\n
Ah, the NY Times, that trumpet of moral superiority, now bellowing about Bitcoin\’s “excessive energy consumption”-a modern drama of misplaced outrage! How tragically funny, the self-appointed guardians of virtue, wielding marginal emission calculations like a priest quoting a dead letter to condemn a plague. š¤”
\n
“Indeed, the Bitcoin maxis were not mistaken (once more),” scoffs Daniel Batten, that hero of the keyboard, in a post ripe with the aroma of schadenfreude. “Behold, the NYTās ājunk scienceā now squirmed under the microscope of academia!”
\n
Methodology? What Methodology? š
\n
This “anti-Bitcoin narrative,” as Batten calls it, now lies before us-nailed by a peer-reviewed study from Nature Climate Change, as though struck by divine comedy. The NYT, in their wisdom, imagined Bitcoin miners slurping fossil fuels like a cavern of Mongols-cāest absurde!
\n
Remember the NYTimes hitpiece on Bitcoin? That āgreenā crusade? We told you it was junk science, andā¦ surprise! A peer-reviewed study debunks their marginal emission witchcraft. š§āļø
– Daniel Batten (@DSBatten) October 27, 2025
\n
Embrace this truth: marginal emissions are not the gospel, but a knight without armor. The NYTās static estimate of climate impact? A ghost of the 19th century! The truth lies in dynamic systems, where solar panels at noon displace clean energy, not death-dealing coal. š
\n
Battenās rebuttal, henceforth, is a pastoral letter of logic: Bitcoinās COā footprint? Overestimated! Miners, those mythical creatures, feast on curtailed renewables and clean energy-neither a satanic ritual nor a Hamlet of destruction. š§
\n
Ah, the NY Times, that trumpet of moral superiority, now bellowing about Bitcoin’s “excessive energy consumption”-a modern drama of misplaced outrage! How tragically funny, the self-appointed guardians of virtue, wielding marginal emission calculations like a priest quoting a dead letter to condemn a plague. š¤”
“Indeed, the Bitcoin maxis were not mistaken (once more),” scoffs Daniel Batten, that hero of the keyboard, in a post ripe with the aroma of schadenfreude. “Behold, the NYTās ājunk scienceā now squirmed under the microscope of academia!”
Methodology? What Methodology? š
This “anti-Bitcoin narrative,” as Batten calls it, now lies before us-nailed by a peer-reviewed study from Nature Climate Change, as though struck by divine comedy. The NYT, in their wisdom, imagined Bitcoin miners slurping fossil fuels like a cavern of Mongols-cāest absurde!
Remember the NYTimes hitpiece on Bitcoin? That āgreenā crusade? We told you it was junk science, andā¦ surprise! A peer-reviewed study debunks their marginal emission witchcraft. š§āļø
– Daniel Batten (@DSBatten) October 27, 2025
Embrace this truth: marginal emissions are not the gospel, but a knight without armor. The NYTās static estimate of climate impact? A ghost of the 19th century! The truth lies in dynamic systems, where solar panels at noon displace clean energy, not death-dealing coal. š
Battenās rebuttal, henceforth, is a pastoral letter of logic: Bitcoinās COā footprint? Overestimated! Miners, those mythical creatures, feast on curtailed renewables and clean energy-neither a satanic ritual nor a Hamlet of destruction. š§
Read More
- The Rookie Saves Fans From A Major Disappointment For Lucy & Tim In Season 8
- Kaliās Shocking Revelation About Elevenās Sacrifice In Stranger Things Season 5 Is Right
- Stranger Thingsās Randy Havens Knows Mr. Clarke Saved the Day
- James Cameron Has a Backup Plan for Avatar
- Did Nancy and Jonathan break up in Season 5? Stranger Things creators confirm the truth
- Henry Cavillās Little Known Action Thriller Finds Huge Success on Streaming
- Decoding the Crypto Transformation: Is It Still the Wild West?
- Stranger Things Season 5ās Will Byers monologue took two 12-hour days to film, Noah Schnapp says
- Games investor lobbies to ākill friendslopā as it devalues games like Peak and REPO
- Marvel Studios Eyeing Jordan Peele to Direct 1 Upcoming MCU Movie (Report)
2025-10-27 09:45