I want it.
That is all.
I think you may be in luck.
WHITE DEATH! PANIC! PANIC!
This seems like an appropriate thread to remind everyone that I am an attorney and I would not be above a injury MVA case from the aforementioned snowfall if my cut was something about $10,000.
Thank you. That is all.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
This seems like an appropriate thread to remind everyone that I am an attorney and I would not be above a injury MVA case from the aforementioned snowfall if my cut was something about $10,000.
Thank you. That is all.
You make us all proud!
(http://thetulsan.com/images/atlas.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
(http://thetulsan.com/images/atlas.gif)
Tease.
*sigh*
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
(http://thetulsan.com/images/atlas.gif)
Beautiful! Thanks for the pic Tim.
(http://www.centralmediaserver.com/KJRH/weather/seven_day.jpg)
I have cc skis, a full ski suit, a 4wd vehicle with 14" clearance, and knowledge from 20+ years in Iowa. Bring it on.
To show ya there is no global warming, Houston had snow and a record early snow at that, a first of it's kind. They also had snow along parts of the Gulf Coast. It's going to be a long cold winter.[xx(]
If you want to see some snow, here is a Telluride (//%22http://www.telluridetoday.com/telluridewebcamseast.htm%22) web cam.
Here is a web cam from Timberline Lodge, Mt Hood, Oregon (//%22http://www.timberlinelodge.com/conditions/%22). I worked there in the early 80s, the average snow pack was 23 feet.
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
To show ya there is no global warming, Houston had snow and a record early snow at that, a first of it's kind. They also had snow along parts of the Gulf Coast. It's going to be a long cold winter.[xx(]
Wow, you obviously don't understand global meteorology. Just because a place has snow that normally doesn't get snow does not mean global warming isn't happening.
Glaciers grew the last 5 years and the global temperature was down .1C or so. The summer was not as hot. Hurricane frequency is down.
That's why they changed the name to "global climate change." They gave up on Global Cooling int he late 1970's. Global Warming has the above related issues with it. But we can all agree that the climate will change!
[:P]
quote:
That's why they changed the name to "global climate change." They gave up on Global Cooling int he late 1970's. Global Warming has the above related issues with it. But we can all agree that the climate will change!
They changed it because of people like sauerkraut who can't grasp that despite the increase in global average temperature doesn't mean that Houston will never see snow. (In fact, for certain corner cases like that one, it makes snow more likely due to stronger weather systems)
And I like my FWD beater for snow driving until it gets to be over a couple of feet of unplowed accumulation. [:D] (I should get a winch for it, though)
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
To show ya there is no global warming, Houston had snow and a record early snow at that, a first of it's kind. They also had snow along parts of the Gulf Coast. It's going to be a long cold winter.[xx(]
Wow, you obviously don't understand global meteorology. Just because a place has snow that normally doesn't get snow does not mean global warming isn't happening.
It's getting colder all over the globe. There have been record snows last year in China and in the mountains of the western USA. The ice sheets are growing -not melting like Al Gore and his kind sprew about-. Since 1998 the globe has cooled off quite a bit. This year the sunspot activity has been very low and the sun's cycle 24 was late and no sunspots means the sun is burning cooler, a cooler sun means a cooler earth. brrrr. Global warming is all a big hoax. I wish we did have global warming I favor a warmer planet A warmer planet means less heating fuel is needed and longer growing seasons and a better climate for out door activities. There are no advantages of a colder planet-none.
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
To show ya there is no global warming, Houston had snow and a record early snow at that, a first of it's kind. They also had snow along parts of the Gulf Coast. It's going to be a long cold winter.[xx(]
Wow, you obviously don't understand global meteorology. Just because a place has snow that normally doesn't get snow does not mean global warming isn't happening.
It's getting colder all over the globe. There have been record snows last year in China and in the mountains of the western USA. The ice sheets are growing -not melting like Al Gore and his kind sprew about-. Since 1998 the globe has cooled off quite a bit. This year the sunspot activity has been very low and the sun's cycle 24 was late and no sunspots means the sun is burning cooler, a cooler sun means a cooler earth. brrrr. Global warming is all a big hoax. I wish we did have global warming I favor a warmer planet A warmer planet means less heating fuel is needed and longer growing seasons and a better climate for out door activities. There are no advantages of a colder planet-none.
If by growing you mean "melting and sliding off into the sea at an increasing rate" (I'm presuming you're talking about greenland), then you are entirely correct.
I would just like to state for the record that...wait for it....
I AGREE WITH SAUERKRAUT!
Who'da thunkit.
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
I wish we did have global warming I favor a warmer planet A warmer planet means less heating fuel is needed and longer growing seasons and a better climate for out door activities.
Wow.
It means much more than that. A warmer planet also means that the deserts grow in size and more plants and animals die. It also means that the ocean currents heat up and make much more violent hurricanes.
Have fun with your out door (sp.) activities with that.
quote:
Originally posted by TulsaMINI
I would just like to state for the record that...wait for it....
I AGREE WITH SAUERKRAUT!
Who'da thunkit.
Thanks Tulsa Mini, Global warming is a big hoax invented in the early 1990's. I have collected alot of info on it. This new global warming meeting that is coming up will choke the economys of "rich" nations (if we sign on to it) and let China & India and other 3rd world nations pollute as much as they want. The concept of CO2 being a pollutant is just nuts, that's a gas that is part of life. They even have talk about taxing farmers who have animals a tax for the CO2 gas the animals emit. This global warming thing is getting more and more nutty, any scientists or facts that debunk it is ignored and kicked aside.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
I wish we did have global warming I favor a warmer planet A warmer planet means less heating fuel is needed and longer growing seasons and a better climate for out door activities.
Wow.
It means much more than that. A warmer planet also means that the deserts grow in size and more plants and animals die. It also means that the ocean currents heat up and make much more violent hurricanes.
Have fun with your out door (sp.) activities with that.
No, the planet was much warmer in the past than it is today. 1,000 years ago Greenland was warm and the Vikings grew crops there. Then suddenly the planet got cold and the Vikings had to flee greenland- The planet is 4.5 BILLION years old what is the normal temp of the earth supposed to be anyhow? A warmer planet will also mean less severe storms (just the oppiset of what global warming people sprew). The cause of storms is temp. difference in the air between hot & cold, with a warmer planet we'll have less cold air and less extreams in temps. and that means Less tornados and less hurricanes and fewer blizzards. There is no advantage of a colder planet, more heating fuel is used and less crops can be grown and that means less food for the worlds people.
You are the one out of five dentists who recommend their patients chew sugared gum.
Global warming is real. It will cause dramatic change to the lives of humans.
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
I wish we did have global warming I favor a warmer planet A warmer planet means less heating fuel is needed and longer growing seasons and a better climate for out door activities.
Wow.
It means much more than that. A warmer planet also means that the deserts grow in size and more plants and animals die. It also means that the ocean currents heat up and make much more violent hurricanes.
Have fun with your out door (sp.) activities with that.
No, the planet was much warmer in the past than it is today. 1,000 years ago Greenland was warm and the Vikings grew crops there. Then suddenly the planet got cold and the Vikings had to flee greenland- The planet is 4.5 BILLION years old what is the normal temp of the earth supposed to be anyhow? A warmer planet will also mean less severe storms (just the oppiset of what global warming people sprew). The cause of storms is temp. difference in the air between hot & cold, with a warmer planet we'll have less cold air and less extreams in temps. and that means Less tornados and less hurricanes and fewer blizzards. There is no advantage of a colder planet, more heating fuel is used and less crops can be grown and that means less food for the worlds people.
Humans are not 4.5 billion years old. I don't care what temperature the earth wants to be, I care what temperature it needs to be for me to survive. Sticking our fingers in our ears and screaming "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" will only result in our delaying until it's too late to avoid inundating our coastlines and changing weather patterns in a way that is not likely to be pleasant for us.
Hell, some newer research indicates that warm temperatures are responsible for mass die-offs due to ocean acidity changes and dissolved gases being released.
And folks like you refuse to believe the evidence that the increase in global average temperature has already caused severe long term droughts in northern africa, resulting in the starvation of millions. I guess if it's not happening here, it isn't important.
You know, last time I checked, Senator Inhofe didn't live in Ohio.....
[xx(]
quote:
Originally posted by nathanm
And folks like you refuse to believe the evidence that the increase in global average temperature has already caused severe long term droughts in northern africa...
Are you referring to the Sahara desert?
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
quote:
Originally posted by TulsaMINI
I would just like to state for the record that...wait for it....
I AGREE WITH SAUERKRAUT!
Who'da thunkit.
Thanks Tulsa Mini, Global warming is a big hoax invented in the early 1990's. I have collected alot of info on it. This new global warming meeting that is coming up will choke the economys of "rich" nations (if we sign on to it) and let China & India and other 3rd world nations pollute as much as they want. The concept of CO2 being a pollutant is just nuts, that's a gas that is part of life. They even have talk about taxing farmers who have animals a tax for the CO2 gas the animals emit. This global warming thing is getting more and more nutty, any scientists or facts that debunk it is ignored and kicked aside.
Global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except what to do about it.
If global warming is real tell me why NASA's Hensen doctored the temp. readings in 2007? Also why did they use September's temps for October in 2008? Then when caught they acted as if it was no big deal. It just made October the warmest month ever when it was one of the coldest Octobers we ever had.. Scientists who retire come out and say global warming is a hoax, but while they were working they had to tow the party line or lose funding. If global warming was real there would be no need to doctor temps. As every school science student knows storms are caused by differences in the air temp- if the globe warmed up the temps will be more even and uniform and less stormes will be the result. However, with massive amounts of cold air and warm air around that is what makes big storms. The year 2005 was a cooler than normal year but had all those hurricanes- because of big extreams in the temps. A warmer planet is a better place to live. There is no advantage of a colder planet. In 65,000 years most of this nation will be under a ice sheet.[B)]
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
You know, last time I checked, Senator Inhofe didn't live in Ohio.....[xx(]
Oh, but one can wish...
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.
I tend to go with the respected professionals that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.
I tend to go with the respected professionals that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....
Ok, if that's what you want....
YOU'RE CRAZY
There are respected scientists that claim that global warming is not caused by humans. Some even claim that the earth is not warming. Specific areas may be warming but the the earth as a whole is not. They don't get the press of the popular theory.
It kind of reminds me of the medical doctor that (eventually) proved, against the popular medical opinion, that stomach ulcers are caused by a bacteria (or something like that).
Here's a frightening thought for the masses, Inhofe might be correct. (Notice, I did not say "right".)
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.
I tend to go with the respected professionals that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....
Ok, if that's what you want....
YOU'RE CRAZY
There are respected scientists that claim that global warming is not caused by humans. Some even claim that the earth is not warming. Specific areas may be warming but the the earth as a whole is not. They don't get the press of the popular theory.
It kind of reminds me of the medical doctor that (eventually) proved, against the popular medical opinion, that stomach ulcers are caused by a bacteria (or something like that).
Here's a frightening thought for the masses, Inhofe might be correct. (Notice, I did not say "right".)
This is an argument that really doesn't have an end, at least not in our lifetime... I certainly don't find it necessary to convince the disbelievers; there is enough evidence already in play that the majority of world leaders have taken notice and will eventually work together to do something productive about it.
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.
I tend to go with the respected professionals that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....
Ok, if that's what you want....
YOU'RE CRAZY
There are respected scientists that claim that global warming is not caused by humans. Some even claim that the earth is not warming. Specific areas may be warming but the the earth as a whole is not. They don't get the press of the popular theory.
It kind of reminds me of the medical doctor that (eventually) proved, against the popular medical opinion, that stomach ulcers are caused by a bacteria (or something like that).
Here's a frightening thought for the masses, Inhofe might be correct. (Notice, I did not say "right".)
This is an argument that really doesn't have an end, at least not in our lifetime... I certainly don't find it necessary to convince the disbelievers; there is enough evidence already in play that the majority of world leaders have taken notice and will eventually work together to do something productive about it.
I agree, there will probably not be an end to the disagreement. Only time will tell if there is anything humans can do to change global climate change. I agree to change human behavior that is obviously harmful at a reasonable cost. I do not agree that we can cause or stop global climate change.
The question is what are "you" willing to give up to "save the planet"? Set your heating thermostat to about 33° only to keep your pipes from freezing? Give up air conditioning in the summer (older people die from the heat, how about your parents or grandparents?). Give up all forms of entertainment that increase your carbon footprint? Don't go on vacation, however you get there, it involves carbon. Forget going to the theater etc downtown. Theater involves electricity to cool/heat the place, light the stage...... The point is that living short of being cavemen, we all use energy that is not
necessary to live. When people start telling me that they will give up the nice things in life to preserve the planet, I will start listening. Algore's house uses more energy than most. He travels via private transportation instead of public airlines yet he tells me to give up my carbon footprint. BS.
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
Are you referring to the Sahara desert?
No, although the best available evidence indicates that the desertification of most of it was caused by overgrazing. (sort of how the dust bowl in the 1930s was exacerbated by poor farming practices)
On the bright side, it may turn out that further increased temperatures will reduce the frequency of Atlantic hurricanes due to the increase in sand blowing off the African coast.
Sauerkraut, arguing over the temperature of one particular month is arguing over the weather, not the climate. There will be abnormally cold and abnormally warm months no matter what. There are always variations in the weather. Ask anybody who lives in Oklahoma. It was 74 degrees when I went to lunch this afternoon. It's 23 and sleeting now.
And if it is in fact true that the sun is less active than usual at the moment, that in no way impugns the evidence for climate change, it only means that we're lucky at the moment. When the sun goes back to normal, it'll be hotter.
It doesn't really come down to who you believe, it comes down to ideology. There are scientists whose field has nothing to do with climatology who don't believe in global warming. Almost none who are in that field disbelieve.
If I needed a good criminal defense attorney, I wouldn't call an attorney who specializes in estate planning. If I needed a proctologist, I wouldn't call a brain surgeon. If I wanted an opinion about climate change, I would not call a person who specializes in nuclear physics or nanotechnology or a geologist (or even someone who specializes in entomology), I'd call a climatologist.
WoW~ We have record cold in the central USA. It's -5 below zero in Omaha and it's not even winter yet. Winter starts next week. The man-made global warming thing goes against common sense. Man is like a gnat on the surface of the planet man could not change the climate if he wanted to, man is helpless against nature. The planet has been around for 4.5 billon years and no one even knows what the "normal" temp of the earth is. The earth got hit with comets, astroids, metorites and our planet has had many volcanos that sprew more junk into the air than man could do in 300 years and the planet is still around and it will be here long after man is gone. In 5 billion years the sun goes red giant and the earth will be fryed anyhow. meanwhile enjoy this record cold. Global warming is a hoax to push a political agenda and a ploy to raise more taxes.
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.
I tend to go with the respected professionals that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....
All I can say is look how many times the professionals are wrong, they were saying that oil would hit $200.00 a barrel this year, and they got alot of the other economic predictions wrong about the price of oil and other things and those people were "experts" in the field of economics. As for the climate many scientists have to pull the global-warming line or they will lose funding so under pressure like that you won't get real accurate science results, also the global warming computer models that are the bible to people like Al Gore, those computer models can't get the past weather history correct when they are fed in data of recent weather history, they spit out totally different weather patterns than what really happened. Garbage in & garbage out. The hottest year of the 20th century was 1934, also if the Dust Bowl happened today instead of 1930 it would be blamed on global warming. [B)]
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.
I tend to go with the respected professionals that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....
All I can say is look how many times the professionals are wrong, they were saying that oil would hit $200.00 a barrel this year, and they got alot of the other economic predictions wrong about the price of oil and other things and those people were "experts" in the field of economics. As for the climate many scientists have to pull the global-warming line or they will lose funding so under pressure like that you won't get real accurate science results, also the global warming computer models that are the bible to people like Al Gore, those computer models can't get the past weather history correct when they are fed in data of recent weather history, they spit out totally different weather patterns than what really happened. Garbage in & garbage out. The hottest year of the 20th century was 1934, also if the Dust Bowl happened today instead of 1930 it would be blamed on global warming. [B)]
OK, now you're starting to sound kooky...oh, wait a minute.....
[:O]
"Global Climate Change" is the popular opinion. But there are many dissenters outside of the religious right. Actual scientist disagree about the merits of the claims and those that agree on the claims disagree with the effect.
It is, however, well worth noting that a portion of the opposition disagrees with the notion of global warming because the Bible says God will end the Earth so any notion to the contrary can not be correct. I am only talking about logical and scientific opposition to the notion that Humans have and continue to irreparably and disastrously alter the climate.
I am skeptical of the notion of Global Warming for several reasons (note: Global Climate change is a bs term because you can't argue with it, the climate has and always will change):
1) Long term trends indicate periodic heating and cooling cycles of the earth. Well before the industrial revolution. These include significant events such as ice ages, historic rises and drops in C02 levels in fossil records, and smaller events such as the "little ice age" of the Napoleonic era (potato famine anyone?) or the climate differences and crop failures noted by record keepers in ancient cultures.
2) Short term variations are not reliable indications. As many have pointed out, the global cooling fear was paramount in the 1970's. The global warming fear dominated in the 1970's. Both relied on subtle variations on long term trends. The current trend is towards cooling with glaciers and snow packs growing, ocean temperatures dropping, record cold, and fewer hurricanes.
Such variations are not indicative of long term climate change as theorized.
3) Honest supporters of Global Warming acknowledge that we do not understand the full cause of global warming. The earths tilt, sun spots, continental drift (causes ice ages and will ultimately cause another), atmosphere, volcanic eruptions, impacts, ambient space radiation... all have a major impact on our short and long term climate. Evidence does suggest that increased levels of C02 will create a green house effect, but we are not advanced enough to understand that effect in by itself... let alone in conjunction with the above alternative causes.
4) Furthermore, we do not understand the EFFECT Global Warming would have. Man made or otherwise, we do not understand the effect in the slightest. We postulated more Hurricanes, now less Hurricanes. More energy = more evaporation = more rain. Or severe drought. Global warming might lead to the next ice age, or a total arid climate.
Le Nina, el nino. Record heat. Record cold. Better crops. Worse crops. We have no idea.
Ultimately a subtle variation in temperature could have a huge impact. We assume that a subtle warming is better than a cooling effect. We assume the net result of a warming is for the worse. But we are not really aware of the greater implications of a warmer planet.
5) And finally, we don't know what to do about it. In relation to our vast ignorance to the above, the proper response is unknown. If we are cooling perhaps we need more C02. If we are warming we need to figure out if it is too late to stop and if so, what will accomplish that the most effective? Do we need to start altering crops and building barriers or are we OK if we simply lower CO2 emissions?
Is there a way to reabsorb the C02? Will the environment adjust and absorb great amounts of C02 naturally? Is it too late and we're just screwed and I can continue about my merry little life until we all die?
- - -
While I think we should take all easy measures to reduce pollution, including C02, I am leery of greater proposals because of the above uncertainty. We SHOULD pluck the low hanging fruit, why not? But to invest unprecedented amounts when we are so ignorant seems to be ill-advised.
I remain open to advancements in science that will shed more light on this and readily acknowledge that I am not an expert on the matter. Regardless, I remain unconvinced that drastic action is required.
(you can, however, sell me alternative fuels and reduced emissions on other basis - such as security, economics, and health)
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.
I tend to go with the respected professionals that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....
Ok, if that's what you want....
YOU'RE CRAZY
There are respected scientists that claim that global warming is not caused by humans. Some even claim that the earth is not warming. Specific areas may be warming but the the earth as a whole is not. They don't get the press of the popular theory.
It kind of reminds me of the medical doctor that (eventually) proved, against the popular medical opinion, that stomach ulcers are caused by a bacteria (or something like that).
Here's a frightening thought for the masses, Inhofe might be correct. (Notice, I did not say "right".)
This is an argument that really doesn't have an end, at least not in our lifetime... I certainly don't find it necessary to convince the disbelievers; there is enough evidence already in play that the majority of world leaders have taken notice and will eventually work together to do something productive about it.
I agree, there will probably not be an end to the disagreement. Only time will tell if there is anything humans can do to change global climate change. I agree to change human behavior that is obviously harmful at a reasonable cost. I do not agree that we can cause or stop global climate change.
The question is what are "you" willing to give up to "save the planet"? Set your heating thermostat to about 33° only to keep your pipes from freezing? Give up air conditioning in the summer (older people die from the heat, how about your parents or grandparents?). Give up all forms of entertainment that increase your carbon footprint? Don't go on vacation, however you get there, it involves carbon. Forget going to the theater etc downtown. Theater involves electricity to cool/heat the place, light the stage...... The point is that living short of being cavemen, we all use energy that is not necessary to live. When people start telling me that they will give up the nice things in life to preserve the planet, I will start listening. Algore's house uses more energy than most. He travels via private transportation instead of public airlines yet he tells me to give up my carbon footprint. BS.
You are exaggerating to make your point, but in reality the actions we can do as responsible people are really quite simple. I don't think anyone is asking anyone to 'give up the nice things in life' unless you consider lightbulbs and plastic bags luxurious.
What it all boils down to is most Americans do not want to be the least bit inconvenienced and therefore get very defensive when it is 'suggested' that they make minor alterations for the good of the environment. The argument of "I'm not going to change, because my neighbor gets to drive a hummer" is a rather childish and immature argument. I really couldn't care less what Al Gore does- I only answer to myself and what I feel is the right thing to do.
Lastly, even if you don't believe in the concept of human induced climate change, why wouldn't you want to be conservative with our natural resources, when no one would argue that they are limited? Why wouldn't you be more aware and consume less harmful products since everyone knows they are bad for people, animals and the land that we all have to live on?
It's still the responsible and right thing to do, regardless if anyone else is doing it or not.
BTW, is it snowing today in Tulsa? Sometimes I miss the snow...but then I quickly get over it when I go home to visit!
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
You are exaggerating to make your point, but in reality the actions we can do as responsible people are really quite simple. I don't think anyone is asking anyone to 'give up the nice things in life' unless you consider lightbulbs and plastic bags luxurious.
What it all boils down to is most Americans do not want to be the least bit inconvenienced and therefore get very defensive when it is 'suggested' that they make minor alterations for the good of the environment. The argument of "I'm not going to change, because my neighbor gets to drive a hummer" is a rather childish and immature argument. I really couldn't care less what Al Gore does- I only answer to myself and what I feel is the right thing to do.
Lastly, even if you don't believe in the concept of human induced climate change, why wouldn't you want to be conservative with our natural resources, when no one would argue that they are limited? Why wouldn't you be more aware and consume less harmful products since everyone knows they are bad for people, animals and the land that we all have to live on?
It's still the responsible and right thing to do, regardless if anyone else is doing it or not.
It is a lot easier to insist that others make sacrifices than to make them yourself. That is one of my gripes about Algore. His stature in the Global Warming/Climate Change community should require him to be an example of what he wants others to do. There are plenty of examples of his energy use beyond the average citizen.
Everything has a cost. I get tired of hearing people say to "do whatever it takes" when they really only mean "do whatever it takes, as long as it isn't too expensive" or as you noted, "as long as it doesn't affect me". I have found this to be true outside of the environmental movement too. One person's minor inconvenience is another person's major problem.
Knee jerk reactions to one problem often create others. I believe that ethanol production from corn falls in this category. Ethanol as a fuel may be OK. I think it was mandated before its time. Maybe something else would be better. Am I for alternate fuel/energy research? YES! Am I for knee jerk political solutions to technical problems? NO!
quote:
Originally posted by Red Arrow
quote:
Originally posted by azbadpuppy
You are exaggerating to make your point, but in reality the actions we can do as responsible people are really quite simple. I don't think anyone is asking anyone to 'give up the nice things in life' unless you consider lightbulbs and plastic bags luxurious.
What it all boils down to is most Americans do not want to be the least bit inconvenienced and therefore get very defensive when it is 'suggested' that they make minor alterations for the good of the environment. The argument of "I'm not going to change, because my neighbor gets to drive a hummer" is a rather childish and immature argument. I really couldn't care less what Al Gore does- I only answer to myself and what I feel is the right thing to do.
Lastly, even if you don't believe in the concept of human induced climate change, why wouldn't you want to be conservative with our natural resources, when no one would argue that they are limited? Why wouldn't you be more aware and consume less harmful products since everyone knows they are bad for people, animals and the land that we all have to live on?
It's still the responsible and right thing to do, regardless if anyone else is doing it or not.
It is a lot easier to insist that others make sacrifices than to make them yourself. That is one of my gripes about Algore. His stature in the Global Warming/Climate Change community should require him to be an example of what he wants others to do. There are plenty of examples of his energy use beyond the average citizen.
Everything has a cost. I get tired of hearing people say to "do whatever it takes" when they really only mean "do whatever it takes, as long as it isn't too expensive" or as you noted, "as long as it doesn't affect me". I have found this to be true outside of the environmental movement too. One person's minor inconvenience is another person's major problem.
Knee jerk reactions to one problem often create others. I believe that ethanol production from corn falls in this category. Ethanol as a fuel may be OK. I think it was mandated before its time. Maybe something else would be better. Am I for alternate fuel/energy research? YES! Am I for knee jerk political solutions to technical problems? NO!
I completely agree with you on this- I am not a fan of 'knee-jerk' solutions either, but again, we are talking about very simple modifications that everyone could do very easily that cumulatively could make a big difference.
I just don't understand the logic of pointing fingers at others, and saying "well if they don't have to do anything, then neither do I". How is that productive? And yes, it is easier to 'insist' that others change, but again I think you (as are many people) are looking at it as a punitive action. Everyone should be thankful they can do something to make a contribution, be it large or small.
Edited to say that I am stepping off my soap box now! [;)]
"Knee-Jerk" is common in the global warming fan's world. They don't want to study it they don't want to debate it, all they keep saying is "We must act now before it's too late" & "act now, think latter".. Al Gore refuses to debate this subject with anyone, not even with reporters and he flys around in his private Gulf Stream Jet that burns 450 gallons of fuel a hour, then he wants everyone else to take a bus, walk, ride a bike or drive a tiny car to work. IMO I believe the globe is cooling, we have not had any real "hot" summers in Ohio for about 20 years, we use to get a few 100 degree days each summer lately we rarely get any 90 degree summer days and they have been closing the city public swimming pools more early than before, it gets too cold for swimming and no one uses the pools. The winters seem to be getting longer and colder.[xx(]
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
"Knee-Jerk" is common in the global warming fan's world. They don't want to study it they don't want to debate it, all they keep saying is "We must act now before it's too late" & "act now, think latter".. Al Gore refuses to debate this subject with anyone, not even with reporters and he flys around in his private Gulf Stream Jet that burns 450 gallons of fuel a hour, then he wants everyone else to take a bus, walk, ride a bike or drive a tiny car to work. IMO I believe the globe is cooling, we have not had any real "hot" summers in Ohio for about 20 years, we use to get a few 100 degree days each summer lately we rarely get any 90 degree summer days and they have been closing the city public swimming pools more early than before, it gets too cold for swimming and no one uses the pools. The winters seem to be getting longer and colder.[xx(]
Funny, in Northwest Arkansas the summers seemed hotter and longer to me. Again, you confuse weather with climate.
If you want to talk about the weather, how about at the ends of the earth where the temperatures are most extreme?
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/256/story/54229.html
Or maybe that it was 16 degrees above normal yesterday in Columbus?
Oh, and you're full of **** when you say you used to get a few 100 degree days each summer, unless you're specifically talking about the summer of 1936, when there were 8 days with record high temperatures that were over 100 degrees. (which also, incidentally, had several of the coldest days on record)
Sometimes columbus gets one or two. There was one in July '99..that's one in the last twelve years (I looked back as far as 1996). Yet you claim that you used to 'usually' get 'a few each summer'.
Not that any of that has any bearing whatsoever on the global climate.
quote:
Originally posted by nathanm
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
"Knee-Jerk" is common in the global warming fan's world. They don't want to study it they don't want to debate it, all they keep saying is "We must act now before it's too late" & "act now, think latter".. Al Gore refuses to debate this subject with anyone, not even with reporters and he flys around in his private Gulf Stream Jet that burns 450 gallons of fuel a hour, then he wants everyone else to take a bus, walk, ride a bike or drive a tiny car to work. IMO I believe the globe is cooling, we have not had any real "hot" summers in Ohio for about 20 years, we use to get a few 100 degree days each summer lately we rarely get any 90 degree summer days and they have been closing the city public swimming pools more early than before, it gets too cold for swimming and no one uses the pools. The winters seem to be getting longer and colder.[xx(]
Funny, in Northwest Arkansas the summers seemed hotter and longer to me. Again, you confuse weather with climate.
If you want to talk about the weather, how about at the ends of the earth where the temperatures are most extreme?
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/256/story/54229.html
Or maybe that it was 16 degrees above normal yesterday in Columbus?
Oh, and you're full of **** when you say you used to get a few 100 degree days each summer, unless you're specifically talking about the summer of 1936, when there were 8 days with record high temperatures that were over 100 degrees. (which also, incidentally, had several of the coldest days on record)
Sometimes columbus gets one or two. There was one in July '99..that's one in the last twelve years (I looked back as far as 1996). Yet you claim that you used to 'usually' get 'a few each summer'.
Not that any of that has any bearing whatsoever on the global climate.
Climate is weather over a long peroid of time, and we had cool summers and bitter long cold winters in the midwest. I lived in Texas (Dallas Fort Worth) during the 1980's and I loved the weather. My first year in Texas 1980 we had a big heatwave that summer (it's listed in google), that was before the global warming craz so the heat wave was not blamed on anything. We had something like 45 days of above 100 degree temps and the low never diped below 90 degrees at night. I loved it, I also vacationed alot in Las Vegas when it was 115 degrees. When I transfered to Ohio in 1989 I missed the warm mild weather of Texas, it's hard to get use-to colder climates once you live in a mild climate. As for Ohio all I said is we don't get the warm weather like we use to in Ohio. Summers are cooler and winters colder and longer. I would favor a debate between the global warming people and people who don't buy into that hoax. That is what we need, but the global warming side does not want to debate the issue, they refuse to look at real data that shows there is no global warming. Like I said before if we had the 1930's dust bowl in 2008 it would be blamed on global warming today no question about that.[xx(]
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
quote:
Originally posted by nathanm
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
"Knee-Jerk" is common in the global warming fan's world. They don't want to study it they don't want to debate it, all they keep saying is "We must act now before it's too late" & "act now, think latter".. Al Gore refuses to debate this subject with anyone, not even with reporters and he flys around in his private Gulf Stream Jet that burns 450 gallons of fuel a hour, then he wants everyone else to take a bus, walk, ride a bike or drive a tiny car to work. IMO I believe the globe is cooling, we have not had any real "hot" summers in Ohio for about 20 years, we use to get a few 100 degree days each summer lately we rarely get any 90 degree summer days and they have been closing the city public swimming pools more early than before, it gets too cold for swimming and no one uses the pools. The winters seem to be getting longer and colder.[xx(]
Funny, in Northwest Arkansas the summers seemed hotter and longer to me. Again, you confuse weather with climate.
If you want to talk about the weather, how about at the ends of the earth where the temperatures are most extreme?
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/256/story/54229.html
Or maybe that it was 16 degrees above normal yesterday in Columbus?
Oh, and you're full of **** when you say you used to get a few 100 degree days each summer, unless you're specifically talking about the summer of 1936, when there were 8 days with record high temperatures that were over 100 degrees. (which also, incidentally, had several of the coldest days on record)
Sometimes columbus gets one or two. There was one in July '99..that's one in the last twelve years (I looked back as far as 1996). Yet you claim that you used to 'usually' get 'a few each summer'.
Not that any of that has any bearing whatsoever on the global climate.
Climate is weather over a long peroid of time, and we had cool summers and bitter long cold winters in the midwest. I lived in Texas (Dallas Fort Worth) during the 1980's and I loved the weather. My first year in Texas 1980 we had a big heatwave that summer (it's listed in google), that was before the global warming craz so the heat wave was not blamed on anything. We had something like 45 days of above 100 degree temps and the low never diped below 90 degrees at night. I loved it, I also vacationed alot in Las Vegas when it was 115 degrees. When I transfered to Ohio in 1989 I missed the warm mild weather of Texas, it's hard to get use-to colder climates once you live in a mild climate. As for Ohio all I said is we don't get the warm weather like we use to in Ohio. Summers are cooler and winters colder and longer. I would favor a debate between the global warming people and people who don't buy into that hoax. That is what we need, but the global warming side does not want to debate the issue, they refuse to look at real data that shows there is no global warming. Like I said before if we had the 1930's dust bowl in 2008 it would be blamed on global warming today no question about that.[xx(]
Your statement about people blaming certain weather events on global warming is a complete straw man. No climatologist does that. (Or very few, if there are exceptions)
Only laypersons and people who disbelieve in climate change do that. The former because they hear "the globe is warming, and that could cause stronger hurricanes" and think "oh, these major hurricanes are caused by global warming," when no specific weather event is the result of global warming.
Whether you like it or not, the global average temperature has been increasing since we started keeping records. Sometimes it does in fact go down for a few years, but the trend is still upwards. An increase in the rate of change was seen when we started burning more and more fuel and pumping more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Think of it like the stock market. As we pump more and more funny money into it, it keeps going up and up. Sometimes it drops, but the overall trend is still upwards.
The temp. trend since 1998 is down. It's getting colder. They had snow in Las Vegas, so much snow that some car port roofs collapsed, they never got snow like that before. They had snow in New Orleans the most early snowfall since 1850 there, and it's not even winter yet. Western China also had record snows near Tibet. The planet is NOT warming. The polar ice is growing thicker not thinner. The climate goes in cycles warm peroids and cold peroids, there is no steady upward trend in temp it's going down. Brrrr! I know some global warming fans have been saying that cold weather is caused by global warming because they need to find a excuse to explain away all these cold years. Talk about me making a example of this cold weather, when there is a batch of a few warm days in winter such as the normal "January Thaw" the global warming people jump all over that and say "see, see we told you it's January and it's warm, it's global warming see we told ya" But when it's super cold they keep quiet. Global warming is the biggest hoax being played on the people, Al Gore and his kind want everyone to drink that Kool-Aid. They won't even debate the issue. They know the facts will shut them down.
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
They know the facts will shut them down.
Are you sure you aren't confusing yourself for these "global warming fans" you speak of?
What you fail to grasp is that what someone like me or like these "global warming fans" say isn't important. The data is what's important. While there hasn't been significant warming in the last few years, there have been other periods in the past where there has been a temporary halt (and even cooling) before again resuming the upward trend.
And ice thickening? Where are you getting that? The references I see indicate significant thinning in the last couple of years.
A BBC story from yesterday: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7786910.stm
I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'll never understand why the anti-climate change crew can't see the HUUUUUGE opportunities that this paradigm shift will open up.
Sauerkraut, it's immaterial whether the science is right or not. We don't have to argue that at all. What's more important is whether the world on balance believes the science is correct.
And if the world on balance believes the science is correct, then that's the reality that we're going to be living with. So: we can either fight it and increasingly be percieved as out of touch or ignorant or simply obstinate, or we can agree to go forward using that template.
Americans are not only excellent innovators, but we're exceptional pioneers. New doesn't (shouldn't) scare us. Given that an alternative energy infrastructure would entail changes large and small in our daily lives, think about all the new business, new jobs, and new money that those changes would generate. Not just power generation, but power transmission, changes to the vehicles we drive and how we get the power to move them; changes in how our homes consume power and how our businesses. It's limitless stuff, because power is everywhere.
I wish you, Sauerkraut, would spend more time thinking of ways a change like that would be beneficial, rather than how it's a threat to our way of life. In a way (in the pioneer way), facing down a paradigm shift like climate change is quintessentially American.
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
[
Sauerkraut, it's immaterial whether the science is right or not. We don't have to argue that at all. What's more important is whether the world on balance believes the science is correct.
I cannot agree and won't apologize for disagreeing by starting my reply with "sorry". Ignoring correct science to follow incorrect science is a waste of resources.
Alternate energy, power generation, vehicle changes etc are worthwhile goals on their own.
If they must be tied to a lie, maybe they shold not be pursued.
Let's say your car doesn't go and is towed to a repair shop. You insist the transmission is shot and insist on overhauling or replacing the transmission. You insist, even thhough the shop manager sees and points out to you a broken driveshaft. Possibly the shop would work on the transmission as a customer demanded service and bill you according. The car still wouldn't go. You would get angry. If you then asked them to fix the car you would also get a bill for a broken drive shaft that fixed it. This is a simple example. You would have to be stupid to ignore the broken driveshaft. It is also wrong to ignore data on the environment just because it does not support a popular theory.
Do things from a base of knowledge, not just a popular cause.
Global Warming people always ignore the effects of the sun in the computer models. Garbage in garbage out- That's like having a inspection of your homes heating system where they check the door seals and window seals, and check the atic insulation but they don't check the furnace the main driving force of a homes heating system. The sun is the driving force of earths climate and it's ignored all the time. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,468084,00.html
There is lots of info to read about the global warming hoax on google by googling "global warming hoax" or "debunking global warming" or words to that effect, tons of stuff comes up. The arctic and polar areas are growing colder. The ice is growing, nothing is melting at -60 below zero. The polar ice melts in the summer and it re-freezes thicker in the winter. Brrrr.
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
There is lots of info to read about the global warming hoax on google by googling "global warming hoax" or "debunking global warming" or words to that effect, tons of stuff comes up. The arctic and polar areas are growing colder. The ice is growing, nothing is melting at -60 below zero. The polar ice melts in the summer and it re-freezes thicker in the winter. Brrrr.
There's a difference between temperature and climate.
Sheesh, you're like a little kid sticking his fingers in his ears saying over and over 'lalalalalalalala'....
Any goofball can throw up a website CLAIMING to debunk global warming. Google searches on this topic mean nothing without science to back them up.
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
There is lots of info to read about the global warming hoax on google by googling "global warming hoax" or "debunking global warming" or words to that effect, tons of stuff comes up. The arctic and polar areas are growing colder. The ice is growing, nothing is melting at -60 below zero. The polar ice melts in the summer and it re-freezes thicker in the winter. Brrrr.
Your post is entirely factually incorrect aside from the fact that there are indeed web sites that claim that there is no such thing as global warming.
Of course, you can't even be bothered to click on the links I've provided in this thread that show ever newer evidence that the poles are warming.
As the summer extent of sea ice in the Arctic decreases, there is more sea surface available to absorb solar energy. The sea absorbs something like 70% of the sun's energy that strikes it. The ice reflects something around 90% of it.
And if you've ever had a glass of ice water, you can understand the concept that as long as there is ice remaining in the glass, the temperature of the water stays around 32 degrees. Once it melts, there's nothing around to continue absorbing the excess heat, so it rapidly warms.
Good analogy on the ice in a glass thing Nathan. Not quite the same since oceans are not a coherent temperature throughout, but good enough.
It is worth noting, however, that over the last 2 or 3 years temperatures have gone down and ice levels have increased. After reaching the lowest point in 30 years ice levels are now back near their normal levels.
Actually, there is 500,000 sq km MORE ice this year than there was last year (int he arctic, where winter measurements are clearly complete). This being the 3rd consecutive year of MORE ice it create a potential problem for Global Warming, so they merely adjusted the scale and said those 500,000 km didn't really count. Really, that's what they did.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24834853-20261,00.html
Damn Global Warming, all adding more ice to the Arctic. If shrinking ice packs are prima facia evidence of Global Warming, wouldn't growing ice packs pretty much destroy the notion?
I grant you this is NOT evidence that Global Warming is not factual. But neither are most of things pointed to as "proof" of global warming. People are now invested financially, professionally, and emotionally in the notion of Global Warming. Such attachments make for bad science.
Here's a intresting link about the global warming hoax... They like to doctor the numbers and facts to make it look like the polar areas are melting. This is all to push a political agenda of making carbon a item to trade with and a way to tax people for using carbon. It's pretty scary they ignore facts and blindly follow the hoax.. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3883550/Facts-melted-by-global-warming.html [xx(]
quote:
Originally posted by nathanm
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
There is lots of info to read about the global warming hoax on google by googling "global warming hoax" or "debunking global warming" or words to that effect, tons of stuff comes up. The arctic and polar areas are growing colder. The ice is growing, nothing is melting at -60 below zero. The polar ice melts in the summer and it re-freezes thicker in the winter. Brrrr.
Your post is entirely factually incorrect aside from the fact that there are indeed web sites that claim that there is no such thing as global warming.
Of course, you can't even be bothered to click on the links I've provided in this thread that show ever newer evidence that the poles are warming.
As the summer extent of sea ice in the Arctic decreases, there is more sea surface available to absorb solar energy. The sea absorbs something like 70% of the sun's energy that strikes it. The ice reflects something around 90% of it.
And if you've ever had a glass of ice water, you can understand the concept that as long as there is ice remaining in the glass, the temperature of the water stays around 32 degrees. Once it melts, there's nothing around to continue absorbing the excess heat, so it rapidly warms.
I read the link- it was about those darn computer models. Like I said they don't go with the real facts. Garbage in and garbage out. The computer models if run backwards they give different weather than what we just experenced. (In other words they get the past weather reports wrong) The computer models leave out the two most important things about a climate The SUN and Water Vapor (the real big greenhouse gas not carbon).. If the computer models can't get the past weather correct, everything they say about the future weather is doubtful. The South Pole had some huge ice build-up, ice sheets are growing all over over. Snowfall is increasing. Eastern Russia has been having record cold of -60 below zero.. Alabama had 10 degrees. Brrr!
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
Good analogy on the ice in a glass thing Nathan. Not quite the same since oceans are not a coherent temperature throughout, but good enough.
It is worth noting, however, that over the last 2 or 3 years temperatures have gone down and ice levels have increased. After reaching the lowest point in 30 years ice levels are now back near their normal levels.
Actually, there is 500,000 sq km MORE ice this year than there was last year (int he arctic, where winter measurements are clearly complete). This being the 3rd consecutive year of MORE ice it create a potential problem for Global Warming, so they merely adjusted the scale and said those 500,000 km didn't really count. Really, that's what they did.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24834853-20261,00.html
Damn Global Warming, all adding more ice to the Arctic. If shrinking ice packs are prima facia evidence of Global Warming, wouldn't growing ice packs pretty much destroy the notion?
I grant you this is NOT evidence that Global Warming is not factual. But neither are most of things pointed to as "proof" of global warming. People are now invested financially, professionally, and emotionally in the notion of Global Warming. Such attachments make for bad science.
The problem with the winter measurements is that there's also been less sea ice in the summer, along with warmer summer temperatures, although I guess we'll have to see what summer '09 brings.
http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2008/10/has_arctic_summer_sea_ice_tipp.html
http://www.nature.com/climate/2008/0811/full/climate.2008.108.html
h
Also, the figure you reference fails to account for the thickness of the ice sheet. Volume is as important as extent.
What date was this ice 'vanished,' btw? And which website are we talking about, NSIDC? The referenced article is nonspecific to the point of being useless and I can't find any other references on Google News.