Snooooow, Snoooow

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.  

I tend to go with the respected professionals  that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....

Ok, if that's what you want....

YOU'RE CRAZY

There are respected scientists that claim that global warming is not caused by humans.  Some even claim that the earth is not warming. Specific areas may be warming but the the earth as a whole is not. They don't get the press of the popular theory.

It kind of reminds me of the medical doctor that (eventually) proved, against the popular medical opinion, that stomach ulcers are caused by a bacteria (or something like that).

Here's a frightening thought for the masses, Inhofe might be correct. (Notice, I did not say "right".)

[azbadpuppy]

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.  

I tend to go with the respected professionals  that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....

Ok, if that's what you want....

YOU'RE CRAZY

There are respected scientists that claim that global warming is not caused by humans.  Some even claim that the earth is not warming. Specific areas may be warming but the the earth as a whole is not. They don't get the press of the popular theory.

It kind of reminds me of the medical doctor that (eventually) proved, against the popular medical opinion, that stomach ulcers are caused by a bacteria (or something like that).

Here's a frightening thought for the masses, Inhofe might be correct. (Notice, I did not say "right".)

This is an argument that really doesn't have an end, at least not in our lifetime... I certainly don't find it necessary to convince the disbelievers; there is enough evidence already in play that the majority of world leaders have taken notice and will eventually work together to do something productive about it.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.  

I tend to go with the respected professionals  that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....

Ok, if that's what you want....

YOU'RE CRAZY

There are respected scientists that claim that global warming is not caused by humans.  Some even claim that the earth is not warming. Specific areas may be warming but the the earth as a whole is not. They don't get the press of the popular theory.

It kind of reminds me of the medical doctor that (eventually) proved, against the popular medical opinion, that stomach ulcers are caused by a bacteria (or something like that).

Here's a frightening thought for the masses, Inhofe might be correct. (Notice, I did not say "right".)

This is an argument that really doesn't have an end, at least not in our lifetime... I certainly don't find it necessary to convince the disbelievers; there is enough evidence already in play that the majority of world leaders have taken notice and will eventually work together to do something productive about it.

I agree, there will probably not be an end to the disagreement.  Only time will tell if there is anything humans can do to change global climate change.  I agree to change human behavior that is obviously harmful at a reasonable cost. I do not agree that we can cause or stop global climate change.  

The question is what are "you" willing to give up to "save the planet"?  Set your heating  thermostat to about 33° only to keep your pipes from freezing?  Give up air conditioning in the summer (older people die from the heat, how about your parents or grandparents?).  Give up all forms of entertainment that increase your carbon footprint?  Don't go on vacation, however you get there, it involves carbon. Forget going to the theater etc downtown. Theater involves electricity to cool/heat the place, light the stage...... The point is that living short of being cavemen, we all use energy that is not necessary to live. When people start telling me that they will give up the nice things in life to preserve the planet, I will start listening.  Algore's house uses more energy than most. He travels via private transportation instead of public airlines yet he tells me to give up my carbon footprint.  BS.

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow


Are you referring to the Sahara desert?

No, although the best available evidence indicates that the desertification of most of it was caused by overgrazing. (sort of how the dust bowl in the 1930s was exacerbated by poor farming practices)

On the bright side, it may turn out that further increased temperatures will reduce the frequency of Atlantic hurricanes due to the increase in sand blowing off the African coast.

Sauerkraut, arguing over the temperature of one particular month is arguing over the weather, not the climate. There will be abnormally cold and abnormally warm months no matter what. There are always variations in the weather. Ask anybody who lives in Oklahoma. It was 74 degrees when I went to lunch this afternoon. It's 23 and sleeting now.

And if it is in fact true that the sun is less active than usual at the moment, that in no way impugns the evidence for climate change, it only means that we're lucky at the moment. When the sun goes back to normal, it'll be hotter.

It doesn't really come down to who you believe, it comes down to ideology. There are scientists whose field has nothing to do with climatology who don't believe in global warming. Almost none who are in that field disbelieve.

If I needed a good criminal defense attorney, I wouldn't call an attorney who specializes in estate planning. If I needed a proctologist, I wouldn't call a brain surgeon. If I wanted an opinion about climate change, I would not call a person who specializes in nuclear physics or nanotechnology or a geologist (or even someone who specializes in entomology), I'd call a climatologist.

[sauerkraut]

WoW~ We have record cold in the central USA. It's -5 below zero in Omaha and it's not even winter yet. Winter starts next week. The man-made global warming thing goes against common sense. Man is like a gnat on the surface of the planet man could not change the climate if he wanted to, man is helpless against nature. The planet has been around for 4.5 billon years and no one even knows what the "normal" temp of the earth is. The earth got hit with comets, astroids, metorites and our planet has had many volcanos that sprew more junk into the air than man could do in 300 years and the planet is still around and it will be here long after man is gone. In 5 billion years the sun goes red giant and the earth will be fryed anyhow. meanwhile enjoy this record cold. Global warming is a hoax to push a political agenda and a ploy to raise more taxes.

[sauerkraut]

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.  

I tend to go with the respected professionals  that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....

All I can say is look how many times the professionals are wrong, they were saying that oil would hit $200.00 a barrel this year, and they got alot of the other economic predictions wrong about the price of oil and other things and those people were "experts" in the field of economics. As for the climate many scientists have to pull the global-warming line or they will lose funding so under pressure like that you won't get real accurate science results, also the global warming computer models that are the bible to people like Al Gore, those computer models can't get the past weather history correct when they are fed in data of recent weather history, they spit out totally different weather patterns than what really happened. Garbage in & garbage out. The hottest year of the 20th century was 1934, also if the Dust Bowl happened today instead of 1930 it would be blamed on global warming. [B)]

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.  

I tend to go with the respected professionals  that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....

All I can say is look how many times the professionals are wrong, they were saying that oil would hit $200.00 a barrel this year, and they got alot of the other economic predictions wrong about the price of oil and other things and those people were "experts" in the field of economics. As for the climate many scientists have to pull the global-warming line or they will lose funding so under pressure like that you won't get real accurate science results, also the global warming computer models that are the bible to people like Al Gore, those computer models can't get the past weather history correct when they are fed in data of recent weather history, they spit out totally different weather patterns than what really happened. Garbage in & garbage out. The hottest year of the 20th century was 1934, also if the Dust Bowl happened today instead of 1930 it would be blamed on global warming. [B)]

OK, now you're starting to sound kooky...oh, wait a minute.....

[:O]

[cannon_fodder]

"Global Climate Change" is the popular opinion.  But there are many dissenters outside of the religious right.  Actual scientist disagree about the merits of the claims and those that agree on the claims disagree with the effect.

It is, however, well worth noting that a portion of the opposition disagrees with the notion of global warming because the Bible says God will end the Earth so any notion to the contrary can not be correct.  I am only talking about logical and scientific opposition to the notion that Humans have and continue to irreparably and disastrously alter the climate.  

I am skeptical of the notion of Global Warming for several reasons (note: Global Climate change is a bs term because you can't argue with it, the climate has and always will change):

1) Long term trends indicate periodic heating and cooling cycles of the earth.  Well before the industrial revolution.  These include significant events such as ice ages, historic rises and drops in C02 levels in fossil records, and smaller events such as the "little ice age" of the Napoleonic era (potato famine anyone?) or the climate differences and crop failures noted by record keepers in ancient cultures.

2) Short term variations are not reliable indications.  As many have pointed out, the global cooling fear was paramount in the 1970's.  The global warming fear dominated in the 1970's.  Both relied on subtle variations on long term trends.  The current trend is towards cooling with glaciers and snow packs growing, ocean temperatures dropping, record cold, and fewer hurricanes.

Such variations are not indicative of long term climate change as theorized.

3) Honest supporters of Global Warming acknowledge that we do not understand the full cause of global warming.  The earths tilt, sun spots, continental drift (causes ice ages and will ultimately cause another), atmosphere, volcanic eruptions, impacts, ambient space radiation... all have a major impact on our short and long term climate.  Evidence does suggest that increased levels of C02 will create a green house effect, but we are not advanced enough to understand that effect in by itself... let alone in conjunction with the above alternative causes.

4) Furthermore, we do not understand the EFFECT Global Warming would have.  Man made or otherwise, we do not understand the effect in the slightest.  We postulated more Hurricanes, now less Hurricanes.  More energy = more evaporation = more rain.  Or severe drought.  Global warming might lead to the next ice age, or a total arid climate.

Le Nina, el nino. Record heat.  Record cold.  Better crops.  Worse crops.  We have no idea.

Ultimately a subtle variation in temperature could have a huge impact. We assume that a subtle warming is better than a cooling effect. We assume the net result of a warming is for the worse.  But we are not really aware of the greater implications of a warmer planet.

5) And finally, we don't know what to do about it.  In relation to our vast ignorance to the above, the proper response is unknown.  If we are cooling perhaps we need more C02.  If we are warming we need to figure out if it is too late to stop and if so, what will accomplish that the most effective?  Do we need to start altering crops and building barriers or are we OK if we simply lower CO2 emissions?  

Is there  a way to reabsorb the C02?  Will the environment adjust and absorb great amounts of C02 naturally?  Is it too late and we're just screwed and I can continue about my merry little life until we all die?
- - -

While I think we should take all easy measures to reduce pollution, including C02, I am leery of greater proposals because of the above uncertainty.  We SHOULD pluck the low hanging fruit, why not?  But to invest unprecedented amounts when we are so ignorant seems to be ill-advised.  

I remain open to advancements in science that will shed more light on this and readily acknowledge that I am not an expert on the matter.  Regardless, I remain unconvinced that drastic action is required.

(you can, however, sell me alternative fuels and reduced emissions on other basis - such as security, economics, and health)

[azbadpuppy]

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

Depending on which scientists you believe, global climate change caused by humans is already a scientifically proven fact. There is really nothing more to debate except except which scientists to believe.  

I tend to go with the respected professionals  that have a vastly superior knowledge on the subject, more than either you or I have, rather than the religious propagandists and conspiracy theorists. Call me crazy....

Ok, if that's what you want....

YOU'RE CRAZY

There are respected scientists that claim that global warming is not caused by humans.  Some even claim that the earth is not warming. Specific areas may be warming but the the earth as a whole is not. They don't get the press of the popular theory.

It kind of reminds me of the medical doctor that (eventually) proved, against the popular medical opinion, that stomach ulcers are caused by a bacteria (or something like that).

Here's a frightening thought for the masses, Inhofe might be correct. (Notice, I did not say "right".)

This is an argument that really doesn't have an end, at least not in our lifetime... I certainly don't find it necessary to convince the disbelievers; there is enough evidence already in play that the majority of world leaders have taken notice and will eventually work together to do something productive about it.

I agree, there will probably not be an end to the disagreement.  Only time will tell if there is anything humans can do to change global climate change.  I agree to change human behavior that is obviously harmful at a reasonable cost. I do not agree that we can cause or stop global climate change.  

The question is what are "you" willing to give up to "save the planet"?  Set your heating  thermostat to about 33° only to keep your pipes from freezing?  Give up air conditioning in the summer (older people die from the heat, how about your parents or grandparents?).  Give up all forms of entertainment that increase your carbon footprint?  Don't go on vacation, however you get there, it involves carbon. Forget going to the theater etc downtown. Theater involves electricity to cool/heat the place, light the stage...... The point is that living short of being cavemen, we all use energy that is not necessary to live. When people start telling me that they will give up the nice things in life to preserve the planet, I will start listening.  Algore's house uses more energy than most. He travels via private transportation instead of public airlines yet he tells me to give up my carbon footprint.  BS.

You are exaggerating to make your point, but in reality the actions we can do as responsible people are really quite simple. I don't think anyone is asking anyone to 'give up the nice things in life' unless you consider lightbulbs and plastic bags luxurious.

What it all boils down to is most Americans do not want to be the least bit inconvenienced and therefore get very defensive when it is 'suggested' that they make minor alterations for the good of the environment. The argument of "I'm not going to change, because my neighbor gets to drive a hummer" is a rather childish and immature argument. I really couldn't care less what Al Gore does- I only answer to myself and what I feel is the right thing to do.

Lastly, even if you don't believe in the concept of human induced climate change, why wouldn't you want to be conservative with our natural resources, when no one would argue that they are limited? Why wouldn't you be more aware and consume less harmful products since everyone knows they are bad for people, animals and the land that we all have to live on?

It's still the responsible and right thing to do, regardless if anyone else is doing it or not.

[azbadpuppy]

BTW, is it snowing today in Tulsa? Sometimes I miss the snow...but then I quickly get over it when I go home to visit!

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

You are exaggerating to make your point, but in reality the actions we can do as responsible people are really quite simple. I don't think anyone is asking anyone to 'give up the nice things in life' unless you consider lightbulbs and plastic bags luxurious.

What it all boils down to is most Americans do not want to be the least bit inconvenienced and therefore get very defensive when it is 'suggested' that they make minor alterations for the good of the environment. The argument of "I'm not going to change, because my neighbor gets to drive a hummer" is a rather childish and immature argument. I really couldn't care less what Al Gore does- I only answer to myself and what I feel is the right thing to do.

Lastly, even if you don't believe in the concept of human induced climate change, why wouldn't you want to be conservative with our natural resources, when no one would argue that they are limited? Why wouldn't you be more aware and consume less harmful products since everyone knows they are bad for people, animals and the land that we all have to live on?

It's still the responsible and right thing to do, regardless if anyone else is doing it or not.

It is a lot easier to insist that others make sacrifices than to make them yourself.  That is one of my gripes about Algore. His stature in the Global Warming/Climate Change community should require him to be an example of what he wants others to do. There are plenty of examples of his energy use beyond the average citizen.  

Everything has a cost. I get tired of hearing people say to "do whatever it takes" when they really only mean "do whatever it takes, as long as it isn't too expensive" or as you noted, "as long as it doesn't affect me".  I have found this to be true outside of the environmental movement too.  One person's minor inconvenience is another person's major problem.  

Knee jerk reactions to one problem often create others. I believe that ethanol production from corn falls in this category.  Ethanol as a fuel may be OK.  I think it was mandated before its time.  Maybe something else would be better.  Am I for alternate fuel/energy research? YES! Am I for knee jerk political solutions to technical problems? NO!

[azbadpuppy]

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by azbadpuppy

You are exaggerating to make your point, but in reality the actions we can do as responsible people are really quite simple. I don't think anyone is asking anyone to 'give up the nice things in life' unless you consider lightbulbs and plastic bags luxurious.

What it all boils down to is most Americans do not want to be the least bit inconvenienced and therefore get very defensive when it is 'suggested' that they make minor alterations for the good of the environment. The argument of "I'm not going to change, because my neighbor gets to drive a hummer" is a rather childish and immature argument. I really couldn't care less what Al Gore does- I only answer to myself and what I feel is the right thing to do.

Lastly, even if you don't believe in the concept of human induced climate change, why wouldn't you want to be conservative with our natural resources, when no one would argue that they are limited? Why wouldn't you be more aware and consume less harmful products since everyone knows they are bad for people, animals and the land that we all have to live on?

It's still the responsible and right thing to do, regardless if anyone else is doing it or not.

It is a lot easier to insist that others make sacrifices than to make them yourself.  That is one of my gripes about Algore. His stature in the Global Warming/Climate Change community should require him to be an example of what he wants others to do. There are plenty of examples of his energy use beyond the average citizen.  

Everything has a cost. I get tired of hearing people say to "do whatever it takes" when they really only mean "do whatever it takes, as long as it isn't too expensive" or as you noted, "as long as it doesn't affect me".  I have found this to be true outside of the environmental movement too.  One person's minor inconvenience is another person's major problem.  

Knee jerk reactions to one problem often create others. I believe that ethanol production from corn falls in this category.  Ethanol as a fuel may be OK.  I think it was mandated before its time.  Maybe something else would be better.  Am I for alternate fuel/energy research? YES! Am I for knee jerk political solutions to technical problems? NO!

I completely agree with you on this- I am not a fan of 'knee-jerk' solutions either, but again, we are talking about very simple modifications that everyone could do very easily that cumulatively could make a big difference.

I just don't understand the logic of pointing fingers at others, and saying "well if they don't have to do anything, then neither do I". How is that productive? And yes, it is easier to 'insist' that others change, but again I think you (as are many people) are looking at it as a punitive action. Everyone should be thankful they can do something to make a contribution, be it large or small.  

Edited to say that I am stepping off my soap box now! []

[sauerkraut]

"Knee-Jerk" is common in the global warming fan's world. They don't want to study it they don't want to debate it, all they keep saying is "We must act now before it's too late" & "act now, think latter".. Al Gore refuses to debate this subject with anyone, not even with reporters and he flys around in his private Gulf Stream Jet that burns 450 gallons of fuel a hour, then he wants everyone else to take a bus, walk, ride a bike or drive a tiny car to work. IMO I believe the globe is cooling, we have not had any real "hot" summers in Ohio for about 20 years, we use to get a few 100 degree days each summer lately we rarely get any 90 degree summer days and they have been closing the city public swimming pools more early than before, it gets too cold for swimming and no one uses the pools. The winters seem to be getting longer and colder.[xx(]

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

"Knee-Jerk" is common in the global warming fan's world. They don't want to study it they don't want to debate it, all they keep saying is "We must act now before it's too late" & "act now, think latter".. Al Gore refuses to debate this subject with anyone, not even with reporters and he flys around in his private Gulf Stream Jet that burns 450 gallons of fuel a hour, then he wants everyone else to take a bus, walk, ride a bike or drive a tiny car to work. IMO I believe the globe is cooling, we have not had any real "hot" summers in Ohio for about 20 years, we use to get a few 100 degree days each summer lately we rarely get any 90 degree summer days and they have been closing the city public swimming pools more early than before, it gets too cold for swimming and no one uses the pools. The winters seem to be getting longer and colder.[xx(]

Funny, in Northwest Arkansas the summers seemed hotter and longer to me. Again, you confuse weather with climate.

If you want to talk about the weather, how about at the ends of the earth where the temperatures are most extreme?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/256/story/54229.html

Or maybe that it was 16 degrees above normal yesterday in Columbus?

Oh, and you're full of **** when you say you used to get a few 100 degree days each summer, unless you're specifically talking about the summer of 1936, when there were 8 days with record high temperatures that were over 100 degrees. (which also, incidentally, had several of the coldest days on record)

Sometimes columbus gets one or two. There was one in July '99..that's one in the last twelve years (I looked back as far as 1996). Yet you claim that you used to 'usually' get 'a few each summer'.

Not that any of that has any bearing whatsoever on the global climate.

[sauerkraut]

quote:Originally posted by nathanm

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

"Knee-Jerk" is common in the global warming fan's world. They don't want to study it they don't want to debate it, all they keep saying is "We must act now before it's too late" & "act now, think latter".. Al Gore refuses to debate this subject with anyone, not even with reporters and he flys around in his private Gulf Stream Jet that burns 450 gallons of fuel a hour, then he wants everyone else to take a bus, walk, ride a bike or drive a tiny car to work. IMO I believe the globe is cooling, we have not had any real "hot" summers in Ohio for about 20 years, we use to get a few 100 degree days each summer lately we rarely get any 90 degree summer days and they have been closing the city public swimming pools more early than before, it gets too cold for swimming and no one uses the pools. The winters seem to be getting longer and colder.[xx(]

Funny, in Northwest Arkansas the summers seemed hotter and longer to me. Again, you confuse weather with climate.

If you want to talk about the weather, how about at the ends of the earth where the temperatures are most extreme?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/256/story/54229.html

Or maybe that it was 16 degrees above normal yesterday in Columbus?

Oh, and you're full of **** when you say you used to get a few 100 degree days each summer, unless you're specifically talking about the summer of 1936, when there were 8 days with record high temperatures that were over 100 degrees. (which also, incidentally, had several of the coldest days on record)

Sometimes columbus gets one or two. There was one in July '99..that's one in the last twelve years (I looked back as far as 1996). Yet you claim that you used to 'usually' get 'a few each summer'.

Not that any of that has any bearing whatsoever on the global climate.

Climate is weather over a long peroid of time, and we had cool summers and bitter long cold winters in the midwest. I lived in Texas (Dallas Fort Worth) during the 1980's and I loved the weather. My first year in Texas 1980 we had a big heatwave that summer (it's listed in google), that was before the global warming craz so the heat wave was not blamed on anything. We had something like 45 days of above 100 degree temps and the low never diped below 90 degrees at night. I loved it, I also vacationed alot in Las Vegas when it was 115 degrees. When I transfered to Ohio in 1989 I missed the warm mild weather of Texas, it's hard to get use-to colder climates once you live in a mild climate. As for Ohio all I said is we don't get the warm weather like we use to in Ohio. Summers are cooler and winters colder and longer. I would favor a debate between the global warming people and people who don't buy into that hoax. That is what we need, but the global warming side does not want to debate the issue, they refuse to look at real data that shows there is no global warming. Like I said before if we had the 1930's dust bowl in 2008 it would be blamed on global warming today no question about that.[xx(]