Extreme global climate outcomes are possible even at 2C of warming

[NNadir]

18. Um, it would seem - not all that surprising - that "I'm not an antinuke" antinukes around here know nothing at all...

Last edited Fri Mar 27, 2026, 08:12 AM - Edit history (1)

about science. Again, not surprising at all; there are very few people in the antinuke cults show any evidence of ever having taken a science course and achieved a grade of C or better.

A scientist supports his scientific views with something called "data."

I refer you to post #14 in this thread:

The data on the construction of nuclear power plants in China is publicly available:

Reactor database, China

The link gives the 2024 output of China's nuclear plants: 417,518 GWh. Note that this is a unit of energy, not power. It translates in SI units to 1.5 Exajoules of electricity, and a primary energy output, given that most of these plants are Rankine devices with an efficiency of roughly 33%, 4.6 Exajoules of primary energy.

In percent talk this primary energy is over 50% of the energy provided by all of the solar facilities on the planet as of 2024, as reported in post #9 with respect to the WEO data tables found on page 420 of the 2025 WEO.

You see those things before "GWh" and "Exajoules?" They're called "numbers."

Descartes famously said (I paraphrase): "If science has a language, it's mathematics."

I agree.

In general, scientists are often appalled when rubes try to tell them what is and is not science, but I'm letting it roll off my back these days. We have lots of people, from the Orange Pedophile's sycophants in the administration right down to antinukes and "I'm not an antinuke" antinukes here at DU who have very little respect for science and scientists.