"Green ilk". ROFL

I'm all for nuclear kman, especially gen 4 (but am also happy with 3+).

I'll type this slowly:

Our future energy supplies have to contain a mix (even coal and wind for the even slower) - horses for courses.

I assume your new: That so called "Oregon Petition" has been around a while. No rational scientist is expecting "catastophic" climate change anytime soon.

What you also don't seem to understand, the next 100 years or so is going to be bad enough.

What you also don't seem to understand, the world doesn't stop in 2100.

What you also don't seem to understand, there is a difference between weather forecasting and climate projection.

Confrontational? I see, you want a warm and fuzzy group hug - you can get that at WUWT.

"Socialism"?

That's what I thought - you are just another political ideological screamer where science has got nothing to do with it.

Btw, you accuse me of the very thing you do yourself - typical.

David, I have always valued your comments, I don't always respond.

I have never respected that shock-jock's comments, for reasons you may not understand.

I notice Bolters doesn't say China is replacing "old" coal-fired power with "new" coal-fired power - I am not surprised at the deliberate distortion misrepresentation

In any event, wind power in China (certainly not most of) will go ahead. Their focus is on BIG stuff, not small stuff still needed in the smaller communities.