Global Warming/Climate Change Super Thread

[Inquisitor]

The guys beating the global warming drum come up with all kinds of examples but no proofs.  I particularly like the carbon dioxide one.  It's a green house gas!  Well.  I guess I better stop breathing since each breath I exhale I'm emitting a green house gas.

Another great one. the Ice Caps are melting!!  Meanwhile this photo and graph from NASA shows the Antarctic Ice cap. Yup it's growing.  See Link.  http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=79369&src=twitter-iotd.

I agree that their are a lot of players that are lining their own pockets at others expense. The more I find out about Al Gore the more I despise him.

Kyoto helped BRIC at the expense on North America.

Thanks to the Mcguinty government Ontario went from some of the cheapest hydro in North America to some of the most expensive, a major factor in manufacturing cratering.

Its good that some of the ice is coming back.

I may be going off on a bit of a tangent on climate change, but I predict that  topics that will be getting a lot more attention  are Drought and access to Potable water and potential for abuse conflict.

 

[kevincanada]

I agree that their are a lot of players that are lining their own pockets at others expense. The more I find out about Al Gore the more I despise him.

Kyoto helped BRIC at the expense on North America.

Thanks to the Mcguinty government Ontario went from some of the cheapest hydro in North America to some of the most expensive, a major factor in manufacturing cratering.

Its good that some of the ice is coming back.

I may be going off on a bit of a tangent on climate change, but I predict that  topics that will be getting a lot more attention  are Drought and access to Potable water and potential for abuse conflict.

The ice was never lost as far as I know.  It cycles but I'm not a pro.  You see down years and you see up years.  Of course our CO count will be higher than other countries as we are a developed nation.  All robust manufacturing countries have higher CO emissions.  It can't be helped.  It makes sense to me that Canada opt out of the Kyoto protocol all together.  I recall reading a article a few years back in the reader digest where they did a break down of CO emissions versus production and CO emissions per capita.  At a per capita percentage we are on the high end of the chart of emissions.  Based on production levels we fared much better.  All other emission types, as in Toxic compounds, smoke etc.  We are one of the best countries in the world at keeping the levels low.

I won't get into Mcguinty costs, that's a different subject and one that is still unfolding to this day.

 

[Nemo888]

The bottom line is we are gambling all future generations for our own greed. Fossil fuels are stored solar energy.  6 million or so years worth. It is one of the most amazing natural resources humanity has ever found. Instead of being reasonable stewards of this nonrenewable resource we are deliberately burning it as fast as possible. If global warming turns out to be true we will be remembered as the biggest assholes in history. In the unlikely event that Global Warming is not a fact and 99%+ of those who study the environments are wrong we are still terrible excuses for human beings. If bloggins ate the entire battalions rations after hearing a rumour that food convoys could no longer get through what would you think of him?

 

[George Wallace]

The bottom line is we are gambling all future generations for our own greed. Fossil fuels are stored solar energy.  6 million or so years worth. It is one of the most amazing natural resources humanity has ever found. Instead of being reasonable stewards of this nonrenewable resource we are deliberately burning it as fast as possible. If global warming turns out to be true we will be remembered as the biggest assholes in history. In the unlikely event that Global Warming is not a fact and 99%+ of those who study the environments are wrong we are still terrible excuses for human beings. If bloggins ate the entire battalions rations after hearing a rumour that food convoys could no longer get through what would you think of him?

LOL

I think Bloggins had a hollow leg and one hell of a tap worm.

We are just as "greedy" today, as all past generations have been, in our search for betterment and improving our lives.  Over the centuries, we have improved our environment by doing away with all the smoke generating factories of the Industrial Age, and finding better means of creating power starting with the internal combustion engine, building Hydro electric dams, nuclear power, and recently further developing wind power and solar power.  If you want to damn us for progress, I pity you.  Would you have us throw away all research so that we can live in a log cabin in the back woods, wearing cloths from hemp crops, sheep's wool and eating fish from the stream and meat that we trapped for ourselves?  Or perhaps we should go further back and live in caves, to preserve the environment? 

 

[kevincanada]

The bottom line is we are gambling all future generations for our own greed. Fossil fuels are stored solar energy.  6 million or so years worth. It is one of the most amazing natural resources humanity has ever found. Instead of being reasonable stewards of this nonrenewable resource we are deliberately burning it as fast as possible. If global warming turns out to be true we will be remembered as the biggest assholes in history. In the unlikely event that Global Warming is not a fact and 99%+ of those who study the environments are wrong we are still terrible excuses for human beings. If bloggins ate the entire battalions rations after hearing a rumour that food convoys could no longer get through what would you think of him?

Greed and gambling with our future.  Where did I hear that before?  Everything is energy.  It's just how you use and convert it.  I'm all for cleaner and better methods of utilizing energy sources so we can live our lives and be productive.  I have to ask.  Show me a better way?  And I'll go that route and reduce my dependance on fossil fuel.  There is just as many studies that say global warming is false.  Look those up or my previous post where NASA has pictures showing a growing Ice Cap, not shrinking as the global warming conspirators claim.

I don't know who Bloggins is, since one person cannot eat that much food.  I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[ArmyRick]

I am going against the grain here and agreeing with Nemo888. I have mentioned my opinions on Global climate disruption. Too many people here are being way too casual and denying its there or that it exist.

Its like having a bad growth on your body and pretending its nothing until its too late.

My 2 cents.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I am going against the grain here and agreeing with Nemo888. I have mentioned my opinions on Global climate disruption. Too many people here are being way too casual and denying its there or that it exist.

Its like having a bad growth on your body and pretending its nothing until its too late.

My 2 cents.

The issue is not whether or not the climate is changing- climates changes all of the time, for all kinds of reasons.

The real issue is: is climate being negatively effected by human activity or is the climate system being driven by solar or other factors? A follow on issue: is the cure (cease use of all carbon based fuels) worse than the so-called disease? For example- just how habitable is Canada in the winter, without carbon fuels? Really.

So far, in this topic area, all that I have seen from AGW proponents are a number of really spectacular claims that have some pretty dubious science or statistical analysis or modelling behind them (once you actually scratch the surface of the hype).

I am of the opinion that carbon fuels will eventually run their course.  Once something better and cheaper arrive.  Until then- well, adapt.

 

[Nemo888]

When it comes to studies that were actually submitted for peer review only 1 in 581 reject global warming or endorse a cause other than human CO2 emissions. That is 33,690 investigators in the pro column and only 34 nays. To the best of our knowledge the earth is warming and human emissions of greenhouse gases are the primary cause. Not to act when the only downside is saving some valuable resources for future generations is shortsighted and pathological. The problem is greed compounded by scale. In the 1950 geophysical year they went on and on about the inexhaustible supply of fish in the ocean. They said very proudly that at current rates we could never make a dent in the bounty nature had given us. Then driftnets were invented and 15km swaths of life were dragged onto mobile factories. We have reached a similar scale transition with fossil fuels. CO2 is now finishing off the coral and other breeding grounds with ocean acidification. Sweden generated 77% of it's energy from oil in the 1970's. Now it is down to 32% and they plan to make that zero by 2020. 26% of it's energy comes from renewables already. There are much worse things than following the Swedish model.

 

[Haletown]

well if you want consensus . . . 100% of climate models have failed to predict what is actually happening to the climate.

Because as everyone knows, consensus is real science.

 

[Kirkhill]

Another high profile right wing Bush and Reagan appointee has jumped ship. Climate change is settled science if you actually follow real science, not tv news. More at the link. http://www.jamespowell.org/PieChart/piechart.html

Or, over a 21 year period 55 teams of scientists have produced, every month, an article which they published in their own journals.

13950 articles between 2012 and 1991 (21 years) equals 664 articles per month.

Assume that the journals are published monthly ( 12 per year)  and it only requires 55 teams to produce 13,950 articles.

As the teams also produce their own journals then it doesn't require much to swap articles with other teams: "I'll publish yours if you'll publish mine".

Climate Change also gets discussed in Geophysics, Archaeology, Physics, Meteorology and various generalist science organisations.  Are these included in your 50 articles per month?

There are a lot more than 50 articles published in disciplines that also concern themselves with Climate Change. 

 

[Haletown]

Global Warming, I mean Climate Change, actually I mean Extreme  Weather is now passe, used up, lost its juice and it is time for the  multi $Billion dollar International Eco Greenie Industry to invent  a new scam to keep the rubes petrified and the money flowing.

I give you Al Gore's next great enviro Scheme & Scam.

 

[jpjohnsn]

Global Warming, I mean Climate Change, actually I mean Extreme  Weather is now passe, used up, lost its juice and it is time for the  multi $Billion dollar International Eco Greenie Industry to invent  a new scam to keep the rubes petrified and the money flowing.

Just out of curiosity, why do you suppose that it's the "Eco Greenie Industry" that's perpetrating the scams and not the multinational corporations like those run by the Koch Brothers perpetrating scams to spread disinformation to protect their bottom lines? 

 

[ArmyRick]

Its not just cars, planes, trains, etc.  Industrial agriculture puts far more carbon into the atmosphere.

Allan Savory. Google him and watch any number of videos he has done. He is logical and well spoken, his arguments makes a heap of sense.

 

[kevincanada]

Just out of curiosity, why do you suppose that it's the "Eco Greenie Industry" that's perpetrating the scams and not the multinational corporations like those run by the Koch Brothers perpetrating scams to spread disinformation to protect their bottom lines?

Why can't it be both?

 

[ModlrMike]

Just out of curiosity, why do you suppose that it's the "Eco Greenie Industry" that's perpetrating the scams and not the multinational corporations like those run by the Koch Brothers perpetrating scams to spread disinformation to protect their bottom lines?

That wouldn't be in any way similar to the Soros / Tides Foundation activities?

 

[Haletown]

Why can't it be both?

According to Grrenpeace USA, the Koch family has, since 1997, funded the AGW denial machine to he tune of $67m.

Greenpeace, on the other hand, generates something south of $500m anually.  And Greenpeace, while it is the poster kiddie for the transnational environmental industry, is by no means the only multi hundred million dollar enviro organization.  Check out the Sierra Club and Tides.

Koch industries produces multiple useful products that are used by society and employs 70,000 people.  It exists to produce products that society deems useful and will pay for.

Greenpeace, in fact the entire environmental industry, exists to produce publicity stunts' photoshopped picturesof lonely polar bears and create fears about the future. They produce no useful products.

Time is ticking on their credibility.  They figured they had the killer app with the global warming thingy and went all in.  They will have a difficult time explaining the non global warming that  has actually happened and continues to happen. 

Too bad about the staggering amounts  in public funds that be been diverted away from useful activities like Healthcare and Education to pay subsisidies for useless solar panels and  wind turbines.

Gawd I feel sorry for Ontario taxpayers.  Because when public policy is hijacked for someone's cause, there is always an opportunity cost.

 

[Nemo888]

Or, over a 21 year period 55 teams of scientists have produced, every month, an article which they published in their own journals.

13950 articles between 2012 and 1991 (21 years) equals 664 articles per month.

Assume that the journals are published monthly ( 12 per year)  and it only requires 55 teams to produce 13,950 articles.

As the teams also produce their own journals then it doesn't require much to swap articles with other teams: "I'll publish yours if you'll publish mine".

Climate Change also gets discussed in Geophysics, Archaeology, Physics, Meteorology and various generalist science organisations.  Are these included in your 50 articles per month?

There are a lot more than 50 articles published in disciplines that also concern themselves with Climate Change.

James Powell is no granola cruncher. He made his chops working for Reagan and Bush. I checked his methodology. The 13,950 affirmative articles have a total of 33,690 individual authors. The nays have a total of 34.  Only one in a thousand knowledgeable people disagree with CO2 emissions causing climate change. Will you gamble all future generations on odds like that?

 

[Jed]

James Powell is no granola cruncher. He made his chops working for Reagan and Bush. I checked his methodology. The 13,950 affirmative articles have a total of 33,690 individual authors. The nays have a total of 34.  Only one in a thousand knowledgeable people disagree with CO2 emissions causing climate change. Will you gamble all future generations on odds like that?

Wow! I must be one of the 1 in a 1000 (33690/34) that thinks this Manmade Global Warming is all BS!

 

[kevincanada]

James Powell is no granola cruncher. He made his chops working for Reagan and Bush. I checked his methodology. The 13,950 affirmative articles have a total of 33,690 individual authors. The nays have a total of 34.  Only one in a thousand knowledgeable people disagree with CO2 emissions causing climate change. Will you gamble all future generations on odds like that?

Instead of arguing statistics based on opinion articles.  Why not cough up a article or two so we have real debate going to see if any of the 33,690 are valid.  Also Al Gore worked for a President.  Clinton I believe it was.  Ironically he has made millions off of in my eyes instilling fear in a ill informed public.

 

[kevincanada]

Wow! I must be one of the 1 in a 1000 (33690/34) that thinks this Manmade Global Warming is all BS!

I'm a nay also.  Oopsie.