The real inconvenient truth

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:58 am

pk500 wrote:I don't believe in spending billions of dollars in a knee-jerk attempt to solve a "problem" that may be nothing more than cyclical in nature.

Take care,
PK

I remember back around in the 90's when VP Al Gore made a big deal about refrigerants in automobile AC systems and how it was ruining the ozone layer. The industry was pressured to change because of that.

Not only is the new refrigerant less efficient over it's predecessor but it really didn't do anything to help the ozone in fact the EU has restricted it's use because of it's now impact on climate change.

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:34 am

pk500 wrote:A little bit of local hard data on this topic: This was the ninth-coldest autumn in Syracuse since the National Weather Service began keeping records in 1950. It also was the eighth-snowiest fall ever in Syracuse.

The ice caps don't seem to be melting here in Central New York.

It's a balmy -12 this morning in St Paul. The two winters we spent in Traverse City MI started with snow in early November that didn't stop until April. It sounds like this winter is more of the same. This is a recent snowmobile trail report.

Just a short note, I have to get to my plowing. 4" so far and it is still snowing like crazy, with 8" to 12" forecasted for today and another system for Saturday and Sunday and more snow right on through Christmas. The next report will be 12-23-08. This is the best December in years.

Went for a short 100 mile ride 12-17-08 and it was sweet. But I am a little dissapointed, in the 100 miles of riding I seen more sleds than groomers. I only seen three groomers and i seen four sleds, but they were parked along the trail, with their thumps up when I went by. Irons, Baldwin, Cadillac, Benzie/Manistee trails were all groomed as per their grooming clubs, I still haven't got an answer back from Wellston yet, but the trails I rode on were fine. Some of the Irons trails were a little bumpy in the am, but by the after noon they looked to be groomed.(That's where I seen one of the groomers)

We do have rooms and snowmobiles open for the weekend of December 19th through 20th and still have a couple rooms and snowmobiles open for the Christmas week.

pk500 wrote:I'm a strong believer in the reality of acid rain, as the chemical makeup of the water in Adirondack mountain lakes proves here in New York. But it's going to take some real convincing for me to believe that this global warming is anything more than cyclical.

I believe in taking care of the environment through less reliance on fossil fuels, using nuclear power, enforcing existing pollution laws, etc. But I don't believe in spending billions of dollars in a knee-jerk attempt to solve a "problem" that may be nothing more than cyclical in nature.

Take care,
PK

I feel the same way.

GameSeven · Post by **GameSeven** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:40 pm

macsomjrr wrote:Is science sometimes wrong? Yes. Is science usually right? Yes. Why? Because it builds from a solid foundation of tireless hard work that enables us to further understand and appreciate the world around us. The hard sciences (chemistry, physics) are telling us, almost irrefutably that man-made gas emissions are having an effect on the Earth's climate. For those people who don't understand the "how" or the "why" that is your responsibility to figure it out, not mine.

There is no hocus pocus magical super secret conspiracy going on here guys. It is happening and we're going to deal with it sooner or later.

Science is never 'wrong,' but it can be incomplete. And scientists can be, and often are, wrong. For the same reasons that GW skeptics are admonished not to take an anecdotal view of GW outside our windows or by a one year 'blip' in temperature, *we* ask the GW believers to consider the possibility that the trends are part of millennial cycles *far* greater than those cited by GW theorists.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html

Long after we and future generations are turned into carbon, the Earth will likely go on cooling and warming up due to influences far greater than we have on the planet.

Again, I'm not arguing that we should be bad tenants while we're here, but I think the issue has become far more about politics and economics than it is about pure science.

"And what if you're wrong?"

"If we're wrong, then nothing happens. We'll go to jail. Peacefully. Quietly. We'll enjoy it. "

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:52 pm

Interesting data and quote in an AP report today from a National Weather Service meteorologist, who obviously works with climate for a living:

>>>>>
As of Saturday, the December snowfall total in Bismarck, N.D., nearly equaled the 19.3-inch mark for of all last winter, said Weather Service meteorologist Joshua Scheck.

"The thing about North Dakota is that it's extreme," Scheck said. "For several years we haven't had an aggressive winter like this."
<<<<<

Guess North Dakotans are being punished for not buying enough carbon credits. They should have known better.

Take care,
PK

fletcher21 · Post by **fletcher21** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 1:04 pm

^^^ I would think living in ND would be punishment enough..

Post by **Jared** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 1:06 pm

I read macsomjrr's post not to mean that those that are skeptical about global warming are anti-Earth, as evidenced by his change is a comin' statement. People can be sarcastic, joking, etc. at times on the forums...though it all breaks down if people get thin-skinned about it.

GameSeven · Post by **GameSeven** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 1:23 pm

I appreciate your POV Jared, but there was also this:

macsomjrr wrote:It's tough to argue against blatant ignorance like this. Luckily the rest of the world and our next president appear to be more serious about the threat of man's impact on this planet and appear to be inclined to do more about it. You guys can vent and get mad about this all you want but smarter people than you are figuring out important solutions whether you like it or not.

Consider being also characterized as 'Anti-Earth' was perhaps the icing on the cake. Next time there's a debate on abortion we'll challenge advocates' intelligence and refer to them as 'baby-killers'.

I also agree with Bdoughty that his first apology ("I take it back sorry. You love the Earth. Happy?") was a tad disingenuous.

Edited for spelling, yikes.

Post by **Jared** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 1:39 pm

GameSeven,

I was focusing too much on the anti-Earth comment, and didn't even look back at that. You're totally right.

dougb · Post by **dougb** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 1:40 pm

bdoughty wrote:
XXXIV wrote:
Yeah but he buys carbon credits.
"You too much buying Carbon Credits from yourself." Mr. Myagi

Hey thanks BD - was laughing at your Karate Kids references and then had the idea of getting a bonsai plant for my wife's birthday (Dec. 25).

Best wishes,

Doug

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:04 pm

GameSeven wrote:I appreciate your POV Jared, but there was also this:

macsomjrr wrote:It's tough to argue against blatant ignorance like this. Luckily the rest of the world and our next president appear to be more serious about the threat of man's impact on this planet and appear to be inclined to do more about it. You guys can vent and get mad about this all you want but smarter people than you are figuring out important solutions whether you like it or not.
Consider being also characterized as 'Anti-Earth' was perhaps the icing on the cake. Next time there's a debate on abortion we'll challenge advocates' intelligence and refer to them as 'baby-killers'.

I also agree with Bdoughty that his first apology ("I take it back sorry. You love the Earth. Happy?") was a tad disengenuous.

Damn message boards always taking things out of context. Instead of "smarter people than you" I think he really meant "less dumb."

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:23 pm

GameSeven wrote: Long after we and future generations are turned into carbon, the Earth will likely go on cooling and warming up due to influences far greater than we have on the planet.

Boy that would be a conundrum for Star Wars fans/environmentalists. A dream come true or save the planet. Decisions, decisions.

dougb wrote:
Hey thanks BD - was laughing at your Karate Kids references and then had the idea of getting a bonsai plant for my wife's birthday (Dec. 25).

Best wishes,

Doug

A little credit goes to XXXIV for the inspiration.

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:58 pm

http://www.latimes.com/news/printeditio ... 9371.story

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Dec 26, 2008 10:05 pm

Geologists obviously don't go to Vegas.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Fri Dec 26, 2008 11:38 pm

All this Global Climate Warming Change stuff reminds me of something else...

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Sat Dec 27, 2008 12:18 am

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Sat Dec 27, 2008 12:27 am

wco81 wrote:Geologists obviously don't go to Vegas.

Probably the only ones who can't get laid there.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Sat Dec 27, 2008 12:57 am

Feanor wrote:

Yeah, feanor-another great visual of what "climate change apocolypse" nonsense looks like. But I think this is a better, more clearly defined representation of it:

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Sat Dec 27, 2008 11:45 pm

Wow, you can search google images, so you must be smarter and know better than the thousands of scientists who think that humans are contributing to global warming.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Sun Dec 28, 2008 12:20 am

Feanor wrote:Wow, you can search google images, so you must be smarter and know better than the thousands of scientists who think that humans are contributing to global warming.

No, I just tend to side with the just-as-many-if-not-more scientists who see it as the empty hullabaloo that it is. I don't tend to go along with the Pied Piper, or the silly agenda that goes along with the empty suit that is global warming or whatever it's called today. You can go on thinking that you're somehow more 'enlightened' than me simply because you subscribe to that baloney if it makes you feel better, but it doesn't shake me one bit. It's a farce and a scam. I don't blame you for defending it vehemently, because I wouldn't want to be known as a sucker, either.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Sun Dec 28, 2008 12:30 am

Feanor wrote:Wow, you can search google images...

Um, didn't you do the exact same thing?

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Sun Dec 28, 2008 12:37 am

matthewk wrote:
Feanor wrote:Wow, you can search google images...
Um, didn't you do the exact same thing?

You know, I did think of that, but decided that, somehow, it would be deflected, so I let it go.

macsomjrr · Post by **macsomjrr** » Sun Dec 28, 2008 12:42 am

Teal wrote:
Feanor wrote:Wow, you can search google images, so you must be smarter and know better than the thousands of scientists who think that humans are contributing to global warming.
No, I just tend to side with the just-as-many-if-not-more scientists who see it as the empty hullabaloo that it is. I don't tend to go along with the Pied Piper, or the silly agenda that goes along with the empty suit that is global warming or whatever it's called today. You can go on thinking that you're somehow more 'enlightened' than me simply because you subscribe to that baloney if it makes you feel better, but it doesn't shake me one bit. It's a farce and a scam. I don't blame you for defending it vehemently, because I wouldn't want to be known as a sucker, either.

Teal I have to know where you're getting this information from that global warming/climate change is a farce and a scam. I'm not finding any legit resources that go so far as to say that this problem simply doesn't exist. Also could you clarify exactly which part you disagree with? Is it that pollution doesn't cause changes in the environment that lead to changes in temperature? Do you not believe in the types of gases? In the research itself? Do you believe it to be a conspiracy?

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Sun Dec 28, 2008 12:56 am

macsomjrr wrote:
Teal wrote:
Feanor wrote:Wow, you can search google images, so you must be smarter and know better than the thousands of scientists who think that humans are contributing to global warming.
No, I just tend to side with the just-as-many-if-not-more scientists who see it as the empty hullabaloo that it is. I don't tend to go along with the Pied Piper, or the silly agenda that goes along with the empty suit that is global warming or whatever it's called today. You can go on thinking that you're somehow more 'enlightened' than me simply because you subscribe to that baloney if it makes you feel better, but it doesn't shake me one bit. It's a farce and a scam. I don't blame you for defending it vehemently, because I wouldn't want to be known as a sucker, either.

Teal I have to know where you're getting this information from that global warming/climate change is a farce and a scam. I'm not finding any legit resources that go so far as to say that this problem simply doesn't exist. Also could you clarify exactly which part you disagree with? Is it that pollution doesn't cause changes in the environment that lead to changes in temperature? Do you not believe in the types of gases? In the research itself? Do you believe it to be a conspiracy?

I believe it to be a power grab at bigger and more intrusive government, as that is exactly what will happen if this s*** gets any more of a toehold, and it explains precisely why people are fired from their positions of meteorology in some places if they don't ascribe to global warming/climate change.

Do I think the climate changes? Absolutely. Has been for at least hundreds of thousands of years, arguably much longer. Do I believe burning a styrofoam cup, or a cow fart is to blame? Hell no. That's just a bunch of popularized nonsense. Know what happens when there isn't enough wind to power a 'wind turbine', BTW? They turn on the gas turbines to get them moving...funny as hell, if you ask me.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:04 am

Here's a good article from the Telegraph, Mac:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/colu ... roved.html

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sun Dec 28, 2008 9:26 am

Here is why the Kyoto accords are a political and economic boondoggle: In its first year, from 2005-06, Kyoto cost an estimated $150 billion. The Earth's temperature dropped .0015 of a degree Celsius during that time.

At that rate, it will take 667 years and $100 trillion for Kyoto to lower the Earth's temperature by 1 degree Celsius.

Also, don't forget this 1975 Newsweek story that predicted a coming ice age:

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/news ... ng-ice-age

Science Digest, The New York Times and The Christian Science Monitor all published similar stories in 1974-75.

Is climate change happening? Yes. But does it deserve the funding and hysteria that it's receiving? No.

Weather cycles last decades or centuries. I don't think the intense political spotlight that has been focused on global warming for the last eight years allows a long enough sample time to truly indicate whether this climate change is man-made or cyclical.

Remember, the next ice age was coming just 33 years ago.

Take care,
PK