General Climate Discussion

[lazs2]

and arlo...   I don't know how you are able to missread numbers so badly but more people die of cold than heat..  in the US alone....

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/dec2007/2007-12-31-096.asp

"""BERKELEY, California, December 31, 2007 (ENS) - Fatalities in the continental United States tend to climb for several weeks after severe cold spells, numbering 360 per day and 14,380 per year, according to a new study co-authored by two University of California economists.

Deaths linked to extreme cold account for 0.8 percent of the nation's annual death rate and outnumber those attributed to leukemia, murder and chronic liver disease combined, the study reports.

Cold-related deaths reduce the average life expectancy of Americans by at least a decade, it says. """"

And that is just America.

Soooo...  It would seem that if we are indeed responsible for this balmy and pleasant warm spell that the earth is seeing then we are saving lives and making it a better place to live with 15% more crop production to feed the people not killed by mean old mother nature.

Unfortunately.. it can't last.. the earth is already starting to cool... people will freeze..  and there will be nothing we can do about it.

lazs

[lazs2]

and of course this....

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/subject/h/summaries/samerhotvcold.jsp

""derived daily numbers of deaths from all causes, excepting violent deaths and deaths of babies up to one month old, from Sao Paulo, Brazil's mortality information system for the period 1991-1994, after which they analyzed them for three groups of people - those less than 15 years of age (children), those 15-64 years of age (adults), and those 65 and above (the elderly) - with respect to the effects of air temperature relative to "change points" at which warming and cooling begin to influence death rates. This work revealed that the change points for heat- and cold-induced deaths were identical, i.e., 20°C; and for each 1°C increase above this value for a given and prior day's mean air temperature, they observed a 2.6% increase in deaths from all causes in children, a 1.5% increase in deaths from all causes in adults, and a 2.5% increase in deaths from all causes in the elderly. For each 1°C decrease below the 20°C change point, however, the cold effect was much greater, with increases in deaths from all causes in children, adults and the elderly being 4.0%, 2.6% and 5.5%, respectively, which cooling-induced death rates are 54%, 73% and 120% greater than those attributable to warming for people in these three respective age groups.""

cold kills... more than heat.  

lazs

[SlapShot]

After reading the supposedly irrefutable referenced article ... all I can say is ... you have got to be chitting me.

The “unequivocal” part is only referencing the fact that things are getting warmer ... whats not “unequivocal” is that "man" is causing this phenomenon or is it really just a weather/climate phase that is happening regardless of human input or not.

"the leading international network of climate scientists has concluded for the first time that global warming is “unequivocal” and that “human activity is the main driver, very likely” causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950.

"very likely" ... impressive, but it doesn't cut the mustard for me ... what it says is that the really don't know for sure.

"The report is the panel’s fourth assessment since 1990 on the causes and consequences of climate change, but it is the first in which the group asserts with near certainty — more than 90 percent confidence — that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from human activities have been the main causes of warming in the past half century.

"very likely" ... "near certainty" ... and "more than 90 percent" ... those terms mean ... they really aren't 100% sure them selfs and they could be wrong ... commonly known as CYA.

That article is not one that I would bank my argument on.

[Reschke]

The simple fact is this people and you will not like it because it isn't built on proof it is built on common sense.


WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING!


SO shut up and move on to something different!

[Arlo]

Originally posted by lazs2
and arlo...   I don't know how you are able to missread numbers so badly ...  

Dunno how you come to a conclusion that when I post a source it involved me "misreading" it. Or are you thinking that when you post one in response that it trumps mine because you like it better and I obviously saw your's before you posted it and just as obviously already misread it and ignored it's truthiness?

It's certainly a window into how you think but that's beside the point. And ... I warned ya. You can't say I didn't.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Reschke
The simple fact is this people and you will not like it because it isn't built on proof it is built on common sense.


WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING!


SO shut up and move on to something different!

Or we do but there's some debate on the cause, effect and necessity of action?

Why? This debate's been going on almost as long as the O-Club's been around and it's the member's most fervent to debunk global warming that give it the most print here. *ShruG*

If one side or another finds it either of pressing enough importance to try to influence other Aces High players (or former/inactive players ... or even just O-Club groupies that like to argue politics alone here) or gather forces together to build support around the subject (either side of it) here .... or even those that find it amusing enough to jump in and play .... I don't think you or I or even a dozen more grouped and armed to the teeth can build sufficient momentum to gag an individual or group no matter what their say or motivation.

It's a current topic. It's a "heated" debate (ptp). Many on both sides feel it's important to support or oppose the activism or the anti-activism. It's only worth the aggravation one feels (if they feel such) if they're truly committed to one side or the other of the crusade and they feel the threat posed by the other side to their personal core.

Other than that ... it's just one more argument in the O-Club that some may be deluded enough to think they'll win single-handedly (or maybe even as a tag-team in a death match or a feud `tween hillbillies), relishing the accolades of their perspective like-minded peers for the rest of their days, afterward.



(It's really just bs over drinks and cards) <-

Damn, Skipper. I'll agree with a part of your point. I really do need something better to do with my time, sometimes. Like ... I dunno ... VF-17 in AHII? (There's not a smiley big nuff on short notice)

[bustr]

Guys,

Lets do a peer review on this thread.

I say at this point it's degenerated down to the basic statement:

"My willy is bigger than yours and if your wife\girlfreind\boyfriend\gerbil  meets me she will agree and tell you to hit the road and become my love slave. All of the google hits I can reference support I'm better hung than you so now tiss off and die a horrible death because you are ignorant because of your microscopic willy!"

If you gents are slinging the mud at this point after all the declarations of Ivory Tower brain farting in this thread that has been whipped out from some geniuses trowsers. Just think how scewed and big willy biased the whole scientific world must be over it.

As of yet science dosent even know which scientist has the biggest willy. That would seem to be alot simpler to scientificly determin than who had the biggest willy or weather pattern wise 1M years, 100K years, 500 years, or when ever they didn't keep records ago.

Arlo do you think the genius's in this thread will ever figure out which one has the biggest willy?........

[bustr]

Dangit, and you guys can't even organise a peer review to see who got the biggest willy let alone if we are all gonna die by drowning Jan 1, 2020. I thought some of you were claiming certanty by association to google threads that say we are doomed......

[MORAY37]

Originally posted by lazs2
oh.

A better one would be that people are getting fatter.   The scientists computer models show that by the year 2100 they will be fat enough to throw off the rotation of the planet....

   



lazs

There are no computer models of the sort Lazs.

That's pretty funny since it directly conflicts with a tenet of science... Matter can neither be created nor destroyed...it can only be changed.

More people could never throw off the rotation of the earth...  simply because that matter came from what was already here.

You consistently continue to spout the same vehement stream of idiocy as when I first met you.  I will say it is nice to see some things don't change.

[Holden McGroin]

a·nal·o·gy [uh-nal-uh-jee]
–noun, plural -gies.

Logic. a form of reasoning in which one thing is inferred to be similar to another thing in a certain respect, on the basis of the known similarity between the things in other respects.  

A comparison of two different things that are alike in some way (see metaphor and simile). An analogy attributed to Samuel Johnson is: “Dictionaries are like watches; the worst is better than none, and the best cannot be expected to go quite true.”

Are dictionaries like watches?  Not really.  you can't tell time from a dictionary.

[lazs2]

moray... correct me if I am wrong but I don't believe that I have ever "met" you.

lazs

[AKIron]

Originally posted by MORAY37
More people could never throw off the rotation of the earth...  simply because that matter came from what was already here.

I beg to differ as that is my plan to alter the path of any asteriod that is passing near us before returning to smash into us. Move everyone in the world into say, Texas, and you've altered the gravitational force of the earth felt by that asteroid. Of course the amount would be miniscule and I'm not serious about it have a significant effect on an asteroid. A prolonged visit to Texas by 6 billion people might have an effect on the rotation of the earth though.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by bustr
Arlo do you think the genius's in this thread will ever figure out which one has the biggest willy?........

Of course! (No.)

[bustr]

Originally posted by Arlo
Of course! (No.)

Arlo,

It's getting bad when I'm asking for your ever impish sage advice. But this thread is bringing out the willies in anyone who gets snared by it. Oh gawd someone intervein and save these poor souls..........

[Arlo]

Originally posted by bustr
Arlo,

It's getting bad when I'm asking for your ever impish sage advice. But this thread is bringing out the willies in anyone who gets snared by it. Oh gawd someone intervein and save these poor souls..........

LOL. I take it as a good sign. Not so much a meeting of political preferences or ideals but a more realistic approach to how much our differences shouldn't threaten our similarities.