Topic: US Town Rejects Solar Panels Because They May “Drain The Sun”... (Read 1823 times)
The cloud will drain or remove the sunlight more than the solar panel. More education is needed in the States.
December 19, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
It is a silly excuse but I think it masks the real reason - MONEY. Those townfolks and taxpayers just don´t see the monetary sense. It´s uncompetitive and therefore subsidized stuff which means corruption and graft in all likelihood, there are still some honest people out there which resent gravy-train politics.
December 19, 2015, 05:48:53 AM
I don't care about the retards who come up with these sort of silly excuses, after getting funds from OPEC to derail the renewable energy usage. That said, I have to remind everyone that solar energy is very expensive, at least when compared to the other renewable energy sources such as nuclear power and wind power. Also, the manufacturing of solar panels produce a lot of harmful waste.
December 18, 2015, 01:19:36 PM
The globe earth is a fake, a fraud and a farce.
You have a belief, a religion of sorts. You don't have a complete physics for flat earth. Nor do you have real, congruent theory. You have points.
Round earth has a whole working science and physics behind it, even though it has some mistakes.
So basically this thread was created to make fun of the absurd idea that solar panels will drain the sun. Clearly those responsible for this towns anti-solar policy don't actually believe this and have financial or political motivation.
The problem here is that the OP is throwing stones while living in glass house as his claimed beliefs regarding the sun are just as absurd and ridiculous. In fact the OP's situation is even worse as he a actually believes the earth is in motion around the sun and isn't just just pushing a political/financial agenda.
The problem here is that the OP is throwing stones while living in glass house as his claimed beliefs regarding the sun are just as absurd and ridiculous. In fact the OP's situation is even worse as he a actually believes the earth is in motion around the sun and isn't just just pushing a political/financial agenda.
This thread was meant to be an informational thread about what was going on in that town in North Carolina - see the original post.
December 18, 2015, 04:56:21 AM
So basically this thread was created to make fun of the absurd idea that solar panels will drain the sun. Clearly those responsible for this towns anti-solar policy don't actually believe this and have financial or political motivation.
The problem here is that the OP is throwing stones while living in glass house as his claimed beliefs regarding the sun are just as absurd and ridiculous. In fact the OP's situation is even worse as he a actually believes the earth is in motion around the sun and isn't just just pushing a political/financial agenda.
The problem here is that the OP is throwing stones while living in glass house as his claimed beliefs regarding the sun are just as absurd and ridiculous. In fact the OP's situation is even worse as he a actually believes the earth is in motion around the sun and isn't just just pushing a political/financial agenda.
December 18, 2015, 02:15:31 AM
The globe earth is a fake, a fraud and a farce.
December 17, 2015, 11:18:18 PM
The blue light you see in that reactor underwater is called "Cherenkov radiation" and it's caused by charged particles breaking the light barrier; an illuminated sonic boom so-to-speak.
Allow me to quote:
Quote
"While electrodynamics holds that the speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant (c), the speed at which light propagates in a material may be significantly less than c. For example, the speed of the propagation of light in water is only 0.75c. Matter can be accelerated beyond this speed (although still to less than c) during nuclear reactions and in particle accelerators. Cherenkov radiation results when a charged particle, most commonly an electron, travels through a dielectric (electrically polarizable) medium with a speed greater than that at which light would otherwise propagate in the same medium."
image
image
Look. It's as simple as this.
At ground level, round earth science looks very similar to flat earth science. But they are not the same. How can you tell? One is about round earth. The other is about flat earth.
Round earth science has flaws in it that need correcting to make it work right.
Flat earth barely has any known science at all.
We all know what round earth science is about, because we have been taught it in schools and by the media for ages. Many of us know that round earth science has flaws that need correcting.
What is flat earth science about? Is there simply a flat earth that extends infinitely in all directions with a sky above it? Where is the science that shows it all as a unit? This science is different than round earth science.
You are not going to get the right results when you apply round earth science to a flat earth universe.
December 17, 2015, 10:28:04 AM
I acknowledge that we live in an imperfect world it's you that's in denial. You're materialist views are a fallacy, Plato despite being a flat-headed goldbricking scumbag is correct in regards to the subjective nature of the universe. You obviously didn't pay attention during theology class.
This being the case it looks like you need some spoon-feeding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms
A simple, basic word for theory is fiction.
Speed of light is a constant here on earth according to observations here on earth.
Speed of light in space as we understand it is based on the operation of the universe as standard physics sees the universe.
Speed of light in space when based on flat earth physics is different than what it is based on standard physics, just as flat earth is different from round earth.
The blue light you see in that reactor underwater is called "Cherenkov radiation" and it's caused by charged particles breaking the light barrier; an illuminated sonic boom so-to-speak.
Allow me to quote:
Quote
"While electrodynamics holds that the speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant (c), the speed at which light propagates in a material may be significantly less than c. For example, the speed of the propagation of light in water is only 0.75c. Matter can be accelerated beyond this speed (although still to less than c) during nuclear reactions and in particle accelerators. Cherenkov radiation results when a charged particle, most commonly an electron, travels through a dielectric (electrically polarizable) medium with a speed greater than that at which light would otherwise propagate in the same medium."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation
December 17, 2015, 10:23:59 AM
Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
it´s still microscopic.
image
it´s still microscopic.
image
The point isn't the amount of usage. The point is the companies that are doing it.
Sure, it´s pretty meaningless in itself because it simply isn´t competitive in the market which is why it has about zero market share. If that´s what you´re saying I agree.
Are you trying to say that these companies succeed because they are not doing something competitive? Why would you think they are going to all the trouble of installing solar if it didn't work? It works. They are proving it. And many of them are looking to the future when solar will be even more competitive.
Since it´s so uncompetitive (as evidenced by about zero% market share) I guess subsidies from Taxpayers had something to do with those companies installing it.
But now that it there, as the price of electricity goes up, they will be paying the same amount... approximately zero.
When people start to understand this, the market will be there. It takes visionaries to see what is coming.
Why would the price of electricity go up? Fossil fuels are dirt cheap, nuclear and hydro plants all over are pretty much written off it´s totally a buyer´s market.
Maybe the price won't go up. But that isn't the rule of thumb for much of anything. Solar can bring the price down.
December 17, 2015, 10:15:43 AM
Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
it´s still microscopic.
image
it´s still microscopic.
image
The point isn't the amount of usage. The point is the companies that are doing it.
Sure, it´s pretty meaningless in itself because it simply isn´t competitive in the market which is why it has about zero market share. If that´s what you´re saying I agree.
Are you trying to say that these companies succeed because they are not doing something competitive? Why would you think they are going to all the trouble of installing solar if it didn't work? It works. They are proving it. And many of them are looking to the future when solar will be even more competitive.
Since it´s so uncompetitive (as evidenced by about zero% market share) I guess subsidies from Taxpayers had something to do with those companies installing it.
But now that it there, as the price of electricity goes up, they will be paying the same amount... approximately zero.
When people start to understand this, the market will be there. It takes visionaries to see what is coming.
Why would the price of electricity go up? Fossil fuels are dirt cheap, nuclear and hydro plants all over are pretty much written off it´s totally a buyer´s market.
December 17, 2015, 10:12:11 AM
Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
it´s still microscopic.
image
it´s still microscopic.
image
The point isn't the amount of usage. The point is the companies that are doing it.
Sure, it´s pretty meaningless in itself because it simply isn´t competitive in the market which is why it has about zero market share. If that´s what you´re saying I agree.
Are you trying to say that these companies succeed because they are not doing something competitive? Why would you think they are going to all the trouble of installing solar if it didn't work? It works. They are proving it. And many of them are looking to the future when solar will be even more competitive.
Since it´s so uncompetitive (as evidenced by about zero% market share) I guess subsidies from Taxpayers had something to do with those companies installing it.
But now that it there, as the price of electricity goes up, they will be paying the same amount... approximately zero.
When people start to understand this, the market will be there. It takes visionaries to see what is coming.
December 17, 2015, 10:07:57 AM
Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
it´s still microscopic.
image
it´s still microscopic.
image
The point isn't the amount of usage. The point is the companies that are doing it.
Sure, it´s pretty meaningless in itself because it simply isn´t competitive in the market which is why it has about zero market share. If that´s what you´re saying I agree.
Are you trying to say that these companies succeed because they are not doing something competitive? Why would you think they are going to all the trouble of installing solar if it didn't work? It works. They are proving it. And many of them are looking to the future when solar will be even more competitive.
Since it´s so uncompetitive (as evidenced by about zero% market share) I guess subsidies from Taxpayers had something to do with those companies installing it.
December 17, 2015, 10:06:23 AM
I acknowledge that we live in an imperfect world it's you that's in denial. You're materialist views are a fallacy, Plato despite being a flat-headed goldbricking scumbag is correct in regards to the subjective nature of the universe. You obviously didn't pay attention during theology class.
This being the case it looks like you need some spoon-feeding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms
A simple, basic word for theory is fiction.
Speed of light is a constant here on earth according to observations here on earth.
Speed of light in space as we understand it is based on the operation of the universe as standard physics sees the universe.
Speed of light in space when based on flat earth physics is different than what it is based on standard physics, just as flat earth is different from round earth.
December 17, 2015, 09:59:02 AM
Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
Case not closed.
Speed of light is irrelevant.
Action of light traveling through a particular medium as opposed to some other medium is irrelevant.
The thing that rules is the action of light through the ether... or through space if you want to believe in space rather than the ether.
----------
The difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is the entire basis of Airy's experiment. It was intended as an experiment to test the æther but in this case we're appropriating it to determine weather it's the stars or the earth that's in motion and the results are irrefutable; the stars are in motion and and the earth is stationary.
Quote
Physics is flawed. It is flawed because basic math is flawed. For example, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Why not? Because there are no two things that are exactly the same. They are always at least a little different. Because of this, 1 + 1 will always equal 1 + 1... never 2.
When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.
----------
The symbol "1" points to the number 1 i.e. the symbol "1" is not the number. Numbers are perfect, they can never be created, destroyed or modified in any way and they exist outside of space and time. 1 + 1 will = 2 every time, math is the only science where you can be 100% sure of the results.When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.
----------
Quote
...snip...
All right. Either you do not understand, or you simply do not want to acknowledge.
I acknowledge that we live in an imperfect world it's you that's in denial. You're materialist views are a fallacy, Plato despite being a flat-headed goldbricking scumbag is correct in regards to the subjective nature of the universe. You obviously didn't pay attention during theology class.
This being the case it looks like you need some spoon-feeding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms
A simple, basic word for theory is fiction.
December 17, 2015, 09:54:06 AM
Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
Case not closed.
Speed of light is irrelevant.
Action of light traveling through a particular medium as opposed to some other medium is irrelevant.
The thing that rules is the action of light through the ether... or through space if you want to believe in space rather than the ether.
----------
The difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is the entire basis of Airy's experiment. It was intended as an experiment to test the æther but in this case we're appropriating it to determine weather it's the stars or the earth that's in motion and the results are irrefutable; the stars are in motion and and the earth is stationary.
Quote
Physics is flawed. It is flawed because basic math is flawed. For example, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Why not? Because there are no two things that are exactly the same. They are always at least a little different. Because of this, 1 + 1 will always equal 1 + 1... never 2.
When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.
----------
The symbol "1" points to the number 1 i.e. the symbol "1" is not the number. Numbers are perfect, they can never be created, destroyed or modified in any way and they exist outside of space and time. 1 + 1 will = 2 every time, math is the only science where you can be 100% sure of the results.When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.
----------
Quote
...snip...
All right. Either you do not understand, or you simply do not want to acknowledge.
I acknowledge that we live in an imperfect world it's you that's in denial. You're materialist views are a fallacy, Plato despite being a flat-headed goldbricking scumbag is correct in regards to the subjective nature of the universe. You obviously didn't pay attention during theology class.
This being the case it looks like you need some spoon-feeding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms
December 17, 2015, 09:43:15 AM
Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
it´s still microscopic.
image
it´s still microscopic.
image
The point isn't the amount of usage. The point is the companies that are doing it.
Sure, it´s pretty meaningless in itself because it simply isn´t competitive in the market which is why it has about zero market share. If that´s what you´re saying I agree.
Are you trying to say that these companies succeed because they are not doing something competitive? Why would you think they are going to all the trouble of installing solar if it didn't work? It works. They are proving it. And many of them are looking to the future when solar will be even more competitive.
December 17, 2015, 09:39:28 AM
Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
Case not closed.
Speed of light is irrelevant.
Action of light traveling through a particular medium as opposed to some other medium is irrelevant.
The thing that rules is the action of light through the ether... or through space if you want to believe in space rather than the ether.
----------
The difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is the entire basis of Airy's experiment. It was intended as an experiment to test the æther but in this case we're appropriating it to determine weather it's the stars or the earth that's in motion and the results are irrefutable; the stars are in motion and and the earth is stationary.
Quote
Physics is flawed. It is flawed because basic math is flawed. For example, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Why not? Because there are no two things that are exactly the same. They are always at least a little different. Because of this, 1 + 1 will always equal 1 + 1... never 2.
When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.
----------
The symbol "1" points to the number 1 i.e. the symbol "1" is not the number. Numbers are perfect, they can never be created, destroyed or modified in any way and they exist outside of space and time. 1 + 1 will = 2 every time, math is the only science where you can be 100% sure of the results.When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.
----------
Quote
...snip...
All right. Either you do not understand, or you simply do not want to acknowledge.
December 17, 2015, 09:37:38 AM
Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
it´s still microscopic.
image
it´s still microscopic.
image
The point isn't the amount of usage. The point is the companies that are doing it.
Sure, it´s pretty meaningless in itself because it simply isn´t competitive in the market which is why it has about zero market share. If that´s what you´re saying I agree.
December 17, 2015, 09:31:56 AM
Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
it´s still microscopic.
image
it´s still microscopic.
image
The point isn't the amount of usage. The point is the companies that are doing it.
December 17, 2015, 09:26:46 AM
Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
Case not closed.
Speed of light is irrelevant.
Action of light traveling through a particular medium as opposed to some other medium is irrelevant.
The thing that rules is the action of light through the ether... or through space if you want to believe in space rather than the ether.
----------
The difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is the entire basis of Airy's experiment. It was intended as an experiment to test the æther but in this case we're appropriating it to determine weather it's the stars or the earth that's in motion and the results are irrefutable; the stars are in motion and and the earth is stationary.
Quote
Physics is flawed. It is flawed because basic math is flawed. For example, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Why not? Because there are no two things that are exactly the same. They are always at least a little different. Because of this, 1 + 1 will always equal 1 + 1... never 2.
When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.
----------
The symbol "1" points to the number 1 i.e. the symbol "1" is not the number. Numbers are perfect, they can never be created, destroyed or modified in any way and they exist outside of space and time. 1 + 1 will = 2 every time, math is the only science where you can be 100% sure of the results.When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.
----------
Quote
...snip...
Jump to: