rest of us. Mind you, I personally work in a cutting edge STEM field and have multiple STEM degrees too, and I still distrust many "scientists" and don't just take them at their word. I challenge my coworkers all the time to make sure they aren't making baseless claims or assumptions.
    1
  20. 17:00 climate change alarmists. They've made thousands of false predictions ever since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution. time and again they keep predicting the ice will melt, the snow will never return, the islands will flood, cities will be underwater, famine, droughts, etc. They've been wrong for 150yrs and yet people still listen to them and ignore the raw data and trust the manipulated climate models.
    1
  21. most Flat Earthers well know they are wrong. they are just either worthless people seeking attention and meaning in their life, or they are trolls. And then everyone falls for it and actually believes these people actually believe their own lies and get annoyed rather than just ignoring the Flat Earthers..
    1
  22. Coffee: mixed = disordered Loaf of brad: mixed = ordered the idea of order and disorder is not an objective one, and this is part of why I have quietly questioned the idea of entropy many times over the years. it depends upon perspective. That, and teh question of, how did the universe Get to be at a state of low entropy such that we can now increase in entropy? Something had to cause it to be high in the first place. We can take dirt, and refine it into steel, then it rusts and gets mixed with other materials and thrown away. then we refine it once again into steel in a process called recycling.
    1
  23. 12:12 this is also Exactly how climate models are created too. yet you totally ignore all the scientific fraud going on in climate predictions.
    1
  24. earth has had CO2 levels 1 order of magnitude higher than now without destroying life.
    1
  25. in the 70s they advocated nuking the ice caps to ward off an ice age..............
    1
  26. ok, so basically Quantum Mechanics is wrong. FAR too many assumptions are required. They need to start proving a LOT of these assumptions FIRST before they can start making up baseless theories based upon them. They are getting ahead of themselves, resulting in abject failures in their "theories".
    1
  27. anyone who claims to be about the environment that opposes nuclear power is a fraud.
    1
  28. in the 70s they advocated nuking the ice caps to ward off an ice age..............
    1
  29.  @UteChewb  but when you fear the wrong things, it ruins your life.
    1
  30.  @Alfred-Neuman  we will not reach 15bil, not even close. We're topping out at 9-10bil. meanwhile we already have more than enough food capacity to feed the world 2x over, and as CO2 rises, so do crop yields per acre. If the entire global population stood 2ft apart, everyone could fit easily inside and area of land smaller than England.
    1
  31.  @Alfred-Neuman  yes, 9-10B. this has been modelled and predicted for decades now. many good lectures on youtube explaining the math, including using visuals. Nearly all countries are below replacement levels, including China, US, European nations, etc. Russia is in teh process of killing off millions of people. China's population in general was found to be overestimated by something like 300mil people. Only places like africa are growing in population. but it takes time for the population to age out, so it appears to still be going up when it's just a bubble. You have to understand how population growth/decline works.
    1
  32.  @Alfred-Neuman  yes, it is already slowing. still climbing but slowing. do some research.
    1
  33.  @Alfred-Neuman  yes, but only places like Africa are still growing, poor nations. all wealthy nations are below replacement levels.
    1
  34.  @Alfred-Neuman  it's not comfort, it's necessity. Vegan is the luxury, not meat eating. Meat eating is necessary. Travel and transport is necessary. Be the change you want to see in the world. so how about living the tough lifestyle you demand we all live? Why wait, start now. But don't you dare use anything that comes to your city by semi, delivery truck, airplane, ship, railroad, etc. anything that required a vehicle is off limits to your ideology. see how long you last.....
    1
  35.  @AGWUK  that is assuming you are surrounded by wolves, which you're not, and that you haven't cried wolf too many times before hand, which you have. At this point I want the wolves to eat you, so even if you cried wolf, and it was legit, I'd just watch them eat you so I never have to listen to you again.
    1
  36. Dark Matter = God Dark Matter is a fiction invented to plug a hole in a failed hypothesis. And rather than proposing a new hypothesis, people continue to try (and fail) to find evidence of God to make their false hypothesis true. Dark Matter =/= Science Dark Matter = anti-science
    1
  37. none of those things are happening, nor will happen, unless communists take over.
    1
  38. i don't expect you to have an agenda, I expect you to follow the logical science. CO2 has a logarithmic effect on temps. We don't have historical global temp data required to make the claims they make. ALL of the climate models keep overestimating actual temps. NASA and NOAA are unscientifically manipulating the temp data to show warming, the raw data and historical data does not show this, and NASA/NOAA do not explain how they're making these temp "corrections" nor why.Also, modern reported temp data is subject to Heat Island effect, and many temps are then "reported" not by actual stations, but by interpolation from those heat island stations. Rural stations and satellite data shows no warming to be concerned with. In 2019 the IPCC published a paper admitting that even if all of the Paris climate targets had been magically achieved by all nations, it would only reduce temps by 0.1C by the year 2100, showing just how little effect humans are having. Higher CO2 is regreening the planet faster than any/all human efforts in history, according to a NASA paper using their satellite data. CO2 improves plant growth and makes plants more water efficient, thus enabling them to grow in drought/desert regions again, and sequestering CO2 once again. follow the science, not politicians and "scientists" with agendas. You may not have an agenda, but the people you blindly trust DO have an agenda.
    1
  39.  @Diamond_Tiara  you clearly didn't comprehend my comment. But since you're French I'll give you a break since english is clearly not your first language. 30C DELTA I've been through 120-147F for weeks on end (not sure what that converts to in C off the top of my head) and worked in up to 160F temps for hours on end. I've lived in hot and cold climates. And where I live now we've had unusually cold winters 3 out of the past 4 yrs in a row. and this winter was average, but less snow than usual due to warm air currents due to an el nino year.
    1
  40.  @k.h.6991  one warm summer =/= climate change. temps have actually been cooling off since 2012. the only places heating up are urban cities with no trees. the temp sensors are in heat island effect or being averaged with good stations, dragging the averages up artificially. rural regions like forests are no hotter than 100yrs ago. CO2 does not drive temp change. And it is know and proven scientific fact that CO2 has a logarithmic effect on temps. the more you add, the less impact i has. It took 200ppm of CO2 to raise temps at most 1C. now it will take another 400ppm to get it o increase another 1C. And then it will take another 800ppm to raise 1C more. and then it will take 1600ppm increase to raise another 1C. 400ppm +400PPM = 800ppm (giving 2C rise total) 800ppm + 800 ppm = 1600ppm (giving 3C rise total, this is still within yearly variations of temps throughout the seasons people wont even notice this much warming) 1600ppm + 1600ppm = 3200pp (for 4C total rise) CO2 changes stomata levels in plants making them more water efficient and drought resistant, and regreening deserts. Plants prefer CO2 levels at 1200ppm or greater for optimal growth. We started at 200ppm. If we had dropped below 150-180ppm all plant life other than grasses would cease to exist, and all the animals that depend upon those plants would have gone extinct. We were on the verge of extinction at 200ppm of CO2. during the Cambrian explosion (greatest diversity of plant and animal life) CO2 was at 4000ppm. Life thrived at those levels. Global average sea levels are not rising at all. in some places it is rising, and other places it is falling, this is due to plate tectonics, something you should have learned about as a child. But when you add up all rise/fall along every coast in the world, overall they average out to zero net rise. hurricanes, forest fires, and tornados are at a record low in history for frequency and intensity. Crop yields are increasing year over year with rising CO2.
    1
  41. voodoo science at this point.
    1
  42. just listing a bunch of catchy talking points doesn't make you right. none of this proves CO2 is causing warming.
    1
  43. CO2 is not the evil silver bullet controlling climate like simpletons believe. Higher CO2 also has tons of environmental benefits. For example, reducing stomata levels in plants making them more water efficient and drought tolerant, increasing plant growth (size and rate), etc. The great explosions of plant/animal life on earth occurred with far higher CO2 levels.
    1
  44. Quantum computing was always snake oil to begin with. Nobody in the supercomputing industry takes Quantum computing research seriously. Nobody even talks about it. But everyone has been investing heavily into AI for years now.
    1
  45. you're not going to make Mars like earth, but even living in domes, having the atmosphere at 20% of earths, and -50C, with an artificial magnetosphere is better than what it is at now. And living on Mars is arguably safer and easier than living on a space station. Iterative improvements over time add up.
    1
  46. pre-industrial average? based upon what data? looks like the current temps are near the data average. some years are hot, some cool. so what's the issue?
    1
  47.  @michaelsommers2356  did I claim it was? Attention to detail.
    1
  48.  @michaelsommers2356  it was very clear that I never said nor claimed that. you're failure to stop projecting your thoughts onto others is your own problem. e.g. Are you a communist? because you didn't make it very clear in your comment that you weren't one. See how stupid that is? Again, attention to details, and not reading into things that aren't there, is a critical skill in science.
    1
  49.  @michaelsommers2356  "You clearly implied that the major, if not the sole, cause of quantum uncertainty was the effects of the measurement process itself. Any competent reader would understand that that is what you meant." I said no such thing. Quote me where I claimed that. You're projection and reading into things wont change that. "You obviously have only one goal now: to explain away your misunderstanding of the UP. " nope, my only goal is to refute your lies about what was, and was not, said. you don't get to reinterpret another person's words and tell another person what they meant to say. That's known as the Fallacy of Speculation, or "mind reading".
    1
  50. Anyone who fears pseudoscience, is not a scientist.
    1