No such thing as a "perfect" temperature

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jrenz
Nobody says pollution isn't bad, and that reducing it wouldn't be to our benefit.

The argument is against the religion of climate change, which has completely consumed the media and politics, forcing it's agenda on the world and distorting scientific facts, labeling anybody who disagrees as a heretic with no credibility.

It's moved from a scientific debate to a crusade by the environuts to change the world as they see fit, backed by celebrities and politicians all waving the flag in the name of the Earth.

If it gets us off the friggin Oil then I don't care what you call it.

Damn the consequences?

Absolutely

wow. Just wow. What a short sighted man you are.

Anyway.

Nothing has been done since 1973.

I don't see anything "short sighted" about that.

But just keep apologizing for your Oil buddies.

Thanks for your lack of comprehension (again). The short sigtedness I was referring to is your nonchalant attitude of consequenses of other power sources. Which, as you have stated, you really couldnt care less.

As far as my oil buddies go, I invest where there is profit. If green energy is profitable, I'll invest there. But, of course since I believe *I* am responsible for my own income, you will call me rich. Whatever. Youre such a whiner.

Always diverting from the issue as usual on you and your kind's part.

I already know theconsequences of sticking with Oil.

What's your beef with renewable energy???

Absolutely nothing But right now its simply not cost effective. Unless, of course, you would be willing to fork out 10 times the amount you pay now for your power needs? Just isnt practical. Some day it will be though. Not in our lifetime however.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: piasabird
I have never seen any body of evidence of global warming. It would make sense that a scientist would have to present evidence of such a claim to the public. All I ever see are reports and predictions without any hard data. I assume it is all a bunch of hooey. Where is this evidence at and why havent I seen a body of evidence spanning 1000 years of recorded temperatures to prove it?

The reason is it does not exist.

Naaaw! It may, might, be 'cause you also wear a blindfold in real life. :roll:

edit Holy cow blackangst1 edit out some of those quotes, your gonna wear out my scroll wheel.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
But the cause is what is key. Are we in a naturally occurring cycle or is our planetary "footprint" bringing about the trend.

It doesn't matter. If the majority of scientists studying global warming are right, and we do nothing about reducing pollution, the world is screwed with no time left to address the possibly catastrophic consequenses. If your industrial greed pack is right, and the world gets serious about reducing pollution, the worst that can happen is, we may come up with solutions sooner than we need them for our own survival.

Good planets are hard to find. If we break this one, we're screwed regardless of whether it's because we do nothing or because we can't fix it in time. Considering the consequenses of being wrong either way, if we really care about our own survival, acting to reduce global warming, now would be the more CONSERVATIVE course of action.

So lets adopt widespread nuclear power and have this problem solved within a decade or so....

We can only dream...eventually I think it'll happen though. Just hope its soon Although it wont do a THING about alleviating our need for oil...

Does anyone yet know what to do with that stuff called Nuclear WASTE?

Some of you conservative rednecks complain about Hybrid car batteries :laugh:

Who cares about nuclear waste? As long as it gets us off oil, right? As Dave says, damn the consequences!

 

[ProfJohn]

Nobody denies that the earth is getting warmer.
The question is what is causing it.

The Global Warming crowd produces all these theories and models and ideas. But they have yet to PROVE their theories in reality.

It has been pointed out before that this recent raise in temperatures started BEFORE the mass creation of green house gasses. CO2 levels also started raising BEFORE the mass use of the automobile, which did not occur until the 1950s.

If Global Warming is man made due to CO2 via cars and power plants how do you explain the raise in temperatures that occurred from 1919 to 1940 when neither cars nor power plants were that wide spread?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
But the cause is what is key. Are we in a naturally occurring cycle or is our planetary "footprint" bringing about the trend.

It doesn't matter. If the majority of scientists studying global warming are right, and we do nothing about reducing pollution, the world is screwed with no time left to address the possibly catastrophic consequenses. If your industrial greed pack is right, and the world gets serious about reducing pollution, the worst that can happen is, we may come up with solutions sooner than we need them for our own survival.

Good planets are hard to find. If we break this one, we're screwed regardless of whether it's because we do nothing or because we can't fix it in time. Considering the consequenses of being wrong either way, if we really care about our own survival, acting to reduce global warming, now would be the more CONSERVATIVE course of action.

So lets adopt widespread nuclear power and have this problem solved within a decade or so....

We can only dream...eventually I think it'll happen though. Just hope its soon Although it wont do a THING about alleviating our need for oil...

Does anyone yet know what to do with that stuff called Nuclear WASTE?

Some of you conservative rednecks complain about Hybrid car batteries :laugh:

Simple recycle what we can, turn the rest of it glass and give it a couple decades to cool, them move it to long term storage. Not really a big problem.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
But the cause is what is key. Are we in a naturally occurring cycle or is our planetary "footprint" bringing about the trend.

It doesn't matter. If the majority of scientists studying global warming are right, and we do nothing about reducing pollution, the world is screwed with no time left to address the possibly catastrophic consequenses. If your industrial greed pack is right, and the world gets serious about reducing pollution, the worst that can happen is, we may come up with solutions sooner than we need them for our own survival.

Good planets are hard to find. If we break this one, we're screwed regardless of whether it's because we do nothing or because we can't fix it in time. Considering the consequenses of being wrong either way, if we really care about our own survival, acting to reduce global warming, now would be the more CONSERVATIVE course of action.

So lets adopt widespread nuclear power and have this problem solved within a decade or so....

We can only dream...eventually I think it'll happen though. Just hope its soon Although it wont do a THING about alleviating our need for oil...

Does anyone yet know what to do with that stuff called Nuclear WASTE?

Some of you conservative rednecks complain about Hybrid car batteries :laugh:

Simple recycle what we can, turn the rest of it glass and give it a couple decades to cool, them move it to long term storage. Not really a big problem.

Not a big problem? So.. we create toxic waste before we know how to honestly manage it?

Why don't we just dump it in the ocean in containers that, supposedly, won't rust.. then we can destroy the oceans and just get it over with

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
But the cause is what is key. Are we in a naturally occurring cycle or is our planetary "footprint" bringing about the trend.

It doesn't matter. If the majority of scientists studying global warming are right, and we do nothing about reducing pollution, the world is screwed with no time left to address the possibly catastrophic consequenses. If your industrial greed pack is right, and the world gets serious about reducing pollution, the worst that can happen is, we may come up with solutions sooner than we need them for our own survival.

Good planets are hard to find. If we break this one, we're screwed regardless of whether it's because we do nothing or because we can't fix it in time. Considering the consequenses of being wrong either way, if we really care about our own survival, acting to reduce global warming, now would be the more CONSERVATIVE course of action.

So lets adopt widespread nuclear power and have this problem solved within a decade or so....

We can only dream...eventually I think it'll happen though. Just hope its soon Although it wont do a THING about alleviating our need for oil...

Does anyone yet know what to do with that stuff called Nuclear WASTE?

Some of you conservative rednecks complain about Hybrid car batteries :laugh:

Simple recycle what we can, turn the rest of it glass and give it a couple decades to cool, them move it to long term storage. Not really a big problem.

Not a big problem? So.. we create toxic waste before we know how to honestly manage it?

Why don't we just dump it in the ocean in containers that, supposedly, won't rust.. then we can destroy the oceans and just get it over with

We know how to manage it. We can recycle it. We can safely store it.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nobody denies that the earth is getting warmer.
The question is what is causing it.

The Global Warming crowd produces all these theories and models and ideas. But they have yet to PROVE their theories in reality.

You know a scientific theory can't be proven right?

 

[Jmman]

I did an undergraduate research paper on global warming a few years ago, and one of the people I cited to was Dr. William Gray. He doesn't seem to think to highly about manmade global warming either, and he is highly respected in his field.


Text


You don?t believe global warming is causing climate change?

G: No. If it is, it is causing such a small part that it is negligible. I?m not disputing that there has been global warming. There was a lot of global warming in the 1930s and ?40s, and then there was a slight global cooling from the middle ?40s to the early ?70s. And there has been warming since the middle ?70s, especially in the last 10 years. But this is natural, due to ocean circulation changes and other factors. It is not human induced.

That must be a controversial position among hurricane researchers.

G: Nearly all of my colleagues who have been around 40 or 50 years are skeptical as hell about this whole global-warming thing. But no one asks us. If you don?t know anything about how the atmosphere functions, you will of course say, ?Look, greenhouse gases are going up, the globe is warming, they must be related.? Well, just because there are two associations, changing with the same sign, doesn?t mean that one is causing the other.

With last year?s hurricane season so active, and this year?s looking like it will be, won?t people say it?s evidence of global warming?

G: The Atlantic has had more of these storms in the least 10 years or so, but in other ocean basins, activity is slightly down. Why would that be so if this is climate change? The Atlantic is a special basin? The number of major storms in the Atlantic also went way down from the middle 1960s to the middle ?90s, when greenhouse gases were going up.

Why is there scientific support for the idea?

G: So many people have a vested interest in this global-warming thing?all these big labs and research and stuff. The idea is to frighten the public, to get money to study it more. Now that the cold war is over, we have to generate a common enemy to support science, and what better common enemy for the globe than greenhouse gases?

Are your funding problems due in part to your views?

G: I can?t be sure, but I think that?s a lot of the reason. I have been around 50 years, so my views on this are well known. I had NOAA money for 30 some years, and then when the Clinton administration came in and Gore started directing some of the environmental stuff, I was cut off. I couldn?t get any NOAA money. They turned down 13 straight proposals from me.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: charrison


We know how to manage it. We can recycle it. We can safely store it.

If we recycle it .. then what are we storing?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: charrison


We know how to manage it. We can recycle it. We can safely store it.

If we recycle it .. then what are we storing?

What cannot be recycled...

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nobody denies that the earth is getting warmer.
The question is what is causing it.

The Global Warming crowd produces all these theories and models and ideas. But they have yet to PROVE their theories in reality.

You know a scientific theory can't be proven right?

And it only takes ones person to prove them wrong.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: charrison


We know how to manage it. We can recycle it. We can safely store it.

If we recycle it .. then what are we storing?

What cannot be recycled...

I was only reading what you wrote

"We can safely store it." <

What is "it"?

Is "it" lethal and has a shelf-life that can outlive civilization?

How confident are you that "it" can be safely stored .. and for how long?

Once again.. why is there "it" left after we recycle nuclear waste?

Is "it" = pollution for the next generation to solve?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: charrison


We know how to manage it. We can recycle it. We can safely store it.

If we recycle it .. then what are we storing?

What cannot be recycled...

I was only reading what you wrote

"We can safely store it." <

What is "it"?

Is "it" lethal and has a shelf-life that can outlive civilization?

How confident are you that "it" can be safely stored .. and for how long?

Once again.. why is there "it" left after we recycle nuclear waste?

Is "it" = pollution for the next generation to solve?

IT is not a problem for the next generation to solve. Anything that is really really hot will also have a very very short 1/2 live and will only be a fraction of the original problem in a decade or two. There is much less of IT after it is recycled. Hell we have been safely storing IT for the last several decades without a problem, because there is just not much of IT to begin with.

 

[umbrella39]

YAGWT

IMO these threads should be consolidated and new ones locked. FFS people, Gore ISN'T running. Continue on with your ignorance while I build my ark

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM

Originally posted by: piasabird
I have never seen any body of evidence of global warming. It would make sense that a scientist would have to present evidence of such a claim to the public. All I ever see are reports and predictions without any hard data. I assume it is all a bunch of hooey. Where is this evidence at and why havent I seen a body of evidence spanning 1000 years of recorded temperatures to prove it?

The reason is it does not exist.

Naaaw! It may, might, be 'cause you also wear a blindfold in real life. :roll:

edit Holy cow blackangst1 edit out some of those quotes, your gonna wear out my scroll wheel.

Sorry man I get lazy sometimes LOL

 

[BlancoNino]

The way we see and deal with Global Warming and what we know about it will constantly change over the next 30 years (look at how much it's changed in the past 30 years!). Obviously something is happening and it should be studied...but I doubt scientists even know half of what is really going on and even less as to what is causing it. There is no cause for alarm. All is well.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nobody denies that the earth is getting warmer.
The question is what is causing it.

The Global Warming crowd produces all these theories and models and ideas. But they have yet to PROVE their theories in reality.

You know a scientific theory can't be proven right?

ummm explain to me the laws of motion and thermal dynamics then.
They started as theory as well.

ALL scientific thought starts as theory.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nobody denies that the earth is getting warmer.
The question is what is causing it.

The Global Warming crowd produces all these theories and models and ideas. But they have yet to PROVE their theories in reality.

You know a scientific theory can't be proven right?

ummm explain to me the laws of motion and thermal dynamics then.
They started as theory as well.

ALL scientific thought starts as theory.

Dear lord are you serious?

The "laws" of motion are objectively wrong!

(Though extremely useful)

That's one of the reasons very few things get called 'laws' anymore.

And no, law was not used to mean 'proven'.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Jmman
Text
Are your funding problems due in part to your views?

G: I can?t be sure, but I think that?s a lot of the reason. I have been around 50 years, so my views on this are well known. I had NOAA money for 30 some years, and then when the Clinton administration came in and Gore started directing some of the environmental stuff, I was cut off. I couldn?t get any NOAA money. They turned down 13 straight proposals from me.

You mean a Presidential administration only funded people who agree with their ideas?
Wow, who would have thought that possible. :roll:

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: jrenz
Maybe he has a personal agenda, who knows. He's turned global warming into a religious cause, and dragged the media and politicians along with him. He's made a boat load off of his movie, and he owns a company that sells carbon credits, or something to that effect.

My point is that if the same standard of skepticism was applied to his motives as is being applied to *everyone* who speaks out about global warming, this would be a completely different debate.

It's possible, but again, it's certainly not obvious. Gore doesn't need the money, and he has been talking this talk rather unprofitably for decades. It just seems like a remarkably elaborate scheme, considering he doesn't need the money.

1. He's an attention whore
2. He's doing it for the money
3. He's fat
4. He invented the internet
5. He's a hypocrite
6. Etc, etc, etc

Everyone wants to get in a jab to discredit the guy. It's sad really. I'm not saying he's perfect but I do believe that he sincerely believes in this cause.

 

[dingnecros]

meh!! I disagree....I keep telling my co-workers to stop touching the thermostat. 72F ought to be good for everyone

 

[Rangoric]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
If Global Warming is man made due to CO2 via cars and power plants how do you explain the raise in temperatures that occurred from 1919 to 1940 when neither cars nor power plants were that wide spread?

World War I/II.

A cooling in the 1940s could be from the end of WWII, and a sudden drop in population for quite a few million.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Rangoric

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
If Global Warming is man made due to CO2 via cars and power plants how do you explain the raise in temperatures that occurred from 1919 to 1940 when neither cars nor power plants were that wide spread?

World War I/II.

A cooling in the 1940s could be from the end of WWII, and a sudden drop in population for quite a few million.

Um, or it could have been nothing to do with people.

 

[k1pp3r]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

<snip>

2. There was a warming trend between 1050 and 1300. No one can explain why it happened. But we know for sure it wasn?t caused by automobiles and green house gasses. Perhaps what we are seeing now is just another long term trend similar to that one.


<snio>

You will notice that the warming period 1050 - 1300 was left out of the last UN climate report, now why would they do that.

Oh i know, because 1) they can't explain it, 2) it does not fit into their agenda!