Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: ridley1 on July 08, 2012, 04:18:53 PM

Title: Climate change?
Post by: ridley1 on July 08, 2012, 04:18:53 PM
so as we're all roasting in this heat wave, which has set records that go back to the beginning of recorded time, (what? 125 years? Geologically, a fart in a hurricane) I just realized that by this time we were all supposed to be reduced to a pool of protoplasm in a moon scape due to the ravages of acid rain.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: SuperDud on July 08, 2012, 07:25:48 PM
Climate change occurs. Whether its natural or man made is the argument... and I'm not touching that.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: titanic3 on July 08, 2012, 07:46:01 PM
It's both.  :) Man just sped up the process. It was going to happen regardless.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: AceHavok on July 08, 2012, 09:00:16 PM
Man has sped up the process, extremely fast. Earth will always be here, but if we will that is the question.  :bhead  We really need to find a non-polluting resource.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: MaSonZ on July 08, 2012, 09:12:50 PM
Man has sped up the process, extremely fast. Earth will always be here, but if we will that is the question.  :bhead  We really need to find a non-polluting resource.
such as? we will always have some sort of pollution whether it be manufacturing or means of travel, or means of war. I dont mean to flirt with polotics here, I just dont see a "clean" resource that one hears about in the news.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: AceHavok on July 08, 2012, 09:21:45 PM
I know nothing will be 'Clean' but we're depleting Earth's resources at an extraordinary rate. We need to find a renewable resource such as Solar Power, Wind Power, Water turbines etc.  Even Nuclear power is a clean way to create energy, people are just afraid that there will be a reactor meltdown or something.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: titanic3 on July 08, 2012, 09:31:16 PM
If there's no sunlight that day? If there's no wind that day? Water pollution from creating dams?

You can say batteries, but then batteries die and you still have to dispose all the chemicals somehow. We'll still be using nonrenewable resources 20 years from now. Then once we find a way to use renewable energy as efficient and easily as we are now with fossil fuels, we still have to find a way to make it world wide.

It's just seems so far away.   :(
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: AceHavok on July 08, 2012, 09:42:13 PM
We're already have water pollution from fossil fuels. I don't see any problem with creating nuclear plants.  Fossil fuels will run out eventually, I just fear that Earth will be pretty far gone by the time that happens.  They expect Polar Bears to be extinct in less than 50 years.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: MaSonZ on July 08, 2012, 09:44:01 PM
If there's no sunlight that day? If there's no wind that day? Water pollution from creating dams?

You can say batteries, but then batteries die and you still have to dispose all the chemicals somehow. We'll still be using nonrenewable resources 20 years from now. Then once we find a way to use renewable energy as efficient and easily as we are now with fossil fuels, we still have to find a way to make it world wide.

It's just seems so far away.   :(
I believe Solar panels have storage compartments to hold energy, if you can afford enough, you want have to worry about no sun for the day. Wind energy is yet again not a worry. Ever see a picture of windmills in large fields, like an orchard of trees? Water pollution is an issue, but if you take steps to filter the water before, duriong and after the energy exchange, whats the issue with it?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: titanic3 on July 08, 2012, 09:54:28 PM
I believe Solar panels have storage compartments to hold energy, if you can afford enough, you want have to worry about no sun for the day. Wind energy is yet again not a worry. Ever see a picture of windmills in large fields, like an orchard of trees? Water pollution is an issue, but if you take steps to filter the water before, duriong and after the energy exchange, whats the issue with it?

Right, but then not every country in the world is willing to use the latest technology.

As for water pollution, I think I might be using the wrong term here, but I remember reading somewhere that dams (you need them for water turbines) can cause wildlife in and around the river to be affected. Floods, water temperature rise, and waste. Heat pollution? If I remember correctly?  :headscratch:

Yes, we are trying to reduce pollution, but just looking at the climate and weather patterns from the past 50 years, I think we're already too late (gee, that sounds depressing). No, it certainly won't be a 2012 apocalypse with great big flood and supervolcanoes, but I bet that in the next 10 years, the weather is gonna get freakier regardless of our efforts to reduce pollution.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: JimmyD3 on July 08, 2012, 10:01:52 PM
See Rule #14
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Chalenge on July 08, 2012, 10:04:32 PM
You are all correct. We need to build a space platform in high orbit and then nuke the planet dwellers below. Its the only way to be sure.  :bolt:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: JimmyD3 on July 08, 2012, 10:06:35 PM
You are all correct. We need to build a space platform in high orbit and then nuke the planet dwellers below. Its the only way to be sure.  :bolt:

 :rofl :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bj229r on July 08, 2012, 10:18:56 PM
so as we're all roasting in this heat wave, which has set records that go back to the beginning of recorded time, (what? 125 years? Geologically, a fart in a hurricane) I just realized that by this time we were all supposed to be reduced to a pool of protoplasm in a moon scape due to the ravages of acid rain.
actually, the 1930's held most of the records until this week....most people didn't even have electricity then......wonder how it got so hot?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mthrockmor on July 08, 2012, 10:24:56 PM
See Rule #14
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: AceHavok on July 08, 2012, 10:35:13 PM
Horse Puky! Polar Bears will be no more extinct, due "Global Warming", than the chances of the Sun not coming up tomorrow. The Climate has NEVER been static, is has and will always be in a state of flux (change). Just another issue for the Progressives to use, to control our lives. 25 years ago we were supposed to be going into another Ice Age. Go figure.


We are overdue for an Ice Age on Earth,  But that's not my point.  We are burning a hole through our ozone layer.  You can't say that would happen naturally. 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: AceHavok on July 08, 2012, 10:42:10 PM
Another large deal of pollution was the Exxon Mobil oil spill and the BP oil spill.  Both killed thousands of animals.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Getback on July 08, 2012, 10:54:03 PM
El Nina killed almost 50% of the population of seals and lizards on the Galapagos. That's been going on quite a while.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: jimson on July 08, 2012, 11:24:12 PM
Here in AZ our record highs were 22 years ago and in Jan 2011 we had some record low temps.

So is global warming making AZ cooler?

I know this is gonna get locked, but so far, drought is caused by man made climate change, floods are caused by man made climate change, storms are caused by man made climate change, lack of storms are caused by man made climate change.

Whatever.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mthrockmor on July 08, 2012, 11:41:42 PM
All one needs to do is read a little George Orwell, 1984 and search out double speak. We have witnessed nothing more then a propaganda change and sadly so many are buying it. We have spent over a decade being told "man-made global warming." The problem, there has been no statistically significant warming since the late 1990s. This is even acknowledged by those that advocate "global warming." Since they have spent a decade plus pushing this and it doesn't work, now they have shifted to "man-made climate change." It is no longer 'global warming,' because it is not happening. FACT! So now, no change in temp at all but man is still guilty.

In fact, Dr Hansen just admitted to the medi-evil mini-ice age, something the 'global warming' crew denied for over two decades. Now, we are back in a soviet-sytle revolutionary change for the sake of change without any real changing taking place. Get's hot, mans fault; get's cold, mans fault; hurricanes, man's fault, too much rain, mans fault; etc, etc, etc.

For the kids on this thread, there are those of us who have watched this going back to the 1980's, some before this. You show up with a few years of history and repeat what you don't know. Sadly, this is one of those situations where you don't even know what you don't know. I suggest sitting back and reading a bit more history.

Boo

PS Holes in the Ozone as the man-made theory of global redistribution of wealth ended in the mid-1990s, replace by the current theory, which was replaced by the most recent theory.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: pembquist on July 09, 2012, 12:46:58 AM
OK since science isn't on the table all I gotta say is the earth doesn't give a rats a... what anybody thinks.  You can believe what ever you want, thing is I'd have to say its pretty obvious that if anthropogenic climate change is real, (which it is as far as I'm concerned,) we sure aint gonna to do anything about it.  I don't imagine its the end of humanity cause we've got opposable thumbs and a mean streak a mile wide, its just gonna get a tad less comfortable.  Can't wait for the next big war.  Sorry for the sourness.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on July 09, 2012, 04:03:22 AM
so as we're all roasting in this heat wave, which has set records that go back to the beginning of recorded time, (what? 125 years? Geologically, a fart in a hurricane) I just realized that by this time we were all supposed to be reduced to a pool of protoplasm in a moon scape due to the ravages of acid rain.

Last two summers it was unusually warm here in Scandinavia and headlines were full of climate change this and that despite the winters being extremely cold and heavy snowed. This summer it has been cold and rain 99% of the time. Shockingly no tabloids are screaming climate change anymore.  :rock

I did get a friendly letter from our local version of IRS stating that they want to help me to choose a more eco friendly car by raising my taxes a lot. I wonder if they'll buy my huge Jeep for a good price then?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 09, 2012, 05:44:22 AM
We have not been around long enough to affect the planet :old:

This period we have been in  is a glitch and enable Humans to evolve, the weather systems are reverting back to the norm :old:

Shida explained that it is due to populations, this is not true we are not that important :old:

These weather systems cause no problem to Bushmen or those living in the Amazon, they do not have air conditioning or four wheel drive :old:

I am moving to Wigan in the North or England because the weather in said town has always been inclement :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: eagl on July 09, 2012, 06:30:36 AM
They expect Polar Bears to be extinct in less than 50 years.

"They" must be kind of dumb then...  The earth has been much much warmer than it is now, and polar bears survived that time.  And the time before that.  The bears will figure it out unless we shoot them all when they move out of their current habitats, but that's a problem faced by lots of species not just polar bears.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 09, 2012, 07:01:54 AM
+1

The arrogance to think we are that important in the scheme of things :old:

We have always had floods and adverse weather.

This is a characteristic of western culture we have to create a bogey man to keep us all in check.

Here is list of said bogey men:

(1) Population growth.
(2) Food supplies. (The US can feed the whole world if it wanted to)
(3) Reds under the Bed.
(4) Economic collapes (It happend in Elizabethan time and Georgian times)
(5) Living space (People are moving to cities only rich people can move to countryside)

You tell a lie to hide a lie :)

I don't care about Polar bears when there are kids starving in the world :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bj229r on July 09, 2012, 07:25:05 AM

We are overdue for an Ice Age on Earth,  But that's not my point.  We are burning a hole through our ozone layer.  You can't say that would happen naturally. 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution
did your high school science teacher mention there is a 'hole' every year over Antarctica  when no UV reaches there?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 09, 2012, 07:36:15 AM
Holes are a myth like Giraffes :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: SuperDud on July 09, 2012, 09:35:56 AM
Wow, exactly what I thought would happen... happened. Thanks for not letting me down guys.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skilless on July 09, 2012, 09:53:53 AM
But...  I thought the debate was over??
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bj229r on July 09, 2012, 10:04:58 AM
Wow, exactly what I thought would happen... happened. Thanks for not letting me down guys.
ummm.....you make a thread called 'climate change'.....and think people aren't gonna debate it? Let's have another guess the song thread
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 09, 2012, 10:19:48 AM
 :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: shiv on July 09, 2012, 11:41:41 AM
Thank you for this wonderful thread.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: SuperDud on July 09, 2012, 01:25:36 PM
ummm.....you make a thread called 'climate change'.....and think people aren't gonna debate it? Let's have another guess the song thread

EXCEPT.... I didn't make it :banana:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Dragon on July 09, 2012, 01:35:44 PM
It's called a weather pattern because every few years or hundred years or thousand years it repeats itself. 


The Geiko insurance reps were doing the same thing it got too hot, or too wet, or the ground shook, or.......
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bj229r on July 09, 2012, 02:12:17 PM
EXCEPT.... I didn't make it :banana:
bah! Same difference (you WISH you would have made it!)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: JimmyD3 on July 09, 2012, 02:12:52 PM
Rule #14 ?? Common Skuzzy, if my comment was political, then the thread is political.  :salute
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Babalonian on July 09, 2012, 02:34:09 PM
Winters colder, summers hotter.   :noid
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Fud on July 09, 2012, 06:27:35 PM
I read that some people consider CO2 a pollutant, so maybe they can help the planet by not exhaling?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: titanic3 on July 09, 2012, 06:28:03 PM
Winters hotter, summers hotter.   :noid

At least in the Northeast.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: cattb on July 09, 2012, 07:56:06 PM
Wether its climate change or not and if the weather pattern persist. I am expecting higher food prices and the price of corn  to set a record. Goto
http://www.weather.com/maps/activity/garden/usdroughtseverity_large.html (http://www.weather.com/maps/activity/garden/usdroughtseverity_large.html)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: AceHavok on July 09, 2012, 09:15:14 PM
I read that some people consider CO2 a pollutant, so maybe they can help the planet by not exhaling?

Or by not cutting down the trees that are their to get rid of it.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: ghi on July 09, 2012, 10:28:10 PM
http://www.solarham.net/

 http://solarimg.org/artis/

see the links above,the Sun is getting more active; the Northern Lights were visible in N. Michigan last night.
Another large sunspot is facing the Earth for next days; NOAA is forecasting 80% chance for M class and 25% X class flare for next 24 hours.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mthrockmor on July 09, 2012, 11:31:57 PM
http://www.solarham.net/

 http://solarimg.org/artis/

see the links above,the Sun is getting more active; the Northern Lights were visible in N. Michigan last night.
Another large sunspot is facing the Earth for next days; NOAA is forecasting 80% chance for M class and 25% X class flare for next 24 hours.


+101! I think we have a bingo!

During the medievil mini-ice age they noted dramatic changes in solar activity and sun spots.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Jappa52 on July 09, 2012, 11:42:01 PM
We're already have water pollution from fossil fuels. I don't see any problem with creating nuclear plants.  Fossil fuels will run out eventually, I just fear that Earth will be pretty far gone by the time that happens.  They expect Polar Bears to be extinct in less than 50 years.

regurgitate like a vulture.

(http://cache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/sol_10_13/sol17.jpg)

Man is not adding anything to this planetary body we call earth. Nothing new has been added that was not here before. The earth runs in cycles and that glowing orb above you affects your AC/energy bill much more than you ever could. Dont be so self centered to think that your teeny tiny existence or that of all your friends or even country has such an impact. Flea farts on a dogs back...
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 10, 2012, 12:06:17 AM
It's completely scientificalicious


(http://i1253.photobucket.com/albums/hh600/assi2929/time-magazine-ice-age-global-warming.gif)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 10, 2012, 12:56:23 AM
+1

Distaster epic movies and articles recirculate at the height of uncertanty and economic woes :old:

All the best apocolypes movies were produced in said periods  :old:

I cant wait for new version of Solent Green or planet of the apes :old:

I am amazed no one has highlighted the effects of velcro has had upon the polar bear population :old:

Because the financial sector has gone wonky again for a bit ,people cannot be allowed to address the issue, so polar bears and too many people in the world is racked up :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 10, 2012, 02:25:41 AM
There's an awful lot of chaff out there, plenty enough to support any view you are comfortable with and in accordance with keeping you in the lifestyle you have become accustomed to. If you really want to understand this dynamic then the data is readily available.


Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 10, 2012, 08:05:32 AM
Hippy!
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 10, 2012, 08:15:09 AM
It's completely scientificalicious


(http://i1253.photobucket.com/albums/hh600/assi2929/time-magazine-ice-age-global-warming.gif)

if anyone thinks those 2 covers are contradictory ... you havent even got onto the bottom rung of the ladder to understanding climate.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 10, 2012, 08:24:37 AM
Hippy!

Neg. I'm a thinker and a dreamer. But I'm not the only one  :old:

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 10, 2012, 09:34:52 AM
speky four eyes :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 10, 2012, 09:54:34 AM
That's what's so nifty about climate change.

Everything is used as proof of it by those who have faith that these changes are man made.  At least we get to discuss some religion in here because of it.


Of course it is changing.  It always has.  We would still be freezing without all of those cavemen driving around Hummers and SUVs.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 10, 2012, 10:01:04 AM
You're mixing two things together.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skilless on July 10, 2012, 10:07:39 AM
You're mixing two things together.

Actually...  The gw faithful are.  Remember, the debate is over.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 10, 2012, 10:09:52 AM
 it's the sun.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 10, 2012, 10:11:06 AM
Dont listen to Shida he looks for the facts to fit the view.

If you look for the views countering the climate nazi's who use Jet travel more than anyone else.

Polar bears are evil by the way :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 10, 2012, 10:13:18 AM
Quote from: almost everyone
I'm not qualified to have an opinion on this

:aok
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 10, 2012, 10:28:01 AM
I really wasn't aware there was much of a debate to start with, except from those who's interests conflict directly, and they discount themselves immediately  :aok

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 10, 2012, 10:30:23 AM
So velco is not the cause then?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 10, 2012, 10:34:15 AM
It is a minor contributer Zack.

There's nothing to particularly worry about, this is perfectly normal for a civilization at your stage of development. I just find it hilarious that the most obtuse example of cause and effect is disputed and bickered over because people are afraid of minor changes.



Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 10, 2012, 10:44:50 AM
I have no problem with change I now use Brown sauce as well as Tomato sauce when lunching :old:

This is a obvious example of change and  I demand a full and proper apology :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skilless on July 10, 2012, 11:01:16 AM
Change is good and warmer is better.  Embrace it.  I will add that the Sierra Club estimates that the maximum sustainable human world population is no greater than 500 million.  How do you suppose that we should achieve that number?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 10, 2012, 11:03:12 AM
The more you educate people the less children they have :old:

The Downside is they buy bigger cars :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 10, 2012, 11:03:30 AM
Change is good and warmer is better.  Embrace it.  I will add that the Sierra Club estimates that the maximum sustainable human world population is no greater than 500 million.  How do you suppose that we should achieve that number?

Just wait a decade or three.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skilless on July 10, 2012, 11:07:55 AM
Just wait a decade or three.

But according to the warmists the poles should have already melted and Manhattan should be under water...
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Jappa52 on July 10, 2012, 11:11:42 AM
For? What? Are the diseased, rotting polar bear corpses going to spread an incurable virus which originates from the desert formally known as the North Pole that kills off a huge percentage of the population?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 10, 2012, 11:37:53 AM
But according to the warmists the poles should have already melted and Manhattan should be under water...


'The warmists'  :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bj229r on July 10, 2012, 11:39:41 AM
For? What? Are the diseased, rotting polar bear corpses going to spread an incurable virus which originates from the desert formally known as the North Pole that kills off a huge percentage of the population?
there's a great article about those polar bears--there were only ever 4 of them
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 10, 2012, 11:42:00 AM

'The warmists'  :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Sabre on July 10, 2012, 11:51:25 AM
I believe Solar panels have storage compartments to hold energy, if you can afford enough, you want have to worry about no sun for the day. Wind energy is yet again not a worry. Ever see a picture of windmills in large fields, like an orchard of trees? Water pollution is an issue, but if you take steps to filter the water before, duriong and after the energy exchange, whats the issue with it?

Negative, solar panels have zero capability to store electricity they generate. Typically (as with spacecraft), excess energy from solar or wind power must be stored using a separate technology (batteries, typically, or using the excess electricty to generate hydrogen through electrolsis would be another, less conventional way to store the energy).  Note that trying to build a 24/7, 365 day system based completely on renewable sources is prohibitively expensive, as you need multiple technologies (different systems for generating versus storing, for example) to cover the gaps inherent in each.

Personally, I think we ought to go heavy into pebble bed nuclear reactors. They are orders of magnitude safer, cheaper, and less complicated than conventional nuclear reactors (they are, for example, incapable of melting down, due to the physics of their design); see http://web.mit.edu/pebble-bed/ for more info. They are also modular, and can be built in factories and shipped in only a few pieces to where they're to be placed, insuring higher quality control and economy of scale.

Not that I have a problem with using the still abundant fossil fuel available in my own country, but more than anything I see it as a national imparitive that we achieve energy indepence. This is a national security issue at heart. Oh, and MMGW is horse-pucky! :neener:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 10, 2012, 12:00:26 PM
if anyone thinks those 2 covers are contradictory ... you havent even got onto the bottom rung of the ladder to understanding climate.

Not for those making money on it........ they love the spin.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 10, 2012, 12:02:04 PM
But according to the warmists the poles should have already melted and Manhattan should be under water...

Warmest = Walarmist  :D
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 10, 2012, 12:53:01 PM
I have no problem with change I now use Brown sauce as well as Tomato sauce when lunching :old:

This is a obvious example of change and  I demand a full and proper apology :old:

Yes I apologise Zack, you are a credit to the human race, especially since you handed in your electric sauce bottle openner to save the Polar bears  :salute
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Sundowner on July 10, 2012, 03:39:42 PM
Extreme Heat Breaks More Than 3,000 Records This Week

More than 3,000 temperature records have been shattered in the U.S. this past week, from June 28-July 4, 2012, according to NOAA. The tally of record high temperatures during the time period is 2,253, and the tally of maximum low temperature records is 936......

http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/more-than-3000-temperature-rec/67593

A Day in the Life of Wanda Karelessian

I guess it’s just business as usual isn’t it?

No big deal, it’s just 3000 temperature records being shattered.   Who cares?  Think I’ll get me one of them energy drinks, then I’ll sit back and watch American Idol re-runs, after all,  even though I know the outcome, its great entertainment!

3000 record-breaking temperatures!  Wow!  Who would-a-thunk?  I wonder what that means?

I didn’t know Katty Perry just made a movie.

What are all these dead bees doing in the driveway?

To bad about Tom Cruise and his wife. They were such a cool couple.

It’s getting hot in here. I better turn up the air conditioner.

Hey,  Andy Griffith died.  I loved that show.  I didn’t know that Oppie was Ron Howard in real life!  He’s done really well with all the movies he’s directed and everything.

I heard about those dolphins washing up on the beach, I wonder why they did that?  Stupid fish!

I just love the way Kim Kardashian looks, maybe if I lost some weight I could look like her.  What a great life she has.

More dead birds in the back yard.  They just seem to be falling out of the sky these days.  Stupid birds.

Oh, I can’t believe this! It’s starting to hail.  Wow, those are really big hail stones. It’s not supposed to do that here this time of year.

Now I better turn on the heater it’s getting cold in here.

Oh look, Lady Ga Ga! I love this video.

Hey, the  TV and the power went out!  I know I paid the cable bill.  Now I’m missing Ga Ga!

Hope it comes back on soon.

Oh well it’s just business as usual I guess…

What’s that flash in the sky?


Where did I put my Big Gulp?


Regards,
Sun
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 10, 2012, 03:51:54 PM
 :lol
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on July 10, 2012, 03:52:26 PM
Extreme Heat Breaks More Than 3,000 Records This Week

More than 3,000 temperature records have been shattered in the U.S. this past week, from June 28-July 4, 2012, according to NOAA. The tally of record high temperatures during the time period is 2,253, and the tally of maximum low temperature records is 936......


The previous records were 1911, 1942, 1955 etc. and only by 1 degree difference. What farm animal or such caused the heat back then?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 10, 2012, 04:11:56 PM
3000 temp records.... not a big deal. Some poor soul thinks the temp only gets high in one place at a time. Two miles down the road it is much cooler.  :rofl


When the climate quits changing.... the earth will be dead along with everything on it.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skilless on July 10, 2012, 04:28:45 PM
I wonder if that bright ball of fire in the sky has anything to do with it?  Oh...  I almost forgot; the debate is over....
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mthrockmor on July 10, 2012, 04:31:29 PM
Tough to respond via my handheld.

Temps are measured via many sources, to include hundreds and hundreds of ground reading stations. These stations have compliance standards to ensure accurate readings. Issues such as proximity to mechanical devices, blacktop, homes, etc. are essential. Noncompliance can read to higher readings.  As many as 30% of these are out of compliance. Satellite readings are more accurate and tell a different story.

Recently a University team took temp readings going back many years from hundreds of lakes. No temp increases for many years.

Should we talk my political world? Economists politely call it "rent seeking." Conservative economists call it "public choice." Street lingo "crony capitalism." Prize, upwards of $20 trillion.

Boo
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 10, 2012, 05:05:41 PM
Sundowner is not taking this thread seriouly!

I found a dead snail in my garden if that is not a direct example of global warming I require a alternative explaintation.

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Tracerfi on July 10, 2012, 05:14:56 PM
Rule #14 ?? Common Skuzzy, if my comment was political, then the thread is political.  :salute
Ahh quiet Buzz kill
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Babalonian on July 10, 2012, 05:47:46 PM
Sundowner is not taking this thread seriouly!

I found a dead snail in my garden if that is not a direct example of global warming I require a alternative explaintation.



Bartender put salt in the margarita?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 10, 2012, 05:47:54 PM
Behold Earth's killer.

(http://i1253.photobucket.com/albums/hh600/assi2929/untitled-2.png)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 10, 2012, 06:32:47 PM
you do of course realize that "record" since means that it's happened before, right?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: warhed on July 10, 2012, 07:23:36 PM
If a species can't survive a few degrees increase in temperature, they don't deserve to live on this planet with us.  We need strong, mean, rabid like creatures to rule Earth, so when the Aliens come we can fight them off.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 11, 2012, 12:03:52 AM
This thread is comedy gold. Some of you don't even know the bare bones of your own cultural history yet you speak with an authoritative tenet. Nor can you distinguish the relevant factors from the incidental. Some of you are even old enough to notice immediately observable differences in living memory, yet you run around like a bunch of see no evil monkeys trying to marginalise this 'view' by giving it a dismissive and minority label.

Of course the climate of this planet is dynamic, the whole thing is a self-balancing, reactive, cyclical system, what those naughty 'warmists' (:lol) are talking about with Global Warming is a specific, unequivocal and characteristic aberration within this cycle. But please do continue to go outside and check the climate by licking the tip of your finger and holding it up to the sun.

 :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
















Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 11, 2012, 01:09:15 AM
Wow.  So many facts.



Perhaps if I could muster more ROFLs my point would reach the skies.  

Of course, I don't want my point to reach the skies if it is going to poke a hole in the atmosphere and sink a Polar bear's ice raft.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Jappa52 on July 11, 2012, 01:27:50 AM
 Yes, careful Assi. There are apparently only 4 of those furry little guys left.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Rob52240 on July 11, 2012, 04:28:49 AM
Luckily Toyota has come up with a zero pollution Prius.  The 'Prius Solution'

http://www.theonion.com/video/new-prius-helps-environment-by-killing-its-owner,28675/
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 11, 2012, 09:16:25 AM
This thread is comedy gold. Some of you don't even know the bare bones of your own cultural history yet you speak with an authoritative tenet. Nor can you distinguish the relevant factors from the incidental. Some of you are even old enough to notice immediately observable differences in living memory, yet you run around like a bunch of see no evil monkeys trying to marginalise this 'view' by giving it a dismissive and minority label.

Of course the climate of this planet is dynamic, the whole thing is a self-balancing, reactive, cyclical system, what those naughty 'warmists' (:lol) are talking about with Global Warming is a specific, unequivocal and characteristic aberration within this cycle. But please do continue to go outside and check the climate by licking the tip of your finger and holding it up to the sun.

 :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl


There was a breeze today where there was none yesterday. Oh my.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 11, 2012, 09:18:03 AM
I think that was Zack Shuffler  :lol
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2012, 10:05:44 AM
 i was worried. it got to nearly 100 here yesterday. then later in the day, the temps dropped. it got chilly last night. that really worried me.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Jappa52 on July 11, 2012, 01:58:23 PM
And rightly so Cap. Flash freezing is a danger to us all and another grizzly side effect of MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING. Think of the camels.

We should all do our part to lower the amount of fossil fuels burned or one day far, far in the future man's output might match the levels released during the Mount St. Helen eruption.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: JimmyD3 on July 11, 2012, 02:40:03 PM
This thread is comedy gold. Some of you don't even know the bare bones of your own cultural history yet you speak with an authoritative tenet. Nor can you distinguish the relevant factors from the incidental. Some of you are even old enough to notice immediately observable differences in living memory, yet you run around like a bunch of see no evil monkeys trying to marginalise this 'view' by giving it a dismissive and minority label.

Of course the climate of this planet is dynamic, the whole thing is a self-balancing, reactive, cyclical system, what those naughty 'warmists' (:lol) are talking about with Global Warming is a specific, unequivocal and characteristic aberration within this cycle. But please do continue to go outside and check the climate by licking the tip of your finger and holding it up to the sun.

 :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl


















Yeah and the Proctologist says "Relax".  :aok

(think I got it right this time  :lol)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 11, 2012, 02:53:50 PM
Oh I find hearty laughter very relaxing thank you  :lol
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 11, 2012, 02:58:04 PM
We got rained on last night,..in North Texas,....in July,... That cannot be good.

Oh, and I ordered the 427 short block for my Cobra!  WOOT!
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Tracerfi on July 11, 2012, 03:08:25 PM
We got rained on last night,..in North Texas,....in July,... That cannot be good.

Oh, and I ordered the 427 short block for my Cobra!  WOOT!
what so bad about that



EDIT:Oh ya Texas is Mainly A Dry place
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 11, 2012, 03:27:02 PM


If all of this keeps up.  I'm afraid Guam might capsize.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2012, 03:41:03 PM
We got rained on last night,..in North Texas,....in July,... That cannot be good.

Oh, and I ordered the 427 short block for my Cobra!  WOOT!

 gonna be a torque monster, isn't it?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2012, 03:41:40 PM
And rightly so Cap. Flash freezing is a danger to us all and another grizzly side effect of MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING. Think of the camels.

We should all do our part to lower the amount of fossil fuels burned or one day far, far in the future man's output might match the levels released during the Mount St. Helen eruption.

 wonder if i'd get in trouble if i mentioned that "fossil fuels" aren't really "fossil fuels"?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 11, 2012, 03:42:44 PM
doubtful, although people may point and laugh :D
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2012, 03:45:34 PM
doubtful, although people may point and laugh :D

 :neener: :neener:

 actually, if you were to google "oil as a renewable resource" you'd be surprised at whatcha find.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 11, 2012, 03:47:19 PM
gonna be a torque monster, isn't it?

I am going for a mild build.  Should be around 550HP and 575ft/lb of torque.  With 3.55 or 3.73 gears and a T56 Magnum, it should have no issue motivating a 2400 pound car down the road.  Might even break 10MPG.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 11, 2012, 03:55:28 PM
actually, if you were to google "oil as a renewable resource" you'd be surprised at whatcha find.

I did exactly that and found pretty much exactly what I was expecting to find - all the links are to US bloggers with ... rather similar viewpoints. strange, since its science you'd expect to find a bunch of links to science departments of decent universities, with comments from qualified geologists, chemists, microbiologists etc. or maybe some peer-reviewed papers. or at least someone who believes it outside of the US.

even stranger theres apparently no support from oil companies, you'd think they would jump all over a revolutionary discovery like this. if true it would be PR gold.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 11, 2012, 04:06:15 PM
You're too isolationist. You Colonials should get out more  :old:

Got any pictures of your Cobra Skuzzy?  :banana:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2012, 04:25:17 PM
I did exactly that and found pretty much exactly what I was expecting to find - all the links are to US bloggers with ... rather similar viewpoints. strange, since its science you'd expect to find a bunch of links to science departments of decent universities, with comments from qualified geologists, chemists, microbiologists etc. or maybe some peer-reviewed papers. or at least someone who believes it outside of the US.

even stranger theres apparently no support from oil companies, you'd think they would jump all over a revolutionary discovery like this. if true it would be PR gold.

 there actually used to be a link to a site as you mentioned.......years ago. it kinda vanished.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 11, 2012, 04:28:06 PM
You're too isolationist. You Colonials should get out more  :old:

Got any pictures of your Cobra Skuzzy?  :banana:

Only the one I posted in the General forum one day.  It is still a shell.  I have the suspension, rear end, and some temp wheels mounted to the frame.  I need the engine block and tranny to affix items around them (i.e. foot box, pedals, exhaust, tranny mount...).
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Babalonian on July 11, 2012, 04:32:46 PM
I am going for a mild build.  Should be around 550HP and 575ft/lb of torque.  With 3.55 or 3.73 gears and a T56 Magnum, it should have no issue motivating a 2400 pound car down the road.  Might even break 10MPG.

Some planes are more gas effecient.   :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 11, 2012, 04:38:20 PM
I am kidding about the gas mileage.  12MPG to 15MPG is probably more accurate. :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 11, 2012, 04:38:34 PM
Only the one I posted in the General forum one day.  It is still a shell.  I have the suspension, rear end, and some temp wheels mounted to the frame.  I need the engine block and tranny to affix items around them (i.e. foot box, pedals, exhaust, tranny mount...).

Ah rgr, perhaps post some more when it is finished  :salute
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2012, 04:40:32 PM
I am kidding about the gas mileage.  12MPG to 15MPG is probably more accurate. :)

 are you going fi, or carb? if you go fi, you may be able to hit over 20 on the highway, even with a 427. also, have you looked into using one of the tremec tr6060's out of a shelby or a camaro? those have 5th and 6th as overdirves. you'd be doing 80 at 1500 rom.  :devil
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2012, 04:41:59 PM
http://www.omichron.com/renewablecrude.html
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 11, 2012, 04:45:18 PM
are you going fi, or carb? if you go fi, you may be able to hit over 20 on the highway, even with a 427. also, have you looked into using one of the tremec tr6060's out of a shelby or a camaro? those have 5th and 6th as overdirves. you'd be doing 80 at 1500 rom.  :devil

The T56 Magnum has overdrive on both 5th and 6th.  It is the same tranny used in the Corvette Z06 and Dodge Viper as well.

It will depend on the rear end I go with.  Still flipping between 3.55 and 3.73.

Initially I will use a carb, but am designing an EFI system for the car.  Not happy with the after market EFI systems at all.  I agree 20MPG will be viable with a good EFI system.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 11, 2012, 04:50:50 PM
Will you be fitting catalytic converters?  :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 11, 2012, 04:54:43 PM
I need the engine block and tranny to affix items around them (i.e. foot box, pedals, exhaust, tranny mount...).

You need a tranny mount?

Try PMing Phatzo or Bj229er.

You prolly could even get them to pay for the service.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Babalonian on July 11, 2012, 04:57:16 PM
Thought I remembered reading somewhere about a 427 with a newer-ish carb getting almost 20mpg (~18/19)....  but I like the custom FI route.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 11, 2012, 05:09:07 PM
The T56 Magnum has overdrive on both 5th and 6th.  It is the same tranny used in the Corvette Z06 and Dodge Viper as well.

It will depend on the rear end I go with.  Still flipping between 3.55 and 3.73.

Initially I will use a carb, but am designing an EFI system for the car.  Not happy with the after market EFI systems at all.  I agree 20MPG will be viable with a good EFI system.

 that tranny should more than handle what you're doing then. i hadn't realized it was in the vettes.

 the edelbrock(if they still make it) setup that looked eerily similar to the old cadi fi setups seemed to work well on some friends cars.

 
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mthrockmor on July 11, 2012, 06:28:43 PM
This is just today. Hotter during Roman times and the Medievil period (right before the mini-ice age, which lasted up to the early 1800's.) Hotter worldwide during these two periods, yet now it is suddenly mans fault? Oh I see...

"We found that previous estimates of historical temperatures during the Roman era and the Middle Ages were too low," says Professor-Doktor Jan Esper of the Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, one of the scientists leading the study. "Such findings are also significant with regard to climate policy." They certainly are, as it is a central plank of climate policy worldwide that the current temperatures are the highest ever seen for many millennia, and that this results from rising levels of atmospheric CO2 emitted by human activities such as industry, transport etc. If it is the case that actually the climate has often been warmer without any significant CO2 emissions having taken place - suggesting that CO2 emissions simply aren't that important - the case for huge efforts to cut those emissions largely disappears. --Lewis Page, The Register, 10 July 2012
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bj229r on July 11, 2012, 07:08:45 PM
You need a tranny mount?

Try PMing Phatzo or Bj229er.

You prolly could even get them to pay for the service.
hmmm
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 11, 2012, 08:20:34 PM
We got rained on last night,..in North Texas,....in July,... That cannot be good.

Oh, and I ordered the 427 short block for my Cobra!  WOOT!

Grats on the rat. :)

We have had rain all week off and on down here.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Widewing on July 11, 2012, 08:33:24 PM
Global warming?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2171973/Tree-ring-study-proves-climate-WARMER-Roman-Medieval-times-modern-industrial-age.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2171973/Tree-ring-study-proves-climate-WARMER-Roman-Medieval-times-modern-industrial-age.html)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: ghi on July 11, 2012, 09:59:56 PM
Global warming?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2171973/Tree-ring-study-proves-climate-WARMER-Roman-Medieval-times-modern-industrial-age.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2171973/Tree-ring-study-proves-climate-WARMER-Roman-Medieval-times-modern-industrial-age.html)


But after the Roman Empire came the dark ages : in 535-536AD something happened, nobody know for sure, but the world population was reduced to about 50% ;some believe was a plague ,the Sun turned dark volcano,..


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_weather_events_of_535%E2%80%93536

 "There was a sign from the Sun, the likes of which had never been seen or reported before. The Sun became dark, and its darkness lasted for about 18 months. Each day, it shown for about four hours and still this light was only a feeble shadow. Everyone declared that the Sun would never recover its full light again." - John of Ephesis, A Syrian bishop, 535-536 A. D.
more here http://gatekeepkey.org/AusbertMerovingDarkAges_526.htm

 
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Rash on July 11, 2012, 10:08:22 PM
We are here because the Earth wanted plastic...so goes a monolog by Sam Kinison.  The same person who suggested sending u-hauls and suitcases to people who are starving, instead of food.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: ghi on July 11, 2012, 10:10:28 PM
"The world came to an end in 535 AD. Say what? They didn’t teach about this in High School, unless one is very young. They did teach that the Dark Ages started about then. The Dark Ages weren’t limited to Europe, all over the world civilisations went into decline. More importantly, the Dark Ages weren’t caused by invading barbarians or some other human caused calamity, something else truly terrible happened that sent the whole planet into a tailspin.

What happened?"

More here: http://unitedcats.wordpress.com/2006/10/29/the-sun-became-dark-its-darkness-lasted-for-18-months/
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Rash on July 11, 2012, 10:57:00 PM
Noobs
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 12, 2012, 02:06:13 AM
A proof by contradiction only holds when there is a 'for all' case, consequently providing alternative examples of climatic aberration does not dismiss the human role in the present one. Stop paying attention to the actual temperatures, they are up and down like a fiddler's elbow anyway, this 'noise' is normal.

I know it must give some of you a great sense of relief to read well-written articles which apparently confirm you can just carry on in the lifestyle to which you have become accustomed. However you should know that this kind of denial has now been marginalised into the popular press only and is largely an American movement.

I know this will come as a shock but I'm sorry to tell you there is no longer any dispute whatsoever in the scientific community that we are experiencing an climatic aberration and it is presently about 90% certain that it is caused directly by mankind's activities since the Industrial Revolution.

And before you try it, no, the scientific community is not a self-serving special interest faction who's opinion can be accepted or rejected in accordance with your cultural values. Think it through.

On a basic common sense level it does rather make sense does it not? This whole phase of human development, the Industrial Revolution, the external and internal combustion engine, mass production, flight, electronics, computers, cyclical consumption, economic growth, world trade, the information age, all of it, has essentially been achieved through the exploitation of fossil fuels, firstly coal and next oil and natural gas. The direct consequence of burning those is the release of large amounts of CO2 (and methane and other things) into the atmosphere that have formerly been stored safely away beneath the surface of the earth. We already know what Earth's atmosphere is like as you increase the CO2 content because it was this way in the beginning, before life began. It was shocking, believe me.

Let's even go one step further, I'll play complete scientific denier here for you: even if there is NO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCE WHATSOEVER to burning fossil fuels, it doesn't matter anyway, because surely no one disputes, even the most entrenched sceptic, that this is a finite and nonrenewable resource. Thus it is ALL going to run out.

It's rather sad seeing you all grasping at straws and frightened that you'll have to hand in your beloved large displacement V8s for Toyota Prius and the subsequent emasculation your culture associates with that. Frankly I don't know why you are all so panicky. Skuzzy should still have just enough time to finish his gas-guzzling Cobra and enjoy it (if he gets a move on), there will be no loss of freedom, no reduction in lifestyle, necessarily.

Your children will have less opportunity to celebrate the 'high points of your cultural values' in this way and their children will look back on this generation as you do to the steam age, but again, it does not mean they won't have happy and interesting, fruitful, productive, mobile and free lives. Socially the paradigms and values will simply shift in accordance with progress, as it always has done.

The human race is now entering a transitionary phase, do not fight it, embrace it, these are exciting times and life will be better in the future, not worse.

oh and like I say, get a bloody passport and get out more and you won't get culturally left behind so badly.  :old:




Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bozon on July 12, 2012, 06:05:10 AM
"There was a sign from the Sun, the likes of which had never been seen or reported before. The Sun became dark, and its darkness lasted for about 18 months. Each day, it shown for about four hours and still this light was only a feeble shadow. Everyone declared that the Sun would never recover its full light again." - John of Ephesis, A Syrian bishop, 535-536 A. D.
Then George killed the dragon.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 06:33:52 AM
Shida is very passionate about this issue and I have tried to explain alternative views on the matter.

Please be understanding of Shida's reaction to said thread he is really only trying to express his inner thoughts.

My input on the topic is concise and to the point.

I have proof of global warming:

"Last week i found a dead snail in my garden, this is definate proof that climate change has occured"!

I also found a shoe which is made of patent leather which also points to the assumption that climate change is upon us.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bozon on July 12, 2012, 06:35:47 AM
A proof by contradiction only holds when there is a 'for all' case, consequently providing alternative examples of climatic aberration does not dismiss the human role in the present one.
Nor does it prove that human have a role in it - why is "our fault" the default?
This is a 3 step logic:
1. Is there a climate change?
2. Is it caused by X?
3. Is X changed because of human activity?
There is not even a clear agreement on 1. If you accept it as true, we have no clue about 2. The "CO2" answer is highly debated because there is not serious calculation that shows it without another to contradict it. Then people already jump to 3 and suggest way to correct the problem that we are not sure it exists due to reasons we do not understand. That is the folly of the man made climate change. And the answer "just to be safe" is pure rubbish because with the money and resources required, you can make this world a hell of a better place even if it ends up 2 degrees warmer.

Quote
I know this will come as a shock but I'm sorry to tell you there is no longer any dispute whatsoever in the scientific community that we are experiencing an climatic aberration and it is presently about 90% certain that it is caused directly by mankind's activities since the Industrial Revolution.
This is completely incorrect and 90% of statistics are made up on the spot.

Quote
And before you try it, no, the scientific community is not a self-serving special interest faction who's opinion can be accepted or rejected in accordance with your cultural values. Think it through.
There are many in the scientific community who object to the current climate theories. No they do not get a cent from petrol or other corporations and hardly get any grants at all just because people with "cultural values" that include "Christian-like auto self guilt" are the ones giving them.

Quote
We already know what Earth's atmosphere is like as you increase the CO2 content because it was this way in the beginning, before life began. It was shocking, believe me.
Believe you? how old were you when that happened?

Quote
Let's even go one step further, I'll play complete scientific denier here for you: even if there is NO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCE WHATSOEVER to burning fossil fuels, it doesn't matter anyway, because surely no one disputes, even the most entrenched sceptic, that this is a finite and nonrenewable resource. Thus it is ALL going to run out.
So it runs out. Why shouldn't we exploit it to the last drop? We will not because at some point fuel will become expensive enough to make other energy sources more economic. We will kill ourselves and the planet through other means before we run out of fossil fuel.

Quote
It's rather sad seeing you all grasping at straws and frightened that you'll have to hand in your beloved large displacement V8s for Toyota Prius and the subsequent emasculation your culture associates with that.
Hybrid cars are not a solution to anything. Do you think that increasing miles/gallon by 30% will change anything? Hybrids burn fossil fuel like any other car. They are not electric cars that can be charged with energy from renewable sources - they charge the batteries by burning fuel. By the way, you can achieve the same or better miles/gallon by driving a normal super-mini size car instead.

Quote
The human race is now entering a transitionary phase, do not fight it, embrace it, these are exciting times and life will be better in the future, not worse.
You are kidding right? I am embracing the change in global weather, you on the other hand resist it.
If you really want to make this world a better place for your children, kill half the world population and try to stabilize the new number on about 3 Billions.




[/quote]
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: kilo2 on July 12, 2012, 06:55:12 AM
A proof by contradiction only holds when there is a 'for all' case, consequently providing alternative examples of climatic aberration does not dismiss the human role in the present one. Stop paying attention to the actual temperatures, they are up and down like a fiddler's elbow anyway, this 'noise' is normal.

I know it must give some of you a great sense of relief to read well-written articles which apparently confirm you can just carry on in the lifestyle to which you have become accustomed. However you should know that this kind of denial has now been marginalised into the popular press only and is largely an American movement.

I know this will come as a shock but I'm sorry to tell you there is no longer any dispute whatsoever in the scientific community that we are experiencing an climatic aberration and it is presently about 90% certain that it is caused directly by mankind's activities since the Industrial Revolution.

And before you try it, no, the scientific community is not a self-serving special interest faction who's opinion can be accepted or rejected in accordance with your cultural values. Think it through.

On a basic common sense level it does rather make sense does it not? This whole phase of human development, the Industrial Revolution, the external and internal combustion engine, mass production, flight, electronics, computers, cyclical consumption, economic growth, world trade, the information age, all of it, has essentially been achieved through the exploitation of fossil fuels, firstly coal and next oil and natural gas. The direct consequence of burning those is the release of large amounts of CO2 (and methane and other things) into the atmosphere that have formerly been stored safely away beneath the surface of the earth. We already know what Earth's atmosphere is like as you increase the CO2 content because it was this way in the beginning, before life began. It was shocking, believe me.

Let's even go one step further, I'll play complete scientific denier here for you: even if there is NO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCE WHATSOEVER to burning fossil fuels, it doesn't matter anyway, because surely no one disputes, even the most entrenched sceptic, that this is a finite and nonrenewable resource. Thus it is ALL going to run out.

It's rather sad seeing you all grasping at straws and frightened that you'll have to hand in your beloved large displacement V8s for Toyota Prius and the subsequent emasculation your culture associates with that. Frankly I don't know why you are all so panicky. Skuzzy should still have just enough time to finish his gas-guzzling Cobra and enjoy it (if he gets a move on), there will be no loss of freedom, no reduction in lifestyle, necessarily.

Your children will have less opportunity to celebrate the 'high points of your cultural values' in this way and their children will look back on this generation as you do to the steam age, but again, it does not mean they won't have happy and interesting, fruitful, productive, mobile and free lives. Socially the paradigms and values will simply shift in accordance with progress, as it always has done.

The human race is now entering a transitionary phase, do not fight it, embrace it, these are exciting times and life will be better in the future, not worse.

oh and like I say, get a bloody passport and get out more and you won't get culturally left behind so badly.  :old:






Nice well written post. You do not have to patronize though. Travel has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation. You blur the lines between science and culture. Believing in global warming does not make you more cultured. That is the problem about having this discussion, it always boils down to insults. There is plenty of dissenting scientific opinions on the matter of global warming. I agree even if everything said about global warming is not true we still should take steps to limit emissions, if economically feasible.

By the way Americans travel outside of our country just as much as anyone else the idea that we do not is somewhat puzzling.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 06:56:46 AM
kill half the population? :cry

I will miss you :old:

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 12, 2012, 07:05:00 AM
try to stabilize the new number on about 3 Billions.

the elephant in the room.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 07:06:23 AM
Will you be fitting catalytic converters?  :old:

No.

Thought I remembered reading somewhere about a 427 with a newer-ish carb getting almost 20mpg (~18/19)....  but I like the custom FI route.

Probably a Pro Systems or Quick Fuel carb.  They are typically better than a Holley.  If I go with a 3.23 gear and milder cam, I could probably get over 20MPG.  The problem with taller gears is you have to be able to run the engine at lower RPM.  High performance cams do come settle down until they get passed the RPM needed to run that taller gear.

What I really need is to complete the project I am working on, which will allow me to run a high performance cam, and still have the power and torque come in at 1200RPM.

that tranny should more than handle what you're doing then. i hadn't realized it was in the vettes.

 the edelbrock(if they still make it) setup that looked eerily similar to the old cadi fi setups seemed to work well on some friends cars.

The 'carb' look alike FI systems are a compromise.  Part of what makes FI efficient is getting the point of fuel introduction closer to the intake port.  When you centralize it, then you suffer the same imbalances a carb system has when the intake opens and pulls air/fuel from all the legs of the intake manifold creating a reversion pulse.

The reversion pulse can create slightly different fuel/air ratios in the legs of the manifold.  This mostly contributes to poorer idle quality. It is even worse on single plane manifolds.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 07:09:29 AM
the elephant in the room.

population growth i will miss you RT :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mthrockmor on July 12, 2012, 07:19:44 AM
See Rule #14
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 07:23:19 AM
Climate change is a myth :old:

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 12, 2012, 07:39:51 AM
I won't address everything because I'm too good looking to get caught up in an argument ad nauseam.  :banana:



There is not even a clear agreement on 1.

You are right, those who feel threatened by the implications of point 1 do tend to disagree.



The "CO2" answer is highly debated because there is not serious calculation that shows it without another to contradict it.

Alas no, not highly. It is a simple game, to match a finding with unsubstantiated alternate possibilities. The CO2 content over time is a matter of international record.



This is completely incorrect and 90% of statistics are made up on the spot.

Indeed? Well you can find out for yourself easily if you want to. All of the information you need is freely available. A good start might be to distinguish between science and propaganda, but that would take some measure of objectivity.



So it runs out. Why shouldn't we exploit it to the last drop?

Because it is unintelligent to completely expend an irreplaceable resource which might be more useful for something else later on? How incredibly shortsighted to assume it is yours to exploit.



We will kill ourselves and the planet through other means before we run out of fossil fuel.

I do not believe the human race can kill the planet before the planet can kill the human race. Only human arrogance would give that idea. The Earth can handle the human race like an unwanted forest fire. In three thousand years there would barely be a trace left.



Hybrid cars are not a solution to anything.


Well I don't believe I said that they were, I mentioned them to illustrate a point which your lack of vision and imagination and especially your speedy response to that idea has further illustrated. I thank you.



You are kidding right? I am embracing the change in global weather, you on the other hand resist it.

Do you really think the weather would simply become more commodious to leisure activities as time goes by?



If you really want to make this world a better place for your children, kill half the world population and try to stabilize the new number on about 3 Billions.

Well now, you know you really should stick to being sceptical and leaving the problem solving to more imaginative people if this is the best you can do. I agree the human population is a contributory problem, but killing people is a distasteful suggestion, even as a joke.



I really don't expect to convert those who are putting their whole value system and culture behind this so called dispute. It is enough to point out that your culture is now rapidly becoming the odd one out on this issue. The reasons for this are abundantly plain to everyone who lives beyond your scope of indoctrination. If I and people like me are talking absolute crap, then it shouldn't really be causing so much discomfort should it?


No one has yet resorted to the hypocrisy implication or personal insult yet. I am rather surprised / impressed. I'd have thought the emphasis would have already shifted to shutting me up at any cost.  :headscratch:



















Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 12, 2012, 07:44:08 AM
Nice well written post. You do not have to patronize though...


Yes I apologise Kilo2, I thought we were way past this point & I get frustrated.  :salute
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 12, 2012, 07:50:04 AM
Climate change is a myth :old:



 noooo....climate change is not a myth. the cause of climate change is a myth.  :bolt:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 08:04:09 AM
yes volcanoes are the reason for climate change not V6's or population growth.

Third world people dont have V6s they have huts and VCR's
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 08:59:00 AM
By the way nrshida, my "gas guzzler" will use less gas a year than a daily driven Prius.

My "gas guzzler" will do less damage to the environment than the process required to make and salvage the batteries for a Prius.

Not offended by the term "gas guzzler".  It will be a guzzler, for sure and I will grin from ear to ear every time I turn the key to start it.  It being a fair weather car, and located in North Texas where there are about 20 days a year of good top down driving weather, it will not register as a spec in any environmental impact study.

I dare say the 200, or so, Cobras in the state of Texas, collectively are pretty harmless to the environment given how little they are driven.

Would it be even better if it had a 1.6L 4 cylinder engine that sipped gas at 50MPG?  Sure, but what would be the point of it then?

The Cobra is a raucous, skittish, noisy, gas guzzling, ill handling car, and an affront to anything 'green'.  It will wear you out when pushed to the limits, for any time at all.  It is a physiological and psychological nightmare stressing every sense and fiber of your being.  It will bake you in the Sun causing you to sweat so much the steering wheel will be hard to hold.  The seating position gives chiropractors reason to smile.  As the car is tossing you in one direction, the wind will blow you in another turning what little brain you might have had into mush.  It will award the good driver with slingshot speeds and rail like handling just as fast as it will kill you from thinking you actually have control of it. There is nothing else like it, and, thankfully, never will be again.  I love it.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: icepac on July 12, 2012, 09:10:18 AM
Strange how the "carbon counters" never even attempt to address any other form of heating other than thier emissions based poster child.

This removes enough credibilty that I stopped listening to them over a decade ago.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bozon on July 12, 2012, 09:32:08 AM
nrshida,

I was being sarcastic on most points, but the arguments stand.

The CO2 content change over time is close to irrelevant. A correlation does not mean causality. Atmospheric radiation transfer codes that are used for climate are something that the profanity filter here will not let me describe properly. They use many "shortcuts" that are good as long as parameters do not change too much. New calculations that fully resolve the vertical atmospheric structure and handle individual molecular lines in full details find minor effect, especially at ground level even if CO2 content is increased by factors of 10 or 50.

There is a great concern in the scientific community that this bubble is going to blow up in our faces. Too many standards are being broken and marginal results that should barely (if at all) get to scientific publication are immediately grabbed by political players and thrown at the public as "scientists say that". Scientists themselves are often human and have political views and agendas. The situation now is that people that go against the climate change zeitgeist find it difficult to reach publication or get grants and are effectively silenced.

Other branches of science look at the situation very grimly. If climatologists cause a global political and economic change for the sake of reducing CO2 for the slim chance that CO2 is actually responsible and humans are actually relevant to its accumulation, but climate keep changing, the damage to science will be enormous. It will be impossible to tell the public then "sorry, it was a 1.2 sigma result that turned out to be a fluke. Please ditch the stupid hybrids and go back to your V6s". People come up with insane ideas to put stuff in space or spread in the atmosphere in order to cool the planet. What if someone goes along with these plans? What will you tell to the developing countries that were held back because of CO2 quotas and crap. One simply cannot initiate such huge global processes on the basis of very marginal evidence and put the label "approved by science" on it. There is a good chance that the result will be complete loss of confidence in science by the public.

By the way, most of the scientists that object the "man made global something" hysteria are extremely "green" in their views. Most will be happy if the burning of fossil fuel is reduced for the the purpose of reducing actual pollution (as opposed to CO2). They are not happy with the lowering of the standards of research and over publicity of the scientific process - "it for the greater good" is not an acceptable argument.

p.s.
We do not need to actively kill people, they tend to die by themselves. However, they tend to bring children more than they tend to die.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 12, 2012, 09:49:03 AM
A proof by contradiction only holds when there is a 'for all' case, consequently providing alternative examples of climatic aberration does not dismiss the human role in the present one. Stop paying attention to the actual temperatures, they are up and down like a fiddler's elbow anyway, this 'noise' is normal.

I know it must give some of you a great sense of relief to read well-written articles which apparently confirm you can just carry on in the lifestyle to which you have become accustomed. However you should know that this kind of denial has now been marginalised into the popular press only and is largely an American movement.

I know this will come as a shock but I'm sorry to tell you there is no longer any dispute whatsoever in the scientific community that we are experiencing an climatic aberration and it is presently about 90% certain that it is caused directly by mankind's activities since the Industrial Revolution.

And before you try it, no, the scientific community is not a self-serving special interest faction who's opinion can be accepted or rejected in accordance with your cultural values. Think it through.

On a basic common sense level it does rather make sense does it not? This whole phase of human development, the Industrial Revolution, the external and internal combustion engine, mass production, flight, electronics, computers, cyclical consumption, economic growth, world trade, the information age, all of it, has essentially been achieved through the exploitation of fossil fuels, firstly coal and next oil and natural gas. The direct consequence of burning those is the release of large amounts of CO2 (and methane and other things) into the atmosphere that have formerly been stored safely away beneath the surface of the earth. We already know what Earth's atmosphere is like as you increase the CO2 content because it was this way in the beginning, before life began. It was shocking, believe me.

Let's even go one step further, I'll play complete scientific denier here for you: even if there is NO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCE WHATSOEVER to burning fossil fuels, it doesn't matter anyway, because surely no one disputes, even the most entrenched sceptic, that this is a finite and nonrenewable resource. Thus it is ALL going to run out.

It's rather sad seeing you all grasping at straws and frightened that you'll have to hand in your beloved large displacement V8s for Toyota Prius and the subsequent emasculation your culture associates with that. Frankly I don't know why you are all so panicky. Skuzzy should still have just enough time to finish his gas-guzzling Cobra and enjoy it (if he gets a move on), there will be no loss of freedom, no reduction in lifestyle, necessarily.

Your children will have less opportunity to celebrate the 'high points of your cultural values' in this way and their children will look back on this generation as you do to the steam age, but again, it does not mean they won't have happy and interesting, fruitful, productive, mobile and free lives. Socially the paradigms and values will simply shift in accordance with progress, as it always has done.

The human race is now entering a transitionary phase, do not fight it, embrace it, these are exciting times and life will be better in the future, not worse.

oh and like I say, get a bloody passport and get out more and you won't get culturally left behind so badly.  :old:






Your opinion is not backed by scientific facts. Lots of wind............
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 10:01:04 AM
Those with the highest birth rates are third world countries with uneducated agricultural societies.

This Dogma about population growth has been prevelent in western societies for the 100 years.

This childish grasping at others who have little impact on world consumption is frankly hilarious.

killing off half the worlds population is going to achieve absolutly nothing except reduce the markets for products produced by the advanced nations.

Maybe hi heel shoes are also a contribution to world events such as Climate.

By the way Shida has just bought a new car :)

 
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 12, 2012, 10:16:26 AM
Your opinion is not backed by scientific facts. Lots of wind............

and this reply is? :headscratch:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 12, 2012, 10:18:39 AM
By the way nrshida, my "gas guzzler" will use less gas a year than a daily driven Prius.

My "gas guzzler" will do less damage to the environment than the process required to make and salvage the batteries for a Prius.

Not offended by the term "gas guzzler".  It will be a guzzler, for sure and I will grin from ear to ear every time I turn the key to start it.  It being a fair weather car, and located in North Texas where there are about 20 days a year of good top down driving weather, it will not register as a spec in any environmental impact study.

I dare say the 200, or so, Cobras in the state of Texas, collectively are pretty harmless to the environment given how little they are driven.

Would it be even better if it had a 1.6L 4 cylinder engine that sipped gas at 50MPG?  Sure, but what would be the point of it then?

The Cobra is a raucous, skittish, noisy, gas guzzling, ill handling car, and an affront to anything 'green'.  It will wear you out when pushed to the limits, for any time at all.  It is a physiological and psychological nightmare stressing every sense and fiber of your being.  It will bake you in the Sun causing you to sweat so much the steering wheel will be hard to hold.  The seating position gives chiropractors reason to smile.  As the car is tossing you in one direction, the wind will blow you in another turning what little brain you might have had into mush.  It will award the good driver with slingshot speeds and rail like handling just as fast as it will kill you from thinking you actually have control of it. There is nothing else like it, and, thankfully, never will be again.  I love it.

 that bolded part up there? it always strikes me as funny that everyone seems to forget about that. and then when you remind them of that, they want proof.........
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Jappa52 on July 12, 2012, 10:24:19 AM
oh and like I say, get a bloody passport and get out more and you won't get culturally left behind so badly.  :old:

I'll agree with kilo that it was a well written post BUT one written by the typical poor old soul that bases his "facts" off of junk science, rumors and emotion. I would say that perhaps YOU should get out more and stretch the boundaries of your little world but meh, you obviously think your poop doesn't smell as bad as everyone else s. So enjoy the dark days my friend and I'm sure your psychotherapist can prescribe something to put a smile on your face.

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 12, 2012, 10:35:27 AM
and this reply is? :headscratch:

Simple fact.... you want to believe it then walk to work and buy your footprint passes.  :rofl

Those attempting to feed you the scare tactics are making millions.

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 12, 2012, 10:58:22 AM
Simple fact.... you want to believe it then walk to work and buy your footprint passes.  :rofl

I dont really understand the rest but the bolded bit is why discussing this is almost pointless. this is not a black and white, one side of the fence or the other deal. theres a bunch of issues around this and dividing the world into 2 camps is simplistic and pointless.

When it comes to climate change I'd be very surprised if I didnt agree with everyone in this thread. and disagree with everyone in this thread ...
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 11:09:43 AM
I agree with RT then again i dont.

I hope there are  no emsissions produced by plane type in game.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 11:12:38 AM
I dont really understand the rest but the bolded bit is why discussing this is almost pointless. this is not a black and white, one side of the fence or the other deal. theres a bunch of issues around this and dividing the world into 2 camps is simplistic and pointless.

When it comes to climate change I'd be very surprised if I didnt agree with everyone in this thread. and disagree with everyone in this thread ...

Sooooo, how's that bipolar disorder coming along? :D

Actually, I agree the topic is not something that can be discussed in a simplistic manner.  To top it all off, no climatologists have successfully created a climate model which takes into account every variable impacting climate on Earth.  They are still discovering things which impact the climate.  Many of these items are not fully understood either, which makes it more difficult, if not impossible, to do a full climate model.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 12, 2012, 11:29:32 AM
it



is



the



sun
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 11:36:58 AM
What is the Sun to do with climate?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 11:41:36 AM
What is the Sun to do with climate?
Cow farts!  :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 11:44:49 AM
 :rofl

fantastic :salute
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 12, 2012, 11:48:50 AM
What is the Sun to do with climate?

 it changes it. that and our orbit, and the wobble on the axis all conspire to change the climate. if one would really truly look and be unbiased, one would notice specific patterns. but one doesn't make money doing such
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 11:53:07 AM
How can the sun affect us its too far way!
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 11:55:26 AM
How can the sun affect us its too far way!

It's like a mother-in-law.  No matter how far she is, she still can make a mess of things when she gets riled up.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Butcher on July 12, 2012, 11:59:28 AM
It's like a mother-in-law.  No matter how far she is, she still can make a mess of things when she gets riled up.

Mines 1700 miles away and causes havoc every other weekend, this weekend is "where's my grand baby, get to work"

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 12:01:10 PM
I see :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 12:02:59 PM
Mines 1700 miles away and causes havoc every other weekend, this weekend is "where's my grand baby, get to work"



Cowfarst=methane, methane =green house gas.  Green house gas= more solar heat trapped in earth atmosphere, solar heat(rays radiation whatever ya wanna call em)= sun effecting us.


Save the Planet eat a cow.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 12, 2012, 12:05:12 PM
I dont really understand the rest but the bolded bit is why discussing this is almost pointless. this is not a black and white, one side of the fence or the other deal. theres a bunch of issues around this and dividing the world into 2 camps is simplistic and pointless.

When it comes to climate change I'd be very surprised if I didnt agree with everyone in this thread. and disagree with everyone in this thread ...

Like I said walk then.... cut your electric lines.... only cook on small fire in the back yard..... lol
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 12, 2012, 12:07:49 PM
Actually, I agree the topic is not something that can be discussed in a simplistic manner.  To top it all off, no climatologists have successfully created a climate model which takes into account every variable impacting climate on Earth.  They are still discovering things which impact the climate.  Many of these items are not fully understood either, which makes it more difficult, if not impossible, to do a full climate model.

that can be said of any model of the real world, its impossible to perfectly model anything. apart from the practical problems, without getting too physicsy, there is ultimately a problem with information. models just try to give predictions, some are better than others and they all evolve.

new discoveries which dont fit the model are like christmas presents for scientists because they get to refine their model and make even better predictions. climate models are evolving rapidly and the more sophisticated they get, the more they seem to be pointing in the same direction. not in a "we're 100% sure we've nailed it!" way, more of a "looks like we're getting a handle on this stuff and we should probably be worried about it given the catastrophic consequences" way.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: ghi on July 12, 2012, 12:12:08 PM
Another X class flare today:major solar flare alert.
 http://www.solarham.net/

 http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/
This one hits right on our heads:NOAA radio blackout indocator map
 http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/drap/Global.png
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 12:15:35 PM
RT, I'll have more faith with the models when they can consistently predict weather/climate 24 hours out.  The worst is they still do not understand why they cannot predict the weather with much certainty.  While it has improved over the last 5 decades, it still has a very long way to go.

Right now, I give all predictions a grain of salt.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 12, 2012, 12:28:47 PM
weather and climate are different things although they are dependent. we know exactly why we cant forecast weather more accurately or further ahead, these days its commonly known as chaos. its also a problem in climate modelling, although I suspect it wont ultimately prevent us from understanding the mechanism for the freefall into the next ice age, or from giving us reasonable predictions of when its likely to happen. I really hope so anyway.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 12, 2012, 12:35:34 PM
It's like a mother-in-law.  No matter how far she is, she still can make a mess of things when she gets riled up.

 ok.....THAT is funny. in fact, i'd go as far as to say it may be sig material.  :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 12:42:06 PM
I must thank the AH community for the education discussion that  day after day they provide.

So we all agree America is to blame for global warming?

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 12:50:13 PM
I must thank the AH community for the education discussion that  day after day they provide.

So we all agree America is to blame for global warming?



No, You guys started it with the Industrial revolution, we merely perfected it.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 12:58:07 PM
lol +1

Again Fantastic <S>
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 12, 2012, 01:09:24 PM
By the way nrshida, my "gas guzzler" will use less gas a year than a daily driven Prius.

Yes I know I am well aware of its purpose. Should be good fun Skuzzy when do you hope to finish it?


Your opinion is not backed by scientific facts. Lots of wind............

You don't even know the foundation for my opinion.


I was being sarcastic on most points, but the arguments stand.

Yes same here.



I'll agree with kilo that it was a well written post BUT one written by the typical poor old soul that bases his "facts" off of junk science, rumors and emotion. I would say that perhaps YOU should get out more and stretch the boundaries of your little world but meh, you obviously think your poop doesn't smell as bad as everyone else s. So enjoy the dark days my friend and I'm sure your psychotherapist can prescribe something to put a smile on your face.

 :rofl  Well there's the first basically insulting one. The standard run to the stereotype shop with the recipe for insult and devaluation attached. I'd be far more impressed if you'd demonstrated a tiny capacity to think for yourself though.




I never expected to convert the doubters on this issue, only to provide a little international balance (and to take the piss a bit, if I'm honest). If you're going to launch sarcastic threads about this topic on a forum which also has international members then you can expect to get some discussion and derision regarding the subject and your handling of it. External to your rather isolationist culture (I'm sorry Kilo2, but I think this is a fair & reasonable comment) this isn't a minority opinion at all.

Yours is the only nation never to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. The only nation, in the entire world. Yours is also the nation which consumes the most petrol in the world, and yet you only comprise something like four and a half percent (yes, 4.5%) of the world's population.

At least try to think about the implications of this, for just 10 seconds.

You really should consider closing this forum off to international users perhaps, if you want to not have your indoctrinated views criticised or classify the discussion of such subjects as political and ban them.




Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 01:18:12 PM
Shida! Skuzzy will mess with your source code if you dont apologise.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 01:24:31 PM

But  you have to consider HOW the petrol is used?  In combines and other farm equipment to raidse the grain that is put on trucks and transported to the train that takes it to the seaport to the ship that takes it  to  a myrriad of 3rd world countries  that is having a food crisis  in which the US is the major food donator, or driving to and from the suburbs to work,(sorry we can't all  live in quaint old world contries that many of are the size or smaller than several of the STATES in the US. fact is many '1st world' countries that like to crow about how much fuel the US uses really dont  have that much of a production base lests just look at the rest of the list of the top users of Petrol http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption) wow! imagine that! the worlds  largest users of Petrol are also the Nations that PROVIDE the rest of the world with most of the food, and production to make  the computers to whine about how much fuel the US uses. How can the UK use more Oil than Signapore or malaysia, they have  a more productive production base, and actually provide the world with stuff other than obnoxious nationalistic whine posts.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 01:33:02 PM
Nationalistic ? where did that enter the thread :rofl

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 01:35:29 PM
Nationalistic ? where did that enter the thread :rofl

Here
So we all agree America is to blame for global warming?

also its ok we can still have pie together just a friendly riposte to your jibe
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 01:42:02 PM
lol sorry your right :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 01:42:52 PM
Yes I know I am well aware of its purpose. Should be good fun Skuzzy when do you hope to finish it?

I am giving myself two years to complete the project.

<snip>
You really should consider closing this forum off to international users perhaps, if you want to not have your indoctrinated views criticised or classify the discussion of such subjects as political and ban them.

nrshida, most people outside of the U.S. only have access to people from the U.S. via the news.  This provides a highly slanted view of the people of the U.S.

Unfortunately, the other view is of those who do travel outside the U.S.  I speak from experience when I say, when I travel I am all but ashamed to admit I am from the U.S. due to how many of the U.S. travelers show absolutely no respect for the local peoples they are visiting. I can also state, from experience, those people represent a small fraction of the people of the U.S.

I am pretty well traveled via the military and my career choices.  One thing I have learned from my travels is there are good and bad people, no matter where you go.  Anyone who can state the stats of good versus bad is better read than I am.

The U.S. is also a very young country, by comparison.  It will make the same mistakes many other countries have made in the process of growing.

At the end of the day, there is good and bad, no matter where you are or where you are from.  Lumping everyone, from any country, into a narrow, limited, and/or biased description is probably going to miss the mark by a wide margin.

I am very happy to have an international community to discuss topics and perspectives with.  Sometimes things can get heated, but I would rather have that than no contact at all.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 12, 2012, 01:45:46 PM
is the US a net exporter of food?

not being fascetious, I just assumed the wealthiest nations would be net importers. we're ~60% self sufficient, and thats the highest % for over 300yrs iirc.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 12, 2012, 01:50:31 PM
i'd say that a nation with an absurdly high debt isn't as wealthy as people like to think.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 01:51:17 PM
is the US a net exporter of food?

not being fascetious, I just assumed the wealthiest nations would be net importers. we're ~60% self sufficient, and thats the highest % for over 300yrs iirc.

I do not know, but I wonder what the fuel consumed per capita per square mile would be?  The U.S. is a big place.  A good portion of fuel is used by trains, planes, and trucks for transportation of goods.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Zoney on July 12, 2012, 01:51:31 PM
Nrshida, where are you from sir ?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 01:53:19 PM
Britain is not self sufficient in regards to food products and has never been :old:

Before Britain imported food products from the US we all had ricketts :old:

Atlantic convoys from america?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 01:53:51 PM
Nrshida, where are you from sir ?

He is Ugandan :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 01:54:42 PM
is the US a net exporter of food?

not being fascetious, I just assumed the wealthiest nations would be net importers. we're ~60% self sufficient, and thats the highest % for over 300yrs iirc.

Yeah Id say thats the only thing we really got going for us http://www.dailymarkets.com/economy/2010/05/16/food-exports-and-food-trade-surplus-with-china-sets-record-highs-in-2009-are-they-beholden/ (http://www.dailymarkets.com/economy/2010/05/16/food-exports-and-food-trade-surplus-with-china-sets-record-highs-in-2009-are-they-beholden/)

sure alot of things come in but an awful lot goes out=, if we cant get it at Mickey D's we are gonna have asurplus of it
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 01:56:54 PM
r we exporting pies?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 01:58:58 PM
r we exporting pies?

nah NZ has better Mutton and we got the beef.Here we make the pies with tortilla's in a cylidical shape. However I balme you for  exporting Skinny jeans however
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 12, 2012, 02:00:53 PM
that looks like just the food trade with china, but I'll buy it since you have such low population density and lots of productive land. wtg, exports are a good thing :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Jappa52 on July 12, 2012, 02:04:11 PM
:rofl  Well there's the first basically insulting one. The standard run to the stereotype shop with the recipe for insult and devaluation attached. I'd be far more impressed if you'd demonstrated a tiny capacity to think for yourself though.


The fact that you cannot understand that the condescending tone your post was written in was insulting further proves my point.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 02:08:24 PM
that looks like just the food trade with china, but I'll buy it since you have such low population density and lots of productive land. wtg, exports are a good thing :)
Yeah but it mentioned that china  over stepped canada and Mexico. Canada produces alot of grain and mexico produces alot of coke...err I mean fruit and if we are exporting to those 2 that says something No? I'm sure the numebr are there to be found.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=US+net+food+exports (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=US+net+food+exports)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 02:10:19 PM
In terms of total food production, the best numbers I can find (from 2010) show China, India, U.S., European Union 27, then Brazil as being the five largest total food producing nations (in that order).

For wheat: European Union 27, China, India, U.S. and Brazil
For corn: U.S., China, Brazil, European Union 27, and India
For beef: U.S., Brazil, European Union 27, China, and India
For soybeans: U.S., China, Brazil, European Union 27, and India
For pork: U.S., China, European Union 27, Brazil, and India
For rice: China, India, U.S., European Union 27, and Brazil
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 02:13:55 PM
In terms of total food production, the best numbers I can find (from 2010) show China, India, U.S., European Union 27, then Brazil as being the five largest total food producing nations (in that order).

For wheat: European Union 27, China, India, U.S. and Brazil
For corn: U.S., China, Brazil, European Union 27, and India
For beef: U.S., Brazil, European Union 27, China, and India
For soybeans: U.S., China, Brazil, European Union 27, and India
For pork: U.S., China, European Union 27, Brazil, and India
For rice: China, India, U.S., European Union 27, and Brazil

wonter how the surplus vs. Population breaks down. Brazil must have a huge surplus.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 02:14:05 PM
The fact that you cannot understand that the condescending tone your post was written in was insulting further proves my point.

You have a chip on your shoulder and take offence at every opportunitie :old:

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 02:17:56 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 02:20:27 PM
Ok, this is starting to wander into a gray area of the bad side of town.  Keep it civil.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 02:21:57 PM
 :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 02:24:58 PM
Yes, I know you are one of the protagonists looking for someone to call the bluff.  The difference between you and I is I do not have to bluff.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 02:28:27 PM
Does the UK export anything anymore? In the way of food or is evereyting brought into home market.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 02:49:01 PM
We export love :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 12, 2012, 02:54:44 PM
Britain is not self sufficient in regards to food products and has never been :old:

Before Britain imported food products from the US we all had ricketts :old:

Atlantic convoys from america?

 ooohhhh man you just opened a biiiiig can o worms.......
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 12, 2012, 02:59:38 PM

You don't even know the foundation for my opinion.


Dreams.... nightmares..... books with horses that have wings and a horn....
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 12, 2012, 03:00:17 PM
ooohhhh man you just opened a biiiiig can o worms.......

I am pretty certain we did not export worms in large cans, or small ones for that matter.  If he opened that can, it was from somewhere else.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 12, 2012, 03:04:33 PM
I am pretty certain we did not export worms in large cans, or small ones for that matter.  If he opened that can, it was from somewhere else.

...that has the ability to save our climate..... 2 empty cans and a string for clean communication. :D
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 03:09:10 PM
Well the good news is if the climate keeps warmng up pretty soon the UK can grow crops  that were usually foundin higher temp climates
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: VonMessa on July 12, 2012, 03:12:37 PM
+101! I think we have a bingo!

During the medievil mini-ice age they noted dramatic changes in solar activity and sun spots.


It gave folks more time inside where it was warm and they could let their imagination run wild.

Same thing happened during the time of Mary Shelly.

She had plenty of time to write Frankenstein.   :x
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 03:16:05 PM
It gave folks more time inside where it was warm and they could let their imagination run wild.

Same thing happened during the time of Mary Shelly.

She had plenty of time to write Frankenstein.   :x

soo your saying the 410 update will get finished sometime in the next ice age?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 12, 2012, 04:07:18 PM
Thank you for your comments Skuzzy. No worries if they want to vent a little, I am poking at their delicate parts with a sharp stick after all  :banana:


The fact that you cannot understand that the condescending tone your post was written in was insulting further proves my point.

Yes you're right I tend to get condescending when I see ignorance, stupidity and bias triumph over education, intelligence and insight. I should work on that. Any suggestions?  :old:


Nrshida, where are you from sir ?

It's no use Zoney, they won't let you bring firearms into the country where I presently reside and you'll only hurt your fists on my head.  :lol


Dreams.... nightmares..... books with horses that have wings and a horn....

Now Shuffler, I thought I forwarded a vision of hope and optimism regarding the future and was suggesting this was a normal stage in your development. You're so sensitive!    :rofl







Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 12, 2012, 04:14:15 PM
Does the UK export anything anymore? In the way of food or is evereyting brought into home market.

we export mostly speciality high margin stuff - loads of fish and seafood, import low margin staples like wheat, rice etc. overall we import like we have done for 100s of years, although there was a massive boost to domestic food production during WWII and that has continued to a degree.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 12, 2012, 04:16:56 PM
we also specialise in meat pies.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Jappa52 on July 12, 2012, 04:59:57 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 12, 2012, 05:08:15 PM
Simmah down now guys
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mensa180 on July 12, 2012, 05:34:23 PM
/thread

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?f=percentage (http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?f=percentage)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 12, 2012, 05:54:36 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mensa180 on July 12, 2012, 07:40:20 PM
Wow you nailed me!  I don't know what I was thinking posting relevant information.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mensa180 on July 12, 2012, 07:41:17 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 12, 2012, 07:49:08 PM
If we were as smart and experienced, we wouldn't be so ignorant to the new undisputed facts.  We would ignore the other ones that aren't chic.

It's like music.  The kids have Pop.  It's popular, so it must be good.

Rock on, Lady Gaga.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: kilo2 on July 12, 2012, 07:50:21 PM
And we're off!
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: GScholz on July 12, 2012, 08:02:21 PM
Look... We need this global warming to counter the global cooling the scientists warned us about in the '70s. In any case I live in the last outpost of civilization before the north pole... We need this.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mensa180 on July 12, 2012, 08:08:38 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 12, 2012, 08:15:14 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: GScholz on July 12, 2012, 08:31:16 PM
Newsweek discussed one of its 1975 articles in 2006:

In April, 1975 … NEWSWEEK published a small back-page article about a very different kind of disaster. Citing “ominous signs that the earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically,” the magazine warned of an impending “drastic decline in food production.” Political disruptions stemming from food shortages could affect “just about every nation on earth.” Scientists urged governments to consider emergency action to head off the terrible threat of . . . well, if you had been following the climate-change debates at the time, you’d have known that the threat was: global cooling…

Citizens can judge for themselves what constitutes a prudent response-which, indeed, is what occurred 30 years ago. All in all, it’s probably just as well that society elected not to follow one of the possible solutions mentioned in the NEWSWEEK article: to pour soot over the Arctic ice cap, to help it melt.


Yeah... I'm also happy they didn't melt the ice cap back then. Every time we humans have tried to actively "fix" something in nature it has gone catastrophically wrong, and in this case we don't know what to fix or even if fixing is needed.

Environ-mentals: Something's happening. We don't know what exactly, but we need to fix it!
Me: Why?
Environ-mentals: Umm....
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: kilo2 on July 12, 2012, 08:34:47 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mensa180 on July 12, 2012, 08:37:15 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 12, 2012, 08:43:26 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: kilo2 on July 12, 2012, 08:48:25 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: GScholz on July 12, 2012, 08:48:50 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mensa180 on July 12, 2012, 08:50:49 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: TheAssi on July 12, 2012, 08:53:03 PM
See Rule #4
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: GScholz on July 12, 2012, 08:59:05 PM
Understanding it is knowing it's propaganda. I take anything posted on a site run by the "Climate Communication Fellow for the Global Change Institute" with the same pitcher of salt as "studies" on the heath effects of artificial sweeteners funded by the sugar industry.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: SEraider on July 12, 2012, 09:47:56 PM
See Rule #6
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 12, 2012, 11:27:05 PM
See Rule #6
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 12, 2012, 11:44:04 PM
Understanding it is knowing it's propaganda. I take anything posted on a site run by the "Climate Communication Fellow for the Global Change Institute" with the same pitcher of salt as "studies" on the heath effects of artificial sweeteners funded by the sugar industry.

the cool thing is you dont have to rely on what you suspect is propaganda, you can check it yourself. the datasets are available and RStudio is freeware, knock yourself out! :D
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 13, 2012, 02:18:38 AM
See Rule #14
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: nrshida on July 13, 2012, 04:14:48 AM
See Rule #6
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Sundowner on July 13, 2012, 04:39:43 AM
For the record:

Yes, I do believe we are experiencing global climate change.
And No, I don't believe it's man made.

Regards,
Sun



U.S. declares drought-stricken states largest natural disaster area ever

The United States Department of Agriculture has declared natural disaster areas in more than 1,000 counties and 26 drought-stricken states, making it the largest natural disaster in America ever.

The declaration—which covers roughly half of the country—gives farmers and ranchers devastated by drought access to federal aid, including low-interest emergency loans.

"Agriculture remains a bright spot in our nation's economy," U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said Wednesday while announcing the assistance program. "We need to be cognizant of the fact that drought and weather conditions have severely impacted farmers around the country.".............

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/us-natural-disaster-area-drought-150130308.html
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: GScholz on July 13, 2012, 05:44:06 AM
Of course we are experiencing global climate change. We've experienced that every day, hour, minute and second since the beginning of time. Is human civilization having an effect on the climate? Undoubtedly, but in an insignificant way compared to nature itself. It is the ultimate arrogance that we think us so important that we represent a threat to nature.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw

Save us George!
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 13, 2012, 06:31:09 AM
+1

My name is not george
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 13, 2012, 08:49:40 AM
Now Shuffler, I thought I forwarded a vision of hope and optimism regarding the future and was suggesting this was a normal stage in your development. You're so sensitive!    :rofl




 :rofl

































 :neener:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 13, 2012, 09:51:33 AM
wow this  thread has certainy down downhill overnight lol, interesting about the global cooling from the 70's i had never heard of that before.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: JimmyD3 on July 13, 2012, 10:03:18 AM
Need to change this thread to the "Rules" thread. :cheers:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: NatCigg on July 13, 2012, 10:20:53 AM
climate change comes from large natural changes.  one giant volcano will dwarf all of what man has put into the air. 

All the C02 we are adding to air came from the air during the carboniferous period.  what was life like then? warm, humid, and the world supported the largest creatures EVER.
and i mean earth time ever. not just the 100 years we have been creating a record.

Worry about why people tell you what they do, not what they tell you to do. :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 13, 2012, 02:55:55 PM
If the consequences of AGW turned out to be free beer, almost everyone who posted here would believe it absolutely :D
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: GScholz on July 13, 2012, 02:58:48 PM
(https://dl.dropbox.com/u/26232318/George%20Carlin%2075.jpg)


In the wake of "Climategate" how can anyone take climate change at face value? Nobel laureate and other notable scientists resigning in protest, conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.

Actual emails leaked during the climategate scandal:

Quote
I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.

Quote
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

Quote
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

Quote
Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back

Quote
This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”
“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !


HOW CAN ANYONE TAKE CLIMATE SCIENCE AT FACE VALUE?



A Nobel laureate has quit one of the world's leading organisations for scientists in protest at its assertion that the evidence of damaging global warming is "incontrovertible".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8786565/War-of-words-over-global-warming-as-Nobel-laureate-resigns-in-protest.html


NASA Gagging Policy: Climate Scientist Resigns over Controversy

http://co2insanity.com/2010/06/03/nasa-gagging-policy-climate-scientist-resigns-over-controversy/


Another ‘Top’ Global Warming Scientist Screams “It’s A Scam!!” -Top scientist resigns from post – admits Global Warming is a scam

http://redwhitebluenews.com/?p=7670


UN climate chief resignation call

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11395194


Sunday Reflection: The collusion of the climate crowd

http://washingtonexaminer.com/sunday-reflection-the-collusion-of-the-climate-crowd/article/2501500


Rebuttal ignores 'Climategate'

http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20120619/OPINION02/206190308/Rebuttal-ignores-Climategate-?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7COpinion%7Cp


Conclusion of series shows IPCC’s ­computer models fall way short

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/06/20/climate-reality-check/


Et cetera ad infinitum...
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: GScholz on July 13, 2012, 03:03:21 PM
See Rule #4

Oops...
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 13, 2012, 03:09:15 PM
Oops...

Not bad,..not bad at all.  You have mellowed.  It is a good thing.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 13, 2012, 03:11:55 PM
so? the science has come under even greater scrutiny, and even more people are looking into it. our understanding has advanced. the practical result of climategate is that the science is better now than before. and still consensus (among those qualified) has hardened.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Puma44 on July 13, 2012, 03:14:10 PM
So, 20,000 years or so ago during the Ice Age, the North American continent was mostly covered ice.  Since Al Gore and the rest of us experts weren't around then, what caused all that ice to go away?   :headscratch:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 13, 2012, 03:18:06 PM
climate change.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: VonMessa on July 13, 2012, 03:26:32 PM
climate change.

Free beer?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 13, 2012, 03:27:30 PM
So, 20,000 years or so ago during the Ice Age, the North American continent was mostly covered ice.  Since Al Gore and the rest of us experts weren't around then, what caused all that ice to go away?   :headscratch:
Mammoth Farts! Less plants to  pump out oxygen and absorb Carbon dixoide so the  Mammoth fart gasses(methane built up in the atmoshere) until the snows melted plants  and other photosythesising organisms sucked up the carbon and pumped out oxygen normalising temps  :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: SEraider on July 13, 2012, 03:27:58 PM
See Rule #6

WooHoo, I can add Rule 6 to my signature.   :D

Just kidding Skuzzy.   :aok
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 13, 2012, 03:28:45 PM
Free beer?

it worked! :lol
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: VonMessa on July 13, 2012, 03:33:08 PM
it worked! :lol

Hey, I hope it gets colder.  I can save money on the electric bill by not having to use the fermentation fridge in the summer months  :rock
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Puma44 on July 13, 2012, 03:42:37 PM
climate change.
Oh, since it wasn't our fault then, it isn't now?   :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 13, 2012, 03:52:26 PM
Hey, I hope it gets colder.  I can save money on the electric bill by not having to use the fermentation fridge in the summer months  :rock

hmmmm ... the getting colder bit is what we really want to delay as long as possible :uhoh
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 13, 2012, 04:06:28 PM
climate change.

 what caused it?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 13, 2012, 04:43:14 PM
we did :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 13, 2012, 04:46:17 PM
Sheesh zack, you been poking people in this thread more than a rabbid daddy jack rabbit on a sugar high.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 13, 2012, 04:46:58 PM
what caused it?

well its a very complex dynamic system, so lots of inputs drive it.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 13, 2012, 05:09:09 PM
well its a very complex dynamic system, so lots of inputs drive it.

 what caused it if we weren't there to affect it? that's what i meant to say. 'cause considering humans are nothing more than a spec in the grand scheme of things, i still find it nearly impossible to believe.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Babalonian on July 13, 2012, 05:24:07 PM
Is it 5pm yet?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: ghi on July 13, 2012, 06:29:49 PM
For the record:

Yes, I do believe we are experiencing global climate change.
And No, I don't believe it's man made.

Regards,
Sun



U.S. declares drought-stricken states largest natural disaster area ever

The United States Department of Agriculture has declared natural disaster areas in more than 1,000 counties and 26 drought-stricken states, making it the largest natural disaster in America ever.

The declaration—which covers roughly half of the country—gives farmers and ranchers devastated by drought access to federal aid, including low-interest emergency loans.

"Agriculture remains a bright spot in our nation's economy," U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said Wednesday while announcing the assistance program. "We need to be cognizant of the fact that drought and weather conditions have severely impacted farmers around the country.".............

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/us-natural-disaster-area-drought-150130308.html
Yep, we are going to pay more for food over next months/year;Corn prices already 45% , soybeans, 22% since June;
Drought stretches across America, threatens crops;
 from CNN;  http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/13/us/midwest-drought/index.html
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 14, 2012, 02:13:47 AM
Sheesh zack, you been poking people in this thread more than a rabbid daddy jack rabbit on a sugar high.

I apologise its raining outside, been raining for weeks :cry

My garden is fantastic though, big problem is I have lots of pumpkins growing and I dont remember planting any :old:

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 14, 2012, 05:49:54 AM
what caused it if we weren't there to affect it? that's what i meant to say. 'cause considering humans are nothing more than a spec in the grand scheme of things, i still find it nearly impossible to believe.

thats one of the interesting features of complex dynamic systems, the tiniest of inputs can result in massive changes to the system. this is also the reason why its so fiendishly difficult to model.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 14, 2012, 07:48:47 AM
thats one of the interesting features of complex dynamic systems, the tiniest of inputs can result in massive changes to the system. this is also the reason why its so fiendishly difficult to model.

 soooo.....you're saying that no one knows?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Melvin on July 14, 2012, 07:50:08 AM
I apologise its raining outside, been raining for weeks :cry

My garden is fantastic though, big problem is I have lots of pumpkins growing and I dont remember planting any :old:



Pumpkin pie is fantastic.

 :noid
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 14, 2012, 07:52:01 AM
soooo.....you're saying that no one knows?

no I'm not :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 14, 2012, 08:00:16 AM
no I'm not :)

 thennnn....what you're saying, is that someone DOES know, but it doesn't align to the beliefs that they wish to put forth, thus they are pretending to not know.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: eagl on July 14, 2012, 08:11:42 AM
The real problem with the climate change debate (and the problem with the expensive laws/regulations being passed) is that while *someone* is right about the whole thing, they don't know WHY they're right, they can't PROVE it, and any attempt to discuss it is either met with derision or accompanied with a call for everyone else to start paying for a "solution" that somehow just seems to be giving either the govt or certain out of work politicians all the money in return for pretty much nothing.

Even if Al Gore is RIGHT, nobody is going to listen to him because his approach is to say everyone else is trying to kill the planet and they should fork over billions of dollars, which he will be happy to help with in exchange for a small fee.  Even if the most skeptical of "denialists" is right, their arguments and rationale will never be considered because he will be instantly drowned out by insane charges that his attempt to think things through is really a desire to kill the planet, so the denialist should shut up and give money to... someone else... who will do... something nobody understands... with the money.

The answer is out there but it can't be proven yet and the discussion is drowned out by really stupid claims that everyone with an opposing conclusion is trying to destroy everything.  That has to be the stupidest claim on the planet but it sure seems to be the first argument used on a lot of topics (listing them and quoting people will of course violate rule #14)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 14, 2012, 08:13:59 AM
the answer is staring us in the face each and every day. we';re riding on the answer, and being kept warm by the answer. if one were to look back throughout history, one would notice a cycle.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: eagl on July 14, 2012, 08:25:08 AM
the answer is staring us in the face each and every day. we';re riding on the answer, and being kept warm by the answer. if one were to look back throughout history, one would notice a cycle.

Oh I know this one.  A mirror.  My butt.  A blanket.  Umm...  tough one.  I guess "War" but it could also be "Famine" or even tides of the moon.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 14, 2012, 08:27:09 AM
Oh I know this one.  A mirror.  My butt.  A blanket.  Umm...  tough one.  I guess "War" but it could also be "Famine" or even tides of the moon.


 hehehehe
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 14, 2012, 08:37:28 AM
Pumpkin pie is fantastic.

 :noid
We in the UK are aware of the sinister ramifications of having colonial vegatable products in our gardens.

We have watched Scoobydoo and the cartoon Sleepy hollow and realise that dark forces are afoot.

We don't eat this type of vegtable but throw the inners out and place a candle within, this reminds us that we are British.

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 14, 2012, 08:47:33 AM
thennnn....what you're saying, is that someone DOES know, but it doesn't align to the beliefs that they wish to put forth, thus they are pretending to not know.

no idea where you got that from, what I'm saying is that our climate is "a very complex dynamic system, so lots of inputs drive it" and that "one of the interesting features of complex dynamic systems, the tiniest of inputs can result in massive changes to the system." ... exactly what I typed - nothing more, nothing less.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Melvin on July 14, 2012, 08:56:01 AM
In America we take the innards out and make delicious pies.

We then deposit bad children into them before throwing the whole works into the trash.

(http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t319/LoriOH_2007/HailenPumpkin.jpg)

Pic from Photobucket. Not mine.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 14, 2012, 08:58:39 AM
no idea where you got that from, what I'm saying is that our climate is "a very complex dynamic system, so lots of inputs drive it" and that "one of the interesting features of complex dynamic systems, the tiniest of inputs can result in massive changes to the system." ... exactly what I typed - nothing more, nothing less.

 Which is a convoluted round-about way of saying one of two things. no one knows, or someone knows, but doesn't want to see.

 i'm not meaning to be offensive to you personally, and i hope you realize that.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 14, 2012, 09:12:44 AM
no it doesnt mean that at all, it means ... exactly what it says. Its not a convoluted way of saying something simple, its a succinct expression of something rather complicated.

edit: just to be clear I was trying to answer your question about how in the grand scheme of things an apparently insignificant human intervention could have a large effect.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 14, 2012, 09:16:10 AM
I agree with RT
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: eagl on July 14, 2012, 09:59:51 AM
I agree with RT

But he didn't really SAY anything.   :huh
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 14, 2012, 10:45:33 AM
which part dont you understand?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skilless on July 14, 2012, 12:00:18 PM
Yep, we are going to pay more for food over next months/year;Corn prices already 45% , soybeans, 22% since June;
Drought stretches across America, threatens crops;
 from CNN;  http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/13/us/midwest-drought/index.html


We're going to pay more for corn because someone got the silly notion that corn is a fuel rather than a food source...
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skilless on July 14, 2012, 12:03:47 PM
Which is a convoluted round-about way of saying one of two things. no one knows, or someone knows, but doesn't want to see.

 i'm not meaning to be offensive to you personally, and i hope you realize that.

It seems to me that he's saying that the subject is too complicated for mere mortals to grasp, so we should leave this to and trust the smart people that know better.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 14, 2012, 12:19:13 PM
But he didn't really SAY anything.   :huh

I still agree with RT though
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 14, 2012, 12:21:49 PM
In America we take the innards out and make delicious pies.


also we leave them in the bushes to ferment and intoxicate the wildlife
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0so5er4X3dc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0so5er4X3dc)

Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: mthrockmor on July 16, 2012, 11:07:18 AM
See Rule #14
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 11:30:39 AM
SHOCKING
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bj229r on July 16, 2012, 11:42:04 AM
no idea where you got that from, what I'm saying is that our climate is "a very complex dynamic system, so lots of inputs drive it" and that "one of the interesting features of complex dynamic systems, the tiniest of inputs can result in massive changes to the system." ... exactly what I typed - nothing more, nothing less.
So.....why shouldn't we take from that......scientists have no way of proving Man is the reason the average temperature has risen 3/4 of ONE degree centigrade in the last century, peaking in 1998?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 16, 2012, 12:52:47 PM
well we will never be able to prove it in the same way as we can prove A=C, if A=B AND B=C, science doesnt work like that. the closer a model's predictions match real-world observations, the better the model is. the more climate models are refined, the closer they are in agreement with each other, and to the real-world measurements. its about weight of evidence, rather like legal prosecution. at this stage I'd personally say we have more than enough evidence to charge, but not quite enough to guarantee a conviction ...
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 16, 2012, 01:02:48 PM
I contend the climate has not changed any more than usual.... only the people have changed.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 01:02:53 PM
PREDICTIONS HAve all been wrong........
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 16, 2012, 01:17:17 PM
I like how this thread was dead over the weekend  and yet once people get back int he office it gets revived.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 16, 2012, 01:28:23 PM
I contend the climate has not changed any more than usual

what evidence do you have to support this contention?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 01:34:09 PM
ANYONE wanna guess what the worst greenhouse gas is? without googling it?

 i'll give ya a clue.....it's not co2, and it's not man made.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 16, 2012, 01:36:23 PM
what evidence do you have to support this contention?

Look out the window and read. Not necessarily in that order. :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 16, 2012, 01:42:23 PM
ANYONE wanna guess what the worst greenhouse gas is? without googling it?

 i'll give ya a clue.....it's not co2, and it's not man made.
Does it begin with c and end with owfarts?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 01:43:21 PM
Does it begin with c and end with owfarts?

 strike 1
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 01:43:53 PM
what evidence do you have to support this contention?

 the low res. monitor.









otherwise known as the window.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 16, 2012, 01:45:09 PM
strike 1

I caved and googled and was suprised.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 01:48:20 PM
I caved and googled and was suprised.

 lolol.

 don't say yet.....
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: narsus on July 16, 2012, 02:03:06 PM
it's water CAP
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 16, 2012, 02:20:34 PM
Look out the window ...

... otherwise known as the window.

you guys apparently have remarkable scientific intuition. it seems a shame for mankind to let it go to waste, perhaps you'd like to look at some old toenail clippings and tell us the cure for cancer? :D
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 02:32:58 PM
it's water CAP

 eeeexxxxaaaacccctttlllllly!

 so now, the next question, is who controls the water more? us or mother nature? especially considering it's been shown to be 70% of the greenhouse effect.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 16, 2012, 02:40:05 PM
(which is also included in all the climate models, obviously)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 02:41:27 PM
would those be the models that were all proven to be tampered last year?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 16, 2012, 02:45:01 PM
some parts of some of them yup. irrelevant now of course, since it was unearthed and the effects reviewed and corrected :aok
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 02:46:13 PM
some parts of some of them yup. irrelevant now of course, since it was unearthed and the effects reviewed and corrected :aok

 but now here's the biggie. how do we know we can trust those corrections?

 and who controls water vapor, which is the largest greenhouse gas? certainly it cannot be man.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 16, 2012, 02:47:42 PM
eeeexxxxaaaacccctttlllllly!

 so now, the next question, is who controls the water more? us or mother nature? especially considering it's been shown to be 70% of the greenhouse effect.

well I sure do process a lot out as a by product of beer drankin.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 02:50:21 PM
well I sure do process a lot out as a by product of beer drankin.

 that would be methane.  :devil
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 16, 2012, 02:58:22 PM
that would be methane.  :devil

Speaking of lot of crop dustin being done in the office today  :devil
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: narsus on July 16, 2012, 03:04:36 PM
So, by that logic. If we have greater temperatures there will be higher levels evaporation or surface water.
This would lead to more trapped infrared radiation emitted by the Earth, thereby warming the climate further.

Or we can make it a bit more interesting.

higher Temp = more evaporation = more water vapor in the air = more clouds = higher Earth albedo = more UV reflected back into space = less IR from Earth = lower temps
 
We can look at this a couple of ways:

Cloud cover is going to stop rising temps and eventually cool the planet.
or
Cloud cover has slowed warming somewhat but not enough.
or
So much water vapor in the air will drive temperatures higher.

There is definitely debate on which one of the above is occuring, or if it even makes that large a difference.

I am not going to debate if CO2 is leading to global warming, what I do recommend individuals pursue is looking at the raw data.
Don't read left or right wing sites with there own agenda. The temperature data is easily found and construct your own graphs, make your own conclusions. Do not just regurgitate
others opinions, and follow them blindly. My views have changed on the subject matter after throwing out preconceptions, and doing primary instead on secondary research.
This is what I tell my meteorology and environmental students. The hardest thing to do is look at data objectively, many people hate to be wrong (this goes for everyone).

What I will say is this though, the thought that humans have little impact on this environment is incorrect. We can look at many different areas to see this:
species hunted to extinction
extinction or endangered due to loss of habitat
smog/ground level ozone
acid rain
subsidence
mining (why hybrids as a solution is stupid, batteries suck to make and dispose of)

I digress, enjoy your day.

P.S. Sometime all it takes is a little nudge in a particular direction and systems can fall apart.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 16, 2012, 03:06:47 PM
but now here's the biggie. how do we know we can trust those corrections?

 and who controls water vapor, which is the largest greenhouse gas? certainly it cannot be man.

the datasets are all available and the software you'll need to check them is all open source. if you dont want to, theres 1,000s of people constantly reviewing the models. given the size of the both pro- and anti-AGW lobby and the fallout from climategate, this must be the most rigorously scrutinised science ever done.

we can effect water vapour and clouds fairly directly through deforestation, irrigation projects etc. and (the evidence seems to suggest) indirectly by effecting the global temps with our CO2 production (the drivers of the climate system feedback to each other remember.)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 16, 2012, 03:08:31 PM
I am not going to debate if CO2 is leading to global warming, what I do recommend individuals pursue is looking at the raw data.
Don't read left or right wing sites with there own agenda. The temperature data is easily found and construct your own graphs, make your own conclusions. Do not just regurgitate others opinions, and follow them blindly. My views have changed on the subject matter after throwing out preconceptions, and doing primary instead on secondary research.
This is what I tell my meteorology and environmental students. The hardest thing to do is look at data objectively, many people hate to be wrong (this goes for everyone).

:aok
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Sundowner on July 16, 2012, 03:13:50 PM

 and who controls water vapor, which is the largest greenhouse gas? certainly it cannot be man.

The Sun.

Regards,
Sun
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 03:14:44 PM
So, by that logic. If we have greater temperatures there will be higher levels evaporation or surface water.
This would lead to more trapped infrared radiation emitted by the Earth, thereby warming the climate further.

Or we can make it a bit more interesting.

higher Temp = more evaporation = more water vapor in the air = more clouds = higher Earth albedo = more UV reflected back into space = less IR from Earth = lower temps
 
We can look at this a couple of ways:

Cloud cover is going to stop rising temps and eventually cool the planet.
or
Cloud cover has slowed warming somewhat but not enough.
or
So much water vapor in the air will drive temperatures higher.

There is definitely debate on which one of the above is occuring, or if it even makes that large a difference.

I am not going to debate if CO2 is leading to global warming, what I do recommend individuals pursue is looking at the raw data.
Don't read left or right wing sites with there own agenda. The temperature data is easily found and construct your own graphs, make your own conclusions. Do not just regurgitate
others opinions, and follow them blindly. My views have changed on the subject matter after throwing out preconceptions, and doing primary instead on secondary research.
This is what I tell my meteorology and environmental students. The hardest thing to do is look at data objectively, many people hate to be wrong (this goes for everyone).

What I will say is this though, the thought that humans have little impact on this environment is incorrect. We can look at many different areas to see this:
species hunted to extinction
extinction or endangered due to loss of habitat
smog/ground level ozone
acid rain
subsidence
mining (why hybrids as a solution is stupid, batteries suck to make and dispose of)

I digress, enjoy your day.

P.S. Sometime all it takes is a little nudge in a particular direction and systems can fall apart.

 You're forgetting the Coriolis effect.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: narsus on July 16, 2012, 03:22:56 PM
You're forgetting the Coriolis effect.

Not especially relevant to the topic at this time, if you want to include how air masses move, winds belts are generated and pressure systems rotate we could include that as well.

Though, more than likely you are just joking.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: GScholz on July 16, 2012, 03:39:43 PM
What I will say is this though, the thought that humans have little impact on this environment is incorrect. We can look at many different areas to see this:
species hunted to extinction
extinction or endangered due to loss of habitat
smog/ground level ozone
acid rain
subsidence
mining (why hybrids as a solution is stupid, batteries suck to make and dispose of)

All those areas are real, tangible and evident. However thanks to the carbon scam they're hardly ever mentioned anymore; to say nothing of all the funds diverted to carbon that could have made a real difference. It is something that angers me.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: narsus on July 16, 2012, 03:49:17 PM
All those areas are real, tangible and evident. However thanks to the carbon scam they're hardly ever mentioned anymore; to say nothing of all the funds diverted to carbon that could have made a real difference. It is something that angers me.

I wholeheartedly agree that those and many other issues need to be addressed far more than they are now. The only one I even hear about at all anymore is deforestation, and smog made a bit of a resurgence after the 2008 Olympics. I think that if some of those areas received some traction in the public conscience, we could reduce a great many other problems that stem indirectly from them.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skilless on July 16, 2012, 04:19:00 PM
But...  I thought that the debate was over??
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 16, 2012, 04:19:50 PM
you guys apparently have remarkable scientific intuition. it seems a shame for mankind to let it go to waste, perhaps you'd like to look at some old toenail clippings and tell us the cure for cancer? :D

Terrible thing is to watch all that schooling go down the tubes for lack of use. Putting the descriptor "Scientist" next to a name does not an intelligent person make. Same with engineer. It's what you do with it from there.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 04:27:22 PM
here's another question.

 where do we get the majority of our o2 from? and what does i live on in order to provide us our o2?

 no googling.  :devil
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 16, 2012, 04:47:50 PM
here's another question.

 where do we get the majority of our o2 from? and what does i live on in order to provide us our o2?

 no googling.  :devil


Green plants and they live on Co2
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: narsus on July 16, 2012, 05:05:48 PM
Algae
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: F22RaptorDude on July 16, 2012, 05:07:09 PM
here's another question.

 where do we get the majority of our o2 from? and what does i live on in order to provide us our o2?

 no googling.  :devil
algae, we can loose a large majority of tree's but be fine as long as there's a large source of algae
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: ByeBye on July 16, 2012, 06:36:20 PM
Skuzzy, do you still believe that the moon is going to leave Earth's orbit and end all life within several hundred years?  :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl



The amount of information available on this topic is rather large.  And just as many opinions seem to pervey it as well.

Do not forget meteorologists also hold that the Earth goes through cycles of weather.  From one ice age to the next is a rather long period of time, but it happens.  During the time between ice ages, the Earth's atmospheric termperatures rise and fall.  Some metoerologists feel (I say *feel* as there is no way to actually prove it) we are on the leading edge of the high temperatures and in a few hundred years the temperatures will peak, and the start of the next ice age will be begin.
None of this happens overnight, and after the start it will take another serverl hundred years before the Earth is an ice ball again and then it will warm and start the process over again.

Long before the next Ice Age happens the Moon will make its departure.  This will end life on Earth before the next Ice Age happens.

The Moon departure is real and easily verified.
 The weather stuff is still somewhat more art than science and almost impossible to pin down.

I could care less about the so-called "global warming".  Seems it is going to happen in spite of us amd mankind will all be dead once the Moon makes its departure.  Hmmm.  Mankind just does not stand much of a chance at all.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skilless on July 16, 2012, 06:40:26 PM
Bye bye..  So...  You think everything is just going to keep hanging around in perfect balance for you forever?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: ByeBye on July 16, 2012, 06:43:20 PM
Bye bye..  So...  You think everything is just going to keep hanging around in perfect balance for you forever?

I'll start another thread, don't want to hijack this one.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Donzo on July 16, 2012, 06:48:33 PM
Leeroy Jenkins!!!!
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Mr No Name on July 16, 2012, 07:14:19 PM
Man made climate change - to believe it you have to be outlandishly gullible at the least, and a narcissistic megalomaniac at the worst...  The world has been much hotter and much colder for centuries on end at a time...  Our life span and any so-called damage we can do is merely a punctuation mark in a footnote of the pages of history and pales in comparison to the forces of nature itself.

Didn't you guys get the news about all of the collusion to fake data from the University of East Anglia some years back?  It showed that all of the so-called 'evidence' was faked and agreements were made within the scientific community to 'stick to the story'. 

The earth may very well be warming, but we have nothing to do with it whatsoever.  Go about your life and enjoy it to the fullest - it is far too short as it is!
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Donzo on July 16, 2012, 07:19:54 PM
Tree ring data, anyone?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 08:02:22 PM

Green plants and they live on Co2

 incorrect. you are not allowed to operate your blender above medium for 1 week.  :neener:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 08:03:05 PM
Algae

 iknd of incorrect, but awful dam close.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 08:04:47 PM
Man made climate change - to believe it you have to be outlandishly gullible at the least, and a narcissistic megalomaniac at the worst...  The world has been much hotter and much colder for centuries on end at a time...  Our life span and any so-called damage we can do is merely a punctuation mark in a footnote of the pages of history and pales in comparison to the forces of nature itself.

Didn't you guys get the news about all of the collusion to fake data from the University of East Anglia some years back?  It showed that all of the so-called 'evidence' was faked and agreements were made within the scientific community to 'stick to the story'. 

The earth may very well be warming, but we have nothing to do with it whatsoever.  Go about your life and enjoy it to the fullest - it is far too short as it is!

 bolded is why i don't believe we could even trust the software that's supposed to be out there for us to view it ourselves.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: narsus on July 16, 2012, 08:30:30 PM
bolded is why i don't believe we could even trust the software that's supposed to be out there for us to view it ourselves.

Don't need climate software...Excel works just fine.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: narsus on July 16, 2012, 08:32:14 PM
Must be phytoplankton (sp?) then.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 16, 2012, 08:53:34 PM
Must be phytoplankton (sp?) then.

 yeppers.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: ghi on July 16, 2012, 09:52:07 PM
 Some photos below,  i captured 2 weeks ago, Columbia Icefields,/ Athabasca Glacier see the glacier position time markers; they start melting long before the massive CO2 emissions;

;http://s10.photobucket.com/albums/a146/johny35/Canadian%20Rockies%20June-July%202012/
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 17, 2012, 12:59:55 AM
There has been a lot of emmissions expelled in this thread :old:

If any of these problems occuring in the world are caused by Human intervention its nothing to do with me, I have no say or influence on changing any of said events. :old:

Last time I was on a airliner was 7 years ago :old:

My emmisions are low but not as low as someone who lives in a shack in New Deli  :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: kilo2 on July 17, 2012, 01:59:48 AM
There has been a lot of emmissions expelled in this thread :old:

If any of these problems occuring in the world are caused by Human intervention its nothing to do with me, I have no say or influence on changing any of said events. :old:

Last time I was on a airliner was 7 years ago :old:

My emmisions are low but not as low as someone who lives in a shack in New Deli  :old:

What are you talking about? The amount of hot gas you have emitted in this thread could kill the planet within the week. zack1234 is the bringer of our destruction. :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 17, 2012, 05:24:45 AM
My said emmissins are not vocal but from other directions and caused by a diret result of acorns and other natural foods products such as Mcdonalds and baby seals :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 17, 2012, 06:26:43 AM
Skuzzy, do you still believe that the moon is going to leave Earth's orbit and end all life within several hundred years?  :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

Reading comprehension?  Are you really that hard up to poke fun at me you have to go back six years in the forum posts to find something?  I can give you a lot more recent things to poke at me about.  Then again, we both know you are not here to have a discussion.

The statement about "hundreds of years" does not refer to the Moon's potential departure.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 17, 2012, 06:49:31 AM
bolded is why i don't believe we could even trust the software that's supposed to be out there for us to view it ourselves.

you dont have to trust it, its open source which means you can check its ok yourself before compiling and running it.

Didn't you guys get the news about all of the collusion to fake data from the University of East Anglia some years back?  It showed that all of the so-called 'evidence' was faked and agreements were made within the scientific community to 'stick to the story'.

no it didnt. did you read all the emails in question? did you understand their context?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 17, 2012, 07:37:12 AM
Are you for or against climate change RT?

Its only because I agree with what you say and need to be sure if your for or against :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: curry1 on July 17, 2012, 07:46:10 AM
I don't understand why the moon could leave its current orbit.  sure there always minute fluctuations in its orbit but I think newton was a pretty smart guy.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 17, 2012, 08:11:30 AM
where's the moon going! :cry
And how have we caused this to happen?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: RTHolmes on July 17, 2012, 08:42:02 AM
Are you for or against climate change RT?

good question(s)!

does the climate change? yes of course, the temp record is not a straight line.

are there patterns in the change or is it random fluctuations/noise? theres obvious patterns.

is it easy to explain and predict these patterns? nope very difficult.

do we understand the processes that drive the climate system? to a large, and increasing, degree yes.

can we model these processes accurately? depending on the process, it ranges from very accurately to not at all.

are mean global surface temps rising, before tipping over into the next ice age? almost certainly.

is it possible for man to influence the climate system? almost certainly.

is man influencing the climate system and accelerating the temp rise? the evidence, although by no means overwhelming, is strong and getting stronger.

should we try to reduce our influence on the climate? given whats at stake I think it would be crazy not to.

will we try to reduce our influence on the climate? very doubtful. people are essentially self-serving. even if the evidence was overwhelming and everyone believed that AGW was happening I dont think people would care or do anything about it. essentially the choice is: carry on as we are and in 100s of years we will be screwed, or modify our behaviour at some personal cost so we are screwed in 1000s of years. numerous examples like the Gambier Islands suggest that we are not good at this stuff.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: phatzo on July 17, 2012, 08:50:05 AM
But is climate change bad? who knows? all we hear is speculation. What about the Medieval warming period?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 17, 2012, 08:51:54 AM
incorrect. you are not allowed to operate your blender above medium for 1 week.  :neener:

I was operating the blender then too :D
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 17, 2012, 08:54:36 AM
I don't understand why the moon could leave its current orbit.  sure there always minute fluctuations in its orbit but I think newton was a pretty smart guy.

The Moon has been moving farther away from the Earth, every year since it parked itself around the planet.  About 1 inch a year.  It is an interesting topic in the orbital mechanics discussions.  I think many people forget the Moon is also being tugged at by the Sun, Venus, and Jupiter, as well as Earth.  The interaction between those bodies is complex and will vary, depending on alignments.  However, the gravitational force between the Sun and the Moon is, approximately (will vary with the Moon's orbital location relative to Earth and the Sun) over twice as large as that of the gravitational force between the Earth and Moon.

During the Moon's near apogee and while in New Moon, and Venus happens to be between Earth and the Sun, the gravitational pull on the Moon, away from Earth, is at its peak.  In this position, the Moon also happens to be going the opposite direction of Earth's solar orbit direction exposing the Moon to the Sun/Venus gravitational forces for longer periods of time.  This slows the Moon's approach to near perigee.  All indications show this particular interaction to be the cause of the Moon's drift away from Earth.

In my spare time (so little of that lately) I had been working on a computer model of this.  There are any number of possibilities, at this point in time.  Departure of the Moon from Earth's orbit is probable.  While I am not an expert on this topic, I find it fascinating and spend a bit of time keeping up on it.

Not to put down Newton, but he would probably struggle in a quality high school physics or trigonometry class today.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 17, 2012, 08:58:56 AM
The Moon has been moving farther away from the Earth, every year since it parked itself around the planet.  About 1 inch a year.  It is an interesting topic in the orbital mechanics discussions.  I think many people forget the Moon is also being tugged at by the Sun, Venus, and Jupiter, as well as Earth.  The interaction between those bodies is complex and will vary, depending on alignments.  However, the gravitational force between the Sun and the Moon is, approximately (will vary with the Moon's orbital location relative to Earth and the Sun) over twice as large as that of the gravitational force between the Earth and Moon.

During the Moon's near apogee and while in New Moon, and Venus happens to be between Earth and the Sun, the gravitational pull on the Moon, away from Earth, is at its peak.  In this position, the Moon also happens to be going the opposite direction of Earth's solar orbit direction exposing the Moon to the Sun/Venus gravitational forces for longer periods of time.  This slows the Moon's approach to near perigee.  All indications show this particular interaction to be the cause of the Moon's drift away from Earth.

In my spare time (so little of that lately) I had been working on a computer model of this.  There are any number of possibilities, at this point in time.  Departure of the Moon from Earth's orbit is probable.  While I am not an expert on this topic, I find it fascinating and spend a bit of time keeping up on it.

The earth will then probably spin out of control.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 17, 2012, 09:00:17 AM
The earth will then probably spin out of control.

That is the theory, at the moment.  It is logical, but the models have not yielded a consistent answer, yet.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Rolex on July 17, 2012, 09:08:28 AM
Well, you learn something new every day. I had never heard of this.

Life and the Universe is relentlessly fascinating.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Nathan60 on July 17, 2012, 09:30:19 AM
where's the moon going! :cry

last time I saw it , it was heading west on I-20 hanging out a cars window
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 17, 2012, 09:39:25 AM
But is climate change bad? who knows? all we hear is speculation. What about the Medieval warming period?

 it is in fact not.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 17, 2012, 09:42:45 AM
Well, you learn something new every day. I had never heard of this.

Life and the Universe is relentlessly fascinating.

The Brewster fascinates me in regards to its prowess :old:
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 17, 2012, 10:05:53 AM
Well, you learn something new every day. I had never heard of this.

Life and the Universe is relentlessly fascinating.

I agree.... Ever changing and our knowledge expanding.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skilless on July 17, 2012, 08:02:59 PM
Punting topics like global warming is against the rules and besides, the debate is over.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: bj229r on July 17, 2012, 08:49:58 PM
Hmmm.....is POSTING in a necro-thread the thing, or merely referencing it?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: curry1 on July 17, 2012, 10:40:21 PM
The Moon has been moving farther away from the Earth, every year since it parked itself around the planet.  About 1 inch a year.  It is an interesting topic in the orbital mechanics discussions.  I think many people forget the Moon is also being tugged at by the Sun, Venus, and Jupiter, as well as Earth.  The interaction between those bodies is complex and will vary, depending on alignments.  However, the gravitational force between the Sun and the Moon is, approximately (will vary with the Moon's orbital location relative to Earth and the Sun) over twice as large as that of the gravitational force between the Earth and Moon.

During the Moon's near apogee and while in New Moon, and Venus happens to be between Earth and the Sun, the gravitational pull on the Moon, away from Earth, is at its peak.  In this position, the Moon also happens to be going the opposite direction of Earth's solar orbit direction exposing the Moon to the Sun/Venus gravitational forces for longer periods of time.  This slows the Moon's approach to near perigee.  All indications show this particular interaction to be the cause of the Moon's drift away from Earth.

In my spare time (so little of that lately) I had been working on a computer model of this.  There are any number of possibilities, at this point in time.  Departure of the Moon from Earth's orbit is probable.  While I am not an expert on this topic, I find it fascinating and spend a bit of time keeping up on it.

Not to put down Newton, but he would probably struggle in a quality high school physics or trigonometry class today.

Will the moon's gravitational pull affect the trajectory of the 50mm round in the 410?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 18, 2012, 05:50:22 AM
I have not noticed the Moon moving away :old:

I looked at it for a good 10 minutes at it was not doing any moving :old:

I will keep the AH community informed of any developments if they occur :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Maniac on July 18, 2012, 12:34:50 PM
The citizens of Niburu will save us all in December anyways...
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: curry1 on July 18, 2012, 01:05:16 PM
It doesnt seem like moon is even moving away in game..  Why isn't that modeled?
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Skuzzy on July 18, 2012, 01:11:11 PM
It doesnt seem like moon is even moving away in game..  Why isn't that modeled?

To be able to perceive the eighteen inch distance change which has occurred over the last twelve years, in the game, takes some sharp eyeballs. :)
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Maniac on July 18, 2012, 01:16:31 PM
Theres no climate change, theres only bad clothes.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Slate on July 18, 2012, 01:44:02 PM
  I'm Hot







   We are living on a spinning lump of matter being pushed and pulled by other matter bombarded by cosmic debris and radiation from a nearby nuclear furnace protected only by a gaseous cloud and magnetic field but being at the perfect distance to sustain biological life forms that will communicate over long distances to debate matters that are beyond anyones efforts to control.


                            Enjoy the Ride while you can. We only get so many trips around the Sun.  :D   
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: Shuffler on July 18, 2012, 03:04:35 PM
To be able to perceive the eighteen inch distance change which has occurred over the last twelve years, in the game, takes some sharp eyeballs. :)


Don't fall for this bait..... I tried sharpening my eyes once. Could not get them to fit in the sharpener. I was going to try a knife but just as I was going to start whittling my Mom walked in and I was grounded for a week.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: phatzo on July 18, 2012, 05:48:09 PM
You really need a whet stone for that.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 19, 2012, 12:33:10 AM
Is it true that its the Moon in game that is moving and not the moon i have been looking at outside my house :old:

I again stood outside for a good ten minutes and I could not even find  the moon because it was raining :old:

Was the effect of the Colonials landing on the Moon causing the said movement, if so i hope we in the UK are not implicated.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: shiv on July 21, 2012, 12:11:53 AM
See Rule #14
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 21, 2012, 04:56:41 AM
You don't have Plutocrats in the US  :rofl
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: SuperDud on July 21, 2012, 07:38:29 AM
  I'm Hot







   We are living on a spinning lump of matter being pushed and pulled by other matter bombarded by cosmic debris and radiation from a nearby nuclear furnace protected only by a gaseous cloud and magnetic field but being at the perfect distance to sustain biological life forms that will communicate over long distances to debate matters that are beyond anyones efforts to control.


                            Enjoy the Ride while you can. We only get so many trips around the Sun.  :D   


And this sums up the whole thing.... well put.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 21, 2012, 10:05:19 AM
This a disgrace everything goes round the earth.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: ghi on July 25, 2012, 05:16:48 PM
I've  just read this NASA report about Greenland ice cap melting rapidly over past 2 weeks; If you live close to shoreline better run for the hills;:lol

 http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/greenland-melt.html
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: zack1234 on July 25, 2012, 05:22:16 PM
Greenland is a myth.
Title: Re: Climate change?
Post by: CAP1 on July 25, 2012, 05:27:14 PM
I've  just read this NASA report about Greenland ice cap melting rapidly over past 2 weeks; If you live close to shoreline better run for the hills;:lol

 http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/greenland-melt.html

 does this mean that the rest of the lost squadron will be recoverable soon?