Outdoor Wood Furnace Info

All-Purpose OWF Discussions => General Outdoor Furnace Discussion => Topic started by: Scott7m on March 19, 2014, 10:50:59 AM

Title: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Scott7m on March 19, 2014, 10:50:59 AM
I find this article directly related to the crap we are dealing with now from the epa and ultimately it's directly related to our outdoor wood furnaces.

The end of the article sums it up nicely

http://www.cfact.org/2014/03/18/top-scientists-debunk-climate-change-myths/ (http://www.cfact.org/2014/03/18/top-scientists-debunk-climate-change-myths/)
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Crow on March 19, 2014, 11:42:50 AM
  When previously asked on Fox Business News who is responsible for promoting unwarranted fear and what their motives are, Moore said: “A powerful convergence of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue.” - See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2014/03/18/top-scientists-debunk-climate-change-myths/#sthash.hfYU9bSN.dpuf (http://www.cfact.org/2014/03/18/top-scientists-debunk-climate-change-myths/#sthash.hfYU9bSN.dpuf)


  Great post Scott. I am not a believer in "Climate Change" or "Global Warming" and as this article reads it has happened before and it will again. It is a normal cycle.
  I am sure many got very wealthy of the idea of it though. Sad.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Roger2561 on March 19, 2014, 11:50:53 AM
Scott - Thanks for the article.   :post: :thumbup:

I work at an Ivy League institution where the prevailing thought among some (not all) of the faculty is we're going to burn to death in the not too distant future if we don't do something about global warming.  Now, try having an opposing point of view with facts and they shout you down.  I see first hand how our tax dollars are being wastefully spent by people whose sole purpose is to get rich by scaring people into thinking we are all doomed.  Roger
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Sloppy_Snood on March 19, 2014, 11:52:20 AM
....like all of these initiatives and concerns, they are "invented" in order to interest in a created topic and "investigate"  root cause.... but with someone else's money (a lot of wasted U.S. taxpayer dollars).  :-\

How do I know?  I wrote three National Institutes of Health grant (NIH) applications for obtaining >3 million grant dollars for graduate chemistry research!  :o  Don't thow rotten produce at me please.  :P
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 19, 2014, 12:21:51 PM
Scott - Thanks for the article.   :post: :thumbup:

I work at an Ivy League institution where the prevailing thought among some (not all) of the faculty is we're going to burn to death in the not too distant future if we don't do something about global warming.  Now, try having an opposing point of view with facts and they shout you down.  I see first hand how our tax dollars are being wastefully spent by people whose sole purpose is to get rich by scaring people into thinking we are all doomed.  Roger

My blacksheep liberal engineer uncle is a firm believer in global warming. Especially when it causes his stock portfolio to increase.  He cried like a baby when when the poop hit the fan over Solyndra. Hypocrite.

If the global warming folks were right, Florida would already be under water, the polar ice would be gone and polar bears would be extinct.

Global warming is nothing more than yet another scheme to give governments of the world even more control over their people under the guise of being in the best interest of the people. Think Obamacare on steroids.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: oldchenowth on March 19, 2014, 02:23:24 PM
I bet this winter set a few of those !@#$%^&* back in their claims.  Next week is supposed to be cold too.  It is funny how the "free thinking" can be lured into this closed minded cult by scare tactics.  The uber educated are the biggest extremists when it comes to warming, guns, execution, foreign policies, etc.  And I am the crazy one????
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on March 19, 2014, 02:53:43 PM
  AAAARK ME SCURRRVY MATES AS ANYONE SEEN ME MIND? seems I lost it!
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 19, 2014, 03:22:43 PM
I bet this winter set a few of those !@#$%^&* back in their claims.  Next week is supposed to be cold too.  It is funny how the "free thinking" can be lured into this closed minded cult by scare tactics.  The uber educated are the biggest extremists when it comes to warming, guns, execution, foreign policies, etc.  And I am the crazy one????

Most likely not. Just heard something on the news, when figuring the average temps this winter it's only the tenth coldest on record for the states.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Dragfluid on March 22, 2014, 08:40:46 PM
Please give Al another Nobel.  ::)  :bash: :bash:
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: menchhofer on March 22, 2014, 09:18:13 PM
Did not read the article but global warming is real. We cannot continue to burn fossil fuels, driving gasoline powered vehicles and add millions of tons of carbon into the air year after year without consequences. North pole melting more every year. Permafrost thawing  rapidly. Ice cover decrease. Only portion of glaciers left. Extreme heat in most of the US.  Do not have to be smart to realize what is happening. A natural cycle? Think again.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: MattyNH on March 22, 2014, 11:09:45 PM
Did not read the article but global warming is real. We cannot continue to burn fossil fuels, driving gasoline powered vehicles and add millions of tons of carbon into the air year after year without consequences. North pole melting more every year. Permafrost thawing  rapidly. Ice cover decrease. Only portion of glaciers left. Extreme heat in most of the US.  Do not have to be smart to realize what is happening. A natural cycle? Think again.
So what melted the glaciers during the "ice age", Global Warming??…How about its a cycle on how the Earth works?..Maybe you need to think again..
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 05:12:18 AM
There is no question that the planet has warmed over the past 200 or so years at a significant rate.  There is also no question that man influences the climate.  The only real unknowns are the degree to which the changing climate man is responsible for, and the processes that Earth may go though to correct that influence. 

Personally I am for responsible stewardship of our planet and climate.  I don't believe that doing so requires a zero carbon footprint, however neither should we be irresponsible with our activities.  We should not run around like a chicken with it's head cut off screaming about the end of days due to warming, yet neither should we have our heads buried in the sand about what is going on.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 05:14:15 AM
Did not read the article but global warming is real. We cannot continue to burn fossil fuels, driving gasoline powered vehicles and add millions of tons of carbon into the air year after year without consequences. North pole melting more every year. Permafrost thawing  rapidly. Ice cover decrease. Only portion of glaciers left. Extreme heat in most of the US.  Do not have to be smart to realize what is happening. A natural cycle? Think again.
So what melted the glaciers during the "ice age", Global Warming??…How about its a cycle on how the Earth works?..Maybe you need to think again..
Previous warming and cooling periods of our planet does not mean that it is not happening now, nor that man does  not play a part in that process.  That argument is one of flawed logic.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 05:15:34 AM
  When previously asked on Fox Business News who is responsible for promoting unwarranted fear and what their motives are, Moore said: “A powerful convergence of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue.” - See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2014/03/18/top-scientists-debunk-climate-change-myths/#sthash.hfYU9bSN.dpuf (http://www.cfact.org/2014/03/18/top-scientists-debunk-climate-change-myths/#sthash.hfYU9bSN.dpuf)


  Great post Scott. I am not a believer in "Climate Change" or "Global Warming" and as this article reads it has happened before and it will again. It is a normal cycle.
  I am sure many got very wealthy of the idea of it though. Sad.
There is far more money to be made by denying warming than there is money being given to study the idea.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 05:18:23 AM
....like all of these initiatives and concerns, they are "invented" in order to interest in a created topic and "investigate"  root cause.... but with someone else's money (a lot of wasted U.S. taxpayer dollars).  :-\

How do I know?  I wrote three National Institutes of Health grant (NIH) applications for obtaining >3 million grant dollars for graduate chemistry research!  :o  Don't thow rotten produce at me please.  :P
Saying that "all of these initiatives" are invented in order to waste taxpayer dollars is simply idiotic and not understanding the problems. 

Educating ourselves about the world around us, and our impact on it is about the farthest thing from a waste that is possible.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: ijon on March 23, 2014, 06:41:09 AM
This is what we really need our government tampering with the weather. They done so well with other projects.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on March 23, 2014, 06:58:54 AM
  Neal I think you are missing a very important point, WE ARE 17 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT, the EPA and the Green movement along with greed and government regulations have driven our jobs to China where there is very little effort to protect our environment worldwide, Why does our government expect me to sit back without an argument and allow them to steal more of my money to fund studies that nobody else in the world pays attention to anyway. We are not just broke but also piling up debt on our next generation as well, it is time to STOP the waste in government givaways, If you as an individual wish to give your money to that sort of research then by all means go ahead, don't mandate to me that I must do the same!
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 23, 2014, 07:07:28 AM
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/03/20/American-Physical-Society-Sees-The-Light-Will-It-Be-The-First-Major-Scientific-Institution-To-Reject-The-Global-Warming-Consensus?utm_source=e_breitbart_com&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+March+21%2C+2014&utm_campaign=20140321_m119659646_Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+March+21%2C+2014&utm_term=More (http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/03/20/American-Physical-Society-Sees-The-Light-Will-It-Be-The-First-Major-Scientific-Institution-To-Reject-The-Global-Warming-Consensus?utm_source=e_breitbart_com&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+March+21%2C+2014&utm_campaign=20140321_m119659646_Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+March+21%2C+2014&utm_term=More)

Climate change most certainly does exist, but you won't get me to call it global warming. I'm a farmer by trade and spent most waking hours outside, I've seen a lot of extreme weather, this winter we just went thru was a normal one, nothing more, and the polar vortex is nothing new either. Talk to the older generations and they've seen both hotter summers and colder winters in the past.

The climate has continued to change for a billions of years and still is, just what part of that does man play is yet to be proven.

Yet to go to the extreme trying to stop it seems just as wrong as going to the extreme to promote it. I have family in England, if some of these initiatives to curb carbon emissions are fully implemented we'd be paying even more then they do in the UK for energy. How long do you think it would take for our economy to crash with $8 a gallon gas/diesel? How about electricity that costs 3-4 times as much?

I know for a fact the farm would be done if my energy costs tripled or quadrupled. How many jobs will be lost if coal continues to stay under attack? How many coal related jobs will be lost? Not only will the miners be out of jobs, but don't forget the truck drivers, the truck mechanics, the heavy equipment mechanics that fix the mining equipment, the places that manufacture wear items or replacement parts for mining equipment.

We might want to be looking at China and India and try harder to get them to curb some of their emissions instead of cutting just our own throats. Tariffs for excessive emissions?

I have no problem with green energy, but it shouldn't be subsidized to the point where it's actually more expensive to the taxpayer than what we have now.

If the government is going to take money out of my wallet to subsidize green energy then lets actually make sure that green energy products are actually designed and built right here in the states instead of china.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: browncty on March 23, 2014, 07:22:39 AM
Global warming, hard to believe that this year, I would say a mini-ice-age this winter. Glad I burned wood this year, I guess I was a contributor to Global Warming.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mikect05 on March 23, 2014, 09:16:37 AM
Global warming, hard to believe that this year, I would say a mini-ice-age this winter. Glad I burned wood this year, I guess I was a contributor to Global Warming.

Although it was warmer locally, globally it was one of the warmest on record.  The polar caps are melting very fast and cooling the worlds oceans which is causing extreme weather conditions from the differences of temperature.  I wonder what will happen when the polar caps are gone...
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mikect05 on March 23, 2014, 09:25:19 AM
Did not read the article but global warming is real. We cannot continue to burn fossil fuels, driving gasoline powered vehicles and add millions of tons of carbon into the air year after year without consequences. North pole melting more every year. Permafrost thawing  rapidly. Ice cover decrease. Only portion of glaciers left. Extreme heat in most of the US.  Do not have to be smart to realize what is happening. A natural cycle? Think again.
So what melted the glaciers during the "ice age", Global Warming??…How about its a cycle on how the Earth works?..Maybe you need to think again..
Previous warming and cooling periods of our planet does not mean that it is not happening now, nor that man does  not play a part in that process.  That argument is one of flawed logic.

Neal

 :thumbup:
Some of these arguments just make me shake my head.  Don't you know it's not your wood burner that heats your house in the winter, it's the sun, it warms up the earth everyday and has long before you had a OWB.
 
I really like this site and shouldn't even speak to this topic because I think everyone already has their own mind made up, however I have to say that I think it is absurd to think "global warming" is a plot to make money...The Iraq war was a plot, global warming is really happening and we as humans are having a very big part in it.

 
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 10:00:32 AM
  Neal I think you are missing a very important point, WE ARE 17 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT, the EPA and the Green movement along with greed and government regulations have driven our jobs to China where there is very little effort to protect our environment worldwide, Why does our government expect me to sit back without an argument and allow them to steal more of my money to fund studies that nobody else in the world pays attention to anyway. We are not just broke but also piling up debt on our next generation as well, it is time to STOP the waste in government givaways, If you as an individual wish to give your money to that sort of research then by all means go ahead, don't mandate to me that I must do the same!
If you want to talk about debt and silly government spending, science and research are hardly the points to bring up.  There is much more waste going on with respect to our military and social programs.  Frankly that crap is what our government should be vastly reducing, while spending more on science and technology.  Studying our climate certainly falls under science that we do not fully understand, and that deserves more of our attention, not less.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 10:05:18 AM
Global warming, hard to believe that this year, I would say a mini-ice-age this winter. Glad I burned wood this year, I guess I was a contributor to Global Warming.
It was significantly warmer than the past two winters globally, and also warmer than the mean used for recent satellite data measurement.

You were indeed, as were we all.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 23, 2014, 10:20:58 AM
  Neal I think you are missing a very important point, WE ARE 17 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT, the EPA and the Green movement along with greed and government regulations have driven our jobs to China where there is very little effort to protect our environment worldwide, Why does our government expect me to sit back without an argument and allow them to steal more of my money to fund studies that nobody else in the world pays attention to anyway. We are not just broke but also piling up debt on our next generation as well, it is time to STOP the waste in government givaways, If you as an individual wish to give your money to that sort of research then by all means go ahead, don't mandate to me that I must do the same!
If you want to talk about debt and silly government spending, science and research are hardly the points to bring up.  There is much more waste going on with respect to our military and social programs.  Frankly that crap is what our government should be vastly reducing, while spending more on science and technology.  Studying our climate certainly falls under science that we do not fully understand, and that deserves more of our attention, not less.

Neal

Just a fluke then that some are making millions if not billions off "global warming"?
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: martyinmi on March 23, 2014, 11:08:25 AM
If we are expected to believe the alleged science pertaining to global warming, than we must disregard the scientific laws we've came to know as thermodynamics.
This system we exist in is constantly trying to achieve equilibrium(our universe is is trying to extinguish the sun, while the sun is attempting to heat up the universe).
The sun is on it's way out, it is getting smaller, and it is "dying"; therefore is is cooling.
There will be a time in the VERY, VERY distant future (ie billions and billions of years) that the earth and the sun will be the same temperature.
As our universe cools it's star (the sun), that temperature most certainly will NOT be warmer.

Folks need to do some "blinders off" climatic research to understand the how's and why's when the subject of this planet's current temperature trends comes up. Look into who funds the quoted research to establish it's validity.

We learned back in the '70s (when I was in high school) that there were periods in recent human history (less than 2000 years ago) where many decades passed where the temperatures globally were higher than what we've witnessed in the last 20 years, as well as consecutive decades where there were global temperatures that were so low that they were referred to as "mini ice ages". I don't remember the means by which the scientific communities employed to determine these changes in climate that occurred hundreds and hundreds of years ago, nor do I really care.

What I do care about, and what really concerns me, is when folks buy in to the propaganda that scum like Al Gore try to pass off as undisputed, undeniable, scientific fact, without first researching it's validity by means of who funded it's authors.  :-\   
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 23, 2014, 11:10:50 AM
 
If we are expected to believe the alleged science pertaining to global warming, than we must disregard the scientific laws we've came to know as thermodynamics.
This system we exist in is constantly trying to achieve equilibrium(our universe is is trying to extinguish the sun, while the sun is attempting to heat up the universe).
The sun is on it's way out, it is getting smaller, and it is "dying"; therefore is is cooling.
There will be a time in the VERY, VERY distant future (ie billions and billions of years) that the earth and the sun will be the same temperature.
As our universe cools it's star (the sun), that temperature most certainly will NOT be warmer.

Folks need to do some "blinders off" climatic research to understand the how's and why's when the subject of this planet's current temperature trends comes up. Look into who funds the quoted research to establish it's validity.

We learned back in the '70s (when I was in high school) that there were periods in recent human history (less than 2000 years ago) where many decades passed where the temperatures globally were higher than what we've witnessed in the last 20 years, as well as consecutive decades where there were global temperatures were so low that they were referred to as mini ice ages. I don't remember the means by which the scientific communities employed to determine these changes in climate that occurred hundreds and hundreds of years ago, nor do I really care.

What I do care about, and what really concerns me, is when folks buy in to the propaganda that scum like Al Gore try to pass off as undisputed, undeniable, scientific fact, without first researching it's validity by means of who funded it's authors.  :-\   

 :post:

Anybody remember back in the mid 70's when a major news publication declared that the next ice age was on its way?

Newsweek if I remember right.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 23, 2014, 11:11:50 AM
Yup, Newsweek:

http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm (http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm)
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 11:43:02 AM
Just a fluke then that some are making millions if not billions off "global warming"?
And who are those people exactly?

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 23, 2014, 11:47:13 AM
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-01-27/global-warming-battle-is-over-market-share-not-science (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-01-27/global-warming-battle-is-over-market-share-not-science)


http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748703939404574566124250205490 (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748703939404574566124250205490)
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 12:23:34 PM
If we are expected to believe the alleged science pertaining to global warming, than we must disregard the scientific laws we've came to know as thermodynamics.
This system we exist in is constantly trying to achieve equilibrium(our universe is is trying to extinguish the sun, while the sun is attempting to heat up the universe).
The sun is on it's way out, it is getting smaller, and it is "dying"; therefore is is cooling.
There will be a time in the VERY, VERY distant future (ie billions and billions of years) that the earth and the sun will be the same temperature.
As our universe cools it's star (the sun), that temperature most certainly will NOT be warmer.

Folks need to do some "blinders off" climatic research to understand the how's and why's when the subject of this planet's current temperature trends comes up. Look into who funds the quoted research to establish it's validity.

We learned back in the '70s (when I was in high school) that there were periods in recent human history (less than 2000 years ago) where many decades passed where the temperatures globally were higher than what we've witnessed in the last 20 years, as well as consecutive decades where there were global temperatures that were so low that they were referred to as "mini ice ages". I don't remember the means by which the scientific communities employed to determine these changes in climate that occurred hundreds and hundreds of years ago, nor do I really care.

What I do care about, and what really concerns me, is when folks buy in to the propaganda that scum like Al Gore try to pass off as undisputed, undeniable, scientific fact, without first researching it's validity by means of who funded it's authors.  :-\   
There is quite a bit of misinformation and inaccuracy in your post.

First, global warming happens, the theory is sound and holds water and has been proven many times.  There are many variables in the equations, some of which are not fully understood, however when broken down and tested we can see the results, as well as observe the process happening to our planet presently.  There is nothing that comes up against any laws of thermodynamics at all.  I'm not sure how you have come to that conclusion.

Secondly, the sun is not on it's way out, it is actually on it's way to increasing size and output as the main sequence of hydrogen burning ends.  After the helium synthesis completes carbon and oxygen synthesis begins, however at this time the sun is gigantic, and has completely roasted the planet Earth (all this happens well within the laws of thermodynamics).  After the helium has all been synthesised out, the sun will go planetary nebula, and then enter the dwarf stage.  From then out out entropy will become prevalent as the star cools out.

As for the earth and the sun being the same temperature, that is most likely not going to be so, as the earth will most likely be consumed and destroyed during the ending helium synthesis. 

You do bring up a good point, although I think your means are severely misguided.  We need to do more research about our planet and climate to get a better understanding of what is going on as far as anthropic means are concerned.  Simply saying that people are blinded or that the only reason for research is to consume dollars is silly and frankly showing signs of being blinded.

Actually almost every reconstruction done by pro and anti global warming scientists shows that we are now hotter than any time in the past several thousand years, specifically during the medieval warm period. 

Finally you seem to be a bit overly critical of other's work (scum like Al Gore), while not fully understanding the information you yourself present (and apparently "nor do you really care").   

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 12:36:48 PM
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-01-27/global-warming-battle-is-over-market-share-not-science (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-01-27/global-warming-battle-is-over-market-share-not-science)


http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748703939404574566124250205490 (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748703939404574566124250205490)
So far not much proof of scientists skinning the taxpayer to research climate change....

Hell the authors of the articles can't even agree on what is going on:

Quote
This debate is no longer about whether global warming is real (it is) or whether humans are the most likely cause (you are)

Quote
This is not the sound of settled science, but of a cracking empirical foundation.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 23, 2014, 12:43:49 PM



Secondly, the sun is not on it's way out, it is actually on it's way to increasing size and output as the main sequence of hydrogen burning ends.  After the helium synthesis completes carbon and oxygen synthesis begins, however at this time the sun is gigantic, and has completely roasted the planet Earth (all this happens well within the laws of thermodynamics).  After the helium has all been synthesised out, the sun will go planetary nebula, and then enter the dwarf stage.  From then out out entropy will become prevalent as the star cools out.

As for the earth and the sun being the same temperature, that is most likely not going to be so, as the earth will most likely be consumed and destroyed during the ending helium synthesis. 

Neal

Yup, as proved by Dr. Who, Series 1, story 158. The end of the World.


doctor who season 1 2005 The End of the world (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x18urf7)
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Homerglide on March 23, 2014, 01:04:58 PM
  WE ARE 17 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT, the EPA and the Green movement along with greed and government regulations have driven our jobs to China where there is very little effort to protect our environment worldwide
Are there any patriotic American citizens within this forum?

Is it solely the Green movement and "Governments" fault that manufacturing jobs have gone overseas? No.

Are American corporations exempt from country loyalty and patriotism? Evidently... Imagine the income tax revenues if all corporations brought manufacturing back to our shores. Our economy would be thriving. With the jobs brought back we could pay down the debt and reduce the handout programs due to job availability. It would be a win all around.

So how bout ya start bashing those who help the citizens of other countries by giving them jobs while firing American citizens.




Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: martyinmi on March 23, 2014, 01:41:49 PM
Neal, I wish that I had both the time and the inclination to debate this with you, but I do not.

Your "theories that are sound and hold water" are pure speculation and vivid ideas at best.

Once again, and for the last time coming from me, try to perceive things with a blinders off attitude.  ;)
In other words, look at this subject from ALL angles. Only then will you be able to understand.

Al Gore is scum. He is an inherently evil human whose focus in life is making millions off from the ill-informed, all the while hiding behind his alleged belief in our creator.

 

Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 23, 2014, 03:15:21 PM


Al Gore is scum. He is an inherently evil human whose focus in life is making millions off from the ill-informed, all the while hiding behind his alleged belief in our creator.

No "Like" button so this will do:  :post:
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 03:19:47 PM
Your "theories that are sound and hold water" are pure speculation and vivid ideas at best.
Believe what you will but science says otherwise. 

You saying something differs quit a bit from the scientific community, who provide theories and data to back them up.

Once again, and for the last time coming from me, try to perceive things with a blinders off attitude.  ;)
In other words, look at this subject from ALL angles. Only then will you be able to understand.

Al Gore is scum. He is an inherently evil human whose focus in life is making millions off from the ill-informed, all the while hiding behind his alleged belief in our creator.
If you have any evidence at all to back your position I am all ears, and eyes as it were.  The scientific community seems to say the exact opposite of what you propose, as well as offer tested theories and data.  I'm not trying to be rude, but all you are offering is cynical words with no evidence.  You ask us/me to have a blinders off attitude, yet offer nothing of substinance to look at. 

Al Gore is scum. He is an inherently evil human whose focus in life is making millions off from the ill-informed, all the while hiding behind his alleged belief in our creator.
Seems like a very blinders on position you have about Al Gore.

Personally he is mostly irrelevant to any views I have on the topic.  He is often used as a strawman argument point that bogs down meaningful discussion, IMO.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: martyinmi on March 23, 2014, 04:01:44 PM
Believe what you will but science says otherwise. 
The scientific community seems to say the exact opposite of what you propose, as well as offer tested theories and data. 
[/quote]
To grasp where I'm trying to lead you here, you must first come to grips with what your word choices actually mean when used in the context(s) you've chosen.
First, look up Webster's definition of "theory".
Second, learn and understand what a "false dichotomy" is.

In the scientific community, the only thing that ever remains constant is the fact that their facts (data supported by theories) are perpetually changing. ;)

I am not trying to be cynical. I humbly apologize if that is the perception that you have. You are not being rude, so that should not concern you.

I stand by my opinion on Al Gore. Do some research on him and you'll eventually come to the conclusion that most have. Do yourself a favor and do not employ tunnel vision. You'll see many, many things we've all seen for many, many years.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Scott7m on March 23, 2014, 05:19:15 PM
Humans haven't existed on this planet long enough to even know what normal is

Anyone who believes this global warming stuff really needs to step outside the box and think for themselves

The planet warmed the same teeny tiny amount t from 1910 til 1940 as it did from like 1970 to 2000, I guess it was all the electricity being produced that caused that raise back in 1910 too lol
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 23, 2014, 06:48:56 PM
Humans haven't existed on this planet long enough to even know what normal is

Anyone who believes this global warming stuff really needs to step outside the box and think for themselves

The planet warmed the same teeny tiny amount t from 1910 til 1940 as it did from like 1970 to 2000, I guess it was all the electricity being produced that caused that raise back in 1910 too lol

Don't forget about all the off road vehicles and SUV's in 1910 as well.

Peoples perception of normal changes yearly.

Data can be changed, skewed or just ignored to reflect a new "normal".
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 08:22:40 PM
Believe what you will but science says otherwise. 
The scientific community seems to say the exact opposite of what you propose, as well as offer tested theories and data. 
To grasp where I'm trying to lead you here, you must first come to grips with what your word choices actually mean when used in the context(s) you've chosen.
First, look up Webster's definition of "theory".
Second, learn and understand what a "false dichotomy" is.

In the scientific community, the only thing that ever remains constant is the fact that their facts (data supported by theories) are perpetually changing. ;)

I am not trying to be cynical. I humbly apologize if that is the perception that you have. You are not being rude, so that should not concern you.

I stand by my opinion on Al Gore. Do some research on him and you'll eventually come to the conclusion that most have. Do yourself a favor and do not employ tunnel vision. You'll see many, many things we've all seen for many, many years.

I quite well understand what a theory is, and how the scientific method works.  So far you have offered only bluster to any aspect of any thoery.

Science is all about change, how ever you are making a serious logical mistake by saying that the facts change.   New facts and data are constantly being added, science is not willy nilly changing previously know facts however.  That's just silly.

Again I concern myself very little with Al Gore.   He has no bearing on my opinions or positions on this issue, and you seem to be fulfilling my contention that he is used as a strawman on this topic.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 23, 2014, 08:26:03 PM
Humans haven't existed on this planet long enough to even know what normal is

Anyone who believes this global warming stuff really needs to step outside the box and think for themselves

The planet warmed the same teeny tiny amount t from 1910 til 1940 as it did from like 1970 to 2000, I guess it was all the electricity being produced that caused that raise back in 1910 too lol
I don't know of anyone that has made any claim or inferred what normal is supposed to be.  Do you have any quotes form the scientific community on what they consider normal?

Over the past 200 or so years the planet has gone through a very significant warming actually. 

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Scott7m on March 23, 2014, 09:18:17 PM
Where is your proof? 

So 200 years ago it was what?? 

Normal, my point exactly, who can say what's normal

Co2 at times was 10x higher than it is now and some of those times where during ice ages.  The fact is the climate has been far warmer than it is now, and also colder

Anyone who believes this global warming stuff for more than political fluff and can't say, we really have no way of knowing if it's natural or not, is drinking some major Kool aid.. 

But this is pointless,  no human will ever convince me it's anything other than political bull and scientist thinking they know things that turn out not to be so.....   

Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 23, 2014, 09:32:32 PM
I certainly hope it has warmed in the last 200 years considering right before that was the little ice age which lasted roughly 500 years.

http://www.eh-resources.org/timeline/timeline_lia.html (http://www.eh-resources.org/timeline/timeline_lia.html)

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/344106/Little-Ice-Age-LIA (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/344106/Little-Ice-Age-LIA)


The world would be a much hungrier place now if we were still dealing with the weather they had from roughly the 1300's to the 1800's. I can't find the article now, but a historian even contributes the high fatality of the Black Death as being brought on by failing crops at the start of the little ice age. People that are malnourished are far more susceptible to infections that those that are well fed.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Scott7m on March 23, 2014, 10:10:56 PM
I certainly hope it has warmed in the last 200 years considering right before that was the little ice age which lasted roughly 500 years.

http://www.eh-resources.org/timeline/timeline_lia.html (http://www.eh-resources.org/timeline/timeline_lia.html)

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/344106/Little-Ice-Age-LIA (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/344106/Little-Ice-Age-LIA)


The world would be a much hungrier place now if we were still dealing with the weather they had from roughly the 1300's to the 1800's. I can't find the article now, but a historian even contributes the high fatality of the Black Death as being brought on by failing crops at the start of the little ice age. People that are malnourished are far more susceptible to infections that those that are well fed.

Must have been those coal power plants back in 1820 that started the global warming haha

A warm planet would be even better for humanity,  warmer equals more food
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: ijon on March 24, 2014, 04:01:30 AM
Neal, I wish that I had both the time and the inclination to debate this with you, but I do not.

Your "theories that are sound and hold water" are pure speculation and vivid ideas at best.

Once again, and for the last time coming from me, try to perceive things with a blinders off attitude.  ;)
In other words, look at this subject from ALL angles. Only then will you be able to understand.

Al Gore is scum. He is an inherently evil human whose focus in life is making millions off from the ill-informed, all the while hiding behind his alleged belief in our creator.  Amen.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on March 24, 2014, 04:28:02 AM
  WE ARE 17 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT, the EPA and the Green movement along with greed and government regulations have driven our jobs to China where there is very little effort to protect our environment worldwide
Are there any patriotic American citizens within this forum?

Is it solely the Green movement and "Governments" fault that manufacturing jobs have gone overseas? No.

Are American corporations exempt from country loyalty and patriotism? Evidently... Imagine the income tax revenues if all corporations brought manufacturing back to our shores. Our economy would be thriving. With the jobs brought back we could pay down the debt and reduce the handout programs due to job availability. It would be a win all around.

So how bout ya start bashing those who help the citizens of other countries by giving them jobs while firing American citizens.
   Homerglide did you not read my post, I never said that it's the green movement or gov's fault entirely, I also mentioned GREED and Regulation, the first man that I ever heard mention two phrases that I detest was Ronald Reagan ( NEW WORLD ORDER and FREE TRADE ) He was for both, in your opinion has free trade helped the common folks here in THESE UNITED STATES in any way, I think not, it along with greedy politicians on the take and greedy corporations driving service oriented small business out of business with cheap labor from overseas and overregulation here at home, we as patriotic Americans will have a very difficult time ever being on top of the world again, even if all Americans could afford and did buy only American made products to support our nation those greedy corps and politicians would find a way to undermine the movement, I guess that I will never understand why anybody would ever trust in ANY government to the point that lots of us do today. This country was built with sweat , blood, hard work and great risks to secure true LIBERTY, we now have a government that nobody in their right mind would trust enough to make those risky investments that would be needed to bring those jobs back to this socialist utopia. I have personally seen what govt can do with kneejerk reaction and ignorant rulemaking in our statehouse, Have you ever stood in the legislative chambers of your state and argued a point of any sort, I have and let me tell you the waste of time, money, and resources that I have seen made me a true LIBERTARIAN and almost an anarchist, we do need some govt to keep the peace but do we truly need 46000 pages of tax law alone, I think a good start might be the TEN COMMANDMENTS and we could proceed from there
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 24, 2014, 05:58:32 AM
 :post:

Term limits for all politicians. Preferably one in office, one in jail.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 24, 2014, 11:07:55 AM
Where is your proof? 

So 200 years ago it was what?? 

Normal, my point exactly, who can say what's normal

Co2 at times was 10x higher than it is now and some of those times where during ice ages.  The fact is the climate has been far warmer than it is now, and also colder

Anyone who believes this global warming stuff for more than political fluff and can't say, we really have no way of knowing if it's natural or not, is drinking some major Kool aid.. 

But this is pointless,  no human will ever convince me it's anything other than political bull and scientist thinking they know things that turn out not to be so.....
Proof of warming?  In the temperature record.  There is direct instrumental measurement, as well as proxy reconstructions.

200 years ago it was globally cooler.  "Normal" is ambiguous, which is why it isn't used in climate issues other than those who are misunderstanding the conversation.

CO2 being higher in the past correlated with lower solar output levels, keeping with the fact that CO2 is a large climate driver.  In recent times however (past 450,000 years or so) we have blown the CO2 levels off the chart:

(http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/400000yearslarge1.gif)   

That said, the earth being warmer or cooler in the past is in no way proof that man has no influence presently.  It is flawed logic.

Global warming is happening it is proven fact.  Those that choose to stick their heads in the sand and not look at the data a fools at best.  Remaining ignorant is something that happens on the topic quite often, and it shows how sad people's desire to educate themselves is.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 24, 2014, 11:12:43 AM
I certainly hope it has warmed in the last 200 years considering right before that was the little ice age which lasted roughly 500 years.

http://www.eh-resources.org/timeline/timeline_lia.html (http://www.eh-resources.org/timeline/timeline_lia.html)

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/344106/Little-Ice-Age-LIA (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/344106/Little-Ice-Age-LIA)


The world would be a much hungrier place now if we were still dealing with the weather they had from roughly the 1300's to the 1800's. I can't find the article now, but a historian even contributes the high fatality of the Black Death as being brought on by failing crops at the start of the little ice age. People that are malnourished are far more susceptible to infections that those that are well fed.
A more indicative display of th LIA, which in fact wasn't an iceage at all.  It also followed a warm period.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png)

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: martyinmi on March 24, 2014, 07:09:02 PM
Where is your proof? 

So 200 years ago it was what?? 

Normal, my point exactly, who can say what's normal

Co2 at times was 10x higher than it is now and some of those times where during ice ages.  The fact is the climate has been far warmer than it is now, and also colder

Anyone who believes this global warming stuff for more than political fluff and can't say, we really have no way of knowing if it's natural or not, is drinking some major Kool aid.. 

But this is pointless,  no human will ever convince me it's anything other than political bull and scientist thinking they know things that turn out not to be so.....
Proof of warming?  In the temperature record.  There is direct instrumental measurement, as well as proxy reconstructions.

  "Normal" is ambiguous
Those that choose to stick their heads in the sand and not look at the data a fools at best.  Remaining ignorant is something that happens on the topic quite often, and it shows how sad people's desire to educate themselves is.

Neal, you are talking out of both sides of your cake hole, my friend.
When you attempt to create a "normal" by use of graphs and your borrowed narratives(yep, I can google too) to prove your points, and than state that normal is "ambiguous", it tends to make one wonder if you might be just be disagreeing to be disagreeable? Or maybe arguing to be argumentative?

On a side note....If you'd ever like the opportunity to win over even one person on this site(or anyone anywhere for that matter) to your perceived notions of what seems logical to you, you'll need to depart from the condescending attitude, speak with people, not down to them, and lastly, but most importantly, don't resort to name calling. Giving folks a label (calling them/us fools) and insulting our aptitude by using the word "ignorant" only proves that you are an individual who lacks redeemable character.
 
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 26, 2014, 08:25:22 AM
Where is your proof? 

So 200 years ago it was what?? 

Normal, my point exactly, who can say what's normal

Co2 at times was 10x higher than it is now and some of those times where during ice ages.  The fact is the climate has been far warmer than it is now, and also colder

Anyone who believes this global warming stuff for more than political fluff and can't say, we really have no way of knowing if it's natural or not, is drinking some major Kool aid.. 

But this is pointless,  no human will ever convince me it's anything other than political bull and scientist thinking they know things that turn out not to be so.....
Proof of warming?  In the temperature record.  There is direct instrumental measurement, as well as proxy reconstructions.

  "Normal" is ambiguous
Those that choose to stick their heads in the sand and not look at the data a fools at best.  Remaining ignorant is something that happens on the topic quite often, and it shows how sad people's desire to educate themselves is.

Neal, you are talking out of both sides of your cake hole, my friend.
When you attempt to create a "normal" by use of graphs and your borrowed narratives(yep, I can google too) to prove your points, and than state that normal is "ambiguous", it tends to make one wonder if you might be just be disagreeing to be disagreeable? Or maybe arguing to be argumentative?

On a side note....If you'd ever like the opportunity to win over even one person on this site(or anyone anywhere for that matter) to your perceived notions of what seems logical to you, you'll need to depart from the condescending attitude, speak with people, not down to them, and lastly, but most importantly, don't resort to name calling. Giving folks a label (calling them/us fools) and insulting our aptitude by using the word "ignorant" only proves that you are an individual who lacks redeemable character.
I do understand that I am condescending at times, a flaw I do admit to having. 

Perhaps you, like many others who expound that somehow these graphs are based on a "normal temperature of the earth" simply don't understand or comprehend what they are telling you.  When the data is compared, a range of time is set as the baseline, this baseline can be set for an arbitrary length of time, however it does not change the shape of the data, simply where the baseline happens to be zeroed at.  I will help you understand the flaw in your argument below.

I have been interested in temp history for some time, and I use the UAH satellite data to create and continue making graphs, as I have for the past 3 or 4 years.  Below is a graph I have created with the global temp data from http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/temp-and-precip/upper-air/uahncdc.lt (http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/temp-and-precip/upper-air/uahncdc.lt)  :

(http://www.nealmastel.com/fs/sth.png)

As you can see, my graph, like many others out there has a 0 on it, and shows how the data has trended from that reference point by degrees celsius of temperature anomaly (how far from zero).  This zero line is created by setting the average of the 12 months of 1994 to zero/baseline/reference, and not classified as "normal temperature of the planet".  Check the above graph and see that top edge of the maroon line (calculated yearly average) for 1994 is right on the zero line.  Now, we can move that zero line up and down choosing any year, or group of years we wish to make our zero/baseline/reference.  However as I stated before, that will not change the shape or trend of the graph in any way.  I, like anyone else who makes or takes these graphs seriously does not claim that 1994 was the year that the earth was at a  normal temperature.  That is because we understand that "normal" doesn't exist, the planet has a very large range of temperatures through which it progresses, throughout history (as best we can tell from proxy data), and as it will into the future.

That said, the next time you accuse me of borrowing a narrative (I guess that is an accusation of not thinking for myself?), or talking out of both sides of my cake hole, you better put forth a little more research and understanding to ensure it isn't simply the airlock between your ears which is causing your bout of incomprehension, my friend.

As for myself labeling others, I damn well will do it.  If someone (not directly accusing anyone here, nor did I previously), wishes to espouse some ignorant nonsense about how we haven't warmed, or the planet doesn't show a warming trend over the past few hundred year I am going to call them on it.  I do apologize for not being the most loving person, and often times arrogant, but if people are going to make outlandish claims that I know to be inaccurate or false - that is something I will not apologize for.

Remaining ignorant about what is going on with our climate, or how we may be impacting it is not something that should be taken lightly.  To me that shows poor stewardship, and an intellectual dishonesty about the way we live our lives. 

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: jcc273 on March 26, 2014, 11:07:51 AM
I say we see how hot we can get the place.  Once all the ice melts ill be able to get to the ocean much quicker.  Maybe once its warm enough I can garden all year round, i'll have one hell of a tan, unfortunately i won't be on here much since i will probably get rid of my OWB.  But i'll have to make sure i start burning alot of garbage to keep the planet temps up ; ).

I have no doubt that we effect the planet, as part of it we always will.  We effect it more than other creatures because of our sheer volume and power by way of intelligence.  We also have the power to realize this and correct our mistakes.  The problem is when people go overboard.  When you make a decision without looking at the economic backlashes you are setting up for an even worse disaster.  Regulations are needed or corporations would really screw stuff up, like they did lake Erie.  But when things start to tip to over-regulated to the point where you can't even build a new power plant because meeting new emissions standards is impossible then we are heading towards disaster.

What happens when energy prices skyrocket to the point of unaffordability?  Basically everything in our economy is tied in with this factor.  What reaction do you think the "mob" will have?  I don't think it will be a pleasant conversation over a cup of tea.  As things grow out of control the system will topple and then who knows what will result, but i doubt a high concern for the planet will go along with it.

We need a balance, just because something is bad for the environment doesn't mean we need to cut it out completely, if so then they oughta just wipe out all life on the planet.  Responsible control, we do what we can afford and as technology advances so does our ability to increase our efforts.

As for global warming, i don't think we even know what the result would be do we?  Higher water levels, more severe storms, death to some animals, but the way they play it; it will be the end of the world.  Who's to say the world might not be a generally more pleasant place to live at a higher temp? If not we all gotta die some day anyway ; )
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: menchhofer on March 26, 2014, 08:28:46 PM
Milder: In the midst of the Sochi Olympics, the New York Times posted a wake-up piece about the future of snow skiing. According to the article's author, Porter Fox — an editor at Powder magazine and author of Deep: The Story of Skiing and the Future of Snow — climate change will not put an end to winter in the U.S., but it will significantly alter the way winter looks and feels. "The planet is getting hotter," he wrote. "Since 1970, the rate of winter warming per decade in the United States has been triple the rate of the previous 75 years, with the strongest trends in the Northern regions of the country. Nine of the 10 hottest years on record have occurred since 2000."
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 26, 2014, 11:15:49 PM
I say we see how hot we can get the place.  Once all the ice melts ill be able to get to the ocean much quicker.  Maybe once its warm enough I can garden all year round, i'll have one hell of a tan, unfortunately i won't be on here much since i will probably get rid of my OWB.  But i'll have to make sure i start burning alot of garbage to keep the planet temps up ; ).

I have no doubt that we effect the planet, as part of it we always will.  We effect it more than other creatures because of our sheer volume and power by way of intelligence.  We also have the power to realize this and correct our mistakes.  The problem is when people go overboard.  When you make a decision without looking at the economic backlashes you are setting up for an even worse disaster.  Regulations are needed or corporations would really screw stuff up, like they did lake Erie.  But when things start to tip to over-regulated to the point where you can't even build a new power plant because meeting new emissions standards is impossible then we are heading towards disaster.

What happens when energy prices skyrocket to the point of unaffordability?  Basically everything in our economy is tied in with this factor.  What reaction do you think the "mob" will have?  I don't think it will be a pleasant conversation over a cup of tea.  As things grow out of control the system will topple and then who knows what will result, but i doubt a high concern for the planet will go along with it.

We need a balance, just because something is bad for the environment doesn't mean we need to cut it out completely, if so then they oughta just wipe out all life on the planet.  Responsible control, we do what we can afford and as technology advances so does our ability to increase our efforts.

As for global warming, i don't think we even know what the result would be do we?  Higher water levels, more severe storms, death to some animals, but the way they play it; it will be the end of the world.  Who's to say the world might not be a generally more pleasant place to live at a higher temp? If not we all gotta die some day anyway ; )

If you're ever in Northern Indiana, look me up and lets drink some beer. Preferably on a Wednesday, dollar beer night at my VFW.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: d conover on March 27, 2014, 01:48:38 PM
I amazes me that the government is worried about the smoke from my boiler, yet when they cleared the right of way that ultimately took our house for a new highway they did not sell the timber off  many acres, in fact they would not allow me to cut trees off my place to use for firewood.


Instead they doused them with diesel and burned thousands of dollars worth of timber and enough oak hickory and ash logs to last me 100 lifetimes of burning my owb...

I did manage to snag a few logs and drag them over onto our new place, although without permission.  The contractors left some for me to get, but officially I wasn't supposed to. 
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: skorpyd on March 27, 2014, 04:43:15 PM
"CLIMATE CHANGE"  I just want to punch somebody when I hear that term.   As I remember it was around 2008 when I first heard that term.  Before that it was "GLOBAL WARMING", but since the average temps around that time had actually began to cool the leftist's whom are so adept at using language to manipulate and control the low information voters of this once great country needed to "CHANGE" the marketing of their theory.

Hell yes the climate is changing.   The world has been getting warmer on long term average since the last ice age.   There are scientists that say it's caused by human activity and scientists that say it is not.  If there are more scientists that say it is human caused than scientists that say it is not, is not "PROOF" that it is human caused.  Now the next question as martyinmi eluded to is there any incentive for the "scientists" to come up with opinions in sync with their funding.

Just because someone can put up graphs and charts showing the climate is warming is not proof we are the cause of it.   If we can and do influence the climate, the degree to which we effect it, is not and can not be proven.

Are we in the USA supposed to dramatically change our way of life unilaterally on the basis of a theory, when our biggest global competitors are doing nothing.   That's like having words with somebody in a bar and agreeing to step outside, but first tying both hands behind your back.



Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: martyinmi on March 27, 2014, 08:43:07 PM
I do understand that I am condescending at times, a flaw I do admit to having. 

That said, the next time you accuse me of borrowing a narrative (I guess that is an accusation of not thinking for myself?), or talking out of both sides of my cake hole, you better put forth a little more research and understanding to ensure it isn't simply the airlock between your ears which is causing your bout of incomprehension, my friend.

As for myself labeling others, I damn well will do it.  If someone (not directly accusing anyone here, nor did I previously), wishes to espouse some ignorant nonsense about how we haven't warmed, or the planet doesn't show a warming trend over the past few hundred year I am going to call them on it.  I do apologize for not being the most loving person, and often times arrogant, but if people are going to make outlandish claims that I know to be inaccurate or false - that is something I will not apologize for.

Remaining ignorant about what is going on with our climate, or how we may be impacting it is not something that should be taken lightly.  To me that shows poor stewardship, and an intellectual dishonesty about the way we live our lives. 

Neal
[/quote]


Neal, would you agree this fellow (Roy Spencer) is without a doubt one of the most respected climatologists on our planet?

http://www.drroyspencer.com/my-global-warming-skepticism-for-dummies/ (http://www.drroyspencer.com/my-global-warming-skepticism-for-dummies/)

I grew up on a farm. Invasive insects are always a problem on a large dairy farm, and we are forced to employ systematic insecticides to prevent disease spread, commodity loss, as well as improve overall heard health.
Farmers are an ingenious bunch. They've/we've learned over the years that the best ways to bait insects are with food sources that are palatable to said insects. All the while they are feasting on a food source that they love, they are also ingesting a toxic poison.
Hence the 'ol saying "You catch more fly's with honey than with vinegar".

The above being said, let me give you a bit 'o friendly, free advice Neal.
The vast majority of folks who frequent this site possess far too much intelligence to blindly indulge in your feces coated poison.

Folks here are not ignorant (especially not the derogatory definition of the word that you've chosen), nor are we/they the incomprehensible, air locked fools that lack ethical stewardship qualities that you imagine.
When we see a spade, that's what we call it.

I have never been a fan of copying and pasting, so I don't do it often.
Folks who choose to clutter up nearly every post they make with links and graphs remind me of one of these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet))

 
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Pinehouse4 on March 27, 2014, 10:24:25 PM
" climate change " just follow the money trail, and the politicians that beat the drum to get elected.

Thank heaven Canada did not sign the Kyoto Protocol, they followed the US lead, much to the chagrin of the under developed countries that wanted our money. Just another form of foreign aid.

So many companies are now " Green " companies.........

Like a soccer mom buying 4 big shiny ORGANIC apples for $7.50, instead of a bag of big shiny ones for $3.50.  She has been educated by the media that she is doing the right thing for her family. Not her fault.

However in many cases the difference between the organic farmer and the regular farmer is that the organic farmer " only sprays at night."

Everyone is entitled to their opinions and hopefully they have been objective enough to hear both sides of an argument before deciding which they believe in.

Graphs and charts, it is all " data mining " look for information that supports your cause and use it, ignore the info that doesn't. One scientist say yes, one says no. Fund me and I will do a 3 year study..........

Bob



 
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 28, 2014, 05:17:59 PM

Neal, would you agree this fellow (Roy Spencer) is without a doubt one of the most respected climatologists on our planet?

http://www.drroyspencer.com/my-global-warming-skepticism-for-dummies/ (http://www.drroyspencer.com/my-global-warming-skepticism-for-dummies/)
I would say he is very well known and respected yes.  He is also a skeptic, which is precisely why I use the data that he manipulates.

I grew up on a farm. Invasive insects are always a problem on a large dairy farm, and we are forced to employ systematic insecticides to prevent disease spread, commodity loss, as well as improve overall heard health.
Farmers are an ingenious bunch. They've/we've learned over the years that the best ways to bait insects are with food sources that are palatable to said insects. All the while they are feasting on a food source that they love, they are also ingesting a toxic poison.
Hence the 'ol saying "You catch more fly's with honey than with vinegar".

The above being said, let me give you a bit 'o friendly, free advice Neal.
The vast majority of folks who frequent this site possess far too much intelligence to blindly indulge in your feces coated poison.
I also grew up on a farm, and in fact still participate in our family farming enterprise. 

How you equate anything about your farming enterprise to the data that I presented and believe to be accurate and agree with (btw as does your buddy Roy!) to fecal coated poison is astounding.  You realize of course you just touted the work of "one of the most respected climatologist on the planet" as you say, as feces coated poison...   Now, you seem to have logged yourself square in the depths of an extremely hypocritical position.  Not the smartest debate move ever made I must say... 

If you consider agreeing with data procured by someone who is skeptical, and analyzing it for a clear trend over time as "blindly following" as I have done, I have no reply other than your inference is absurd, grossly inaccurate, and flat out wrong.
Folks here are not ignorant (especially not the derogatory definition of the word that you've chosen), nor are we/they the incomprehensible, air locked fools that lack ethical stewardship qualities that you imagine.
When we see a spade, that's what we call it.
I never said that "folks here" were ignorant, and stated as much previously.  Apparently you missed that.

Personally however, you do seem to suffer from ignorance, incomprehension, and airlock.  I'm calling a spade a spade here.

I have never been a fan of copying and pasting, so I don't do it often.
Folks who choose to clutter up nearly every post they make with links and graphs remind me of one of these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet))
I can imagine that you do not like someone posting up links to data and charts providing factual information, after all, it must clutter up your preconceived albeit incorrect argument point, and that's no good!

(http://www.impermium.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Troll.png)

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 28, 2014, 05:20:13 PM
" climate change " just follow the money trail, and the politicians that beat the drum to get elected.

Thank heaven Canada did not sign the Kyoto Protocol, they followed the US lead, much to the chagrin of the under developed countries that wanted our money. Just another form of foreign aid.

So many companies are now " Green " companies.........

Like a soccer mom buying 4 big shiny ORGANIC apples for $7.50, instead of a bag of big shiny ones for $3.50.  She has been educated by the media that she is doing the right thing for her family. Not her fault.

However in many cases the difference between the organic farmer and the regular farmer is that the organic farmer " only sprays at night."

Everyone is entitled to their opinions and hopefully they have been objective enough to hear both sides of an argument before deciding which they believe in.

Graphs and charts, it is all " data mining " look for information that supports your cause and use it, ignore the info that doesn't. One scientist say yes, one says no. Fund me and I will do a 3 year study..........

Bob
There is far more money to be made by denying that the planet is warming.  You really think that a few scientists studying man's impact on our climate holds a candle to the dollars that energy companies and the like hold?  Really?

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: martyinmi on March 28, 2014, 08:39:27 PM


How you equate anything about your farming enterprise to the data that I presented and believe to be accurate and agree with (btw as does your buddy Roy!) to fecal coated poison is astounding.  You realize of course you just touted the work of "one of the most respected climatologist on the planet" as you say, as feces coated poison...   Now, you seem to have logged yourself square in the depths of an extremely hypocritical position.  Not the smartest debate move ever made I must say... 


Personally however, you do seem to suffer from ignorance, incomprehension, and airlock.  I'm calling a spade a spade here.

Let me draw you a picture...so to speak...with my words.
The "poison" is your view of climate change (global warming).
The "fecal coating" is the manner in which you present your illogical conclusions based on your interpretations of "theories".
Let me expand on your manner a bit. You present yourself as a condescending, character debasing, know it all.
Sooo...."fecal coated poison" should be understood this way by you:
"Your condescending, character debasing, know it all attitude is not  an effective way to sell your global warming theories".
 Very, very easy to comprehend. I'd wager that you are the only individual reading this thread who couldn't grasp the deeply hidden meaning of "fecal coated poison". Sorry about that. I'll try harder next time.


If being ignorant, lacking the ability to comprehend, and remaining in a perpetual air locked state are definitions that do not resemble you in any way, shape, or form, yet fully represent the current state of my existence, I'd like to sincerely THANK YOU for the compliments!!!

Troll on, my friend!!!!!!



Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: ijon on March 29, 2014, 05:32:38 AM
Well said Marty.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on March 29, 2014, 05:45:30 AM
NA, in my humble opinion you have the liberty to support and promote any theories that you wish, what really bothers me is that I personally do not think it is my responsibility to fund your theories, fund your own research and theories and I'll have no problem with what you are promoting but to steal hard working Americans money to promote it all and knowingly allow China or any other country to destroy our economy by not adhering to the same guidelines that your crowd and our government forces upon us here is just plain leaving a bad taste in my mouth!
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 29, 2014, 06:10:30 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/18/jaw-dropping-former-u-s-treasury-secretary-makes-bombshell-claim-about-russia-and-2008-financial-crisis/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/18/jaw-dropping-former-u-s-treasury-secretary-makes-bombshell-claim-about-russia-and-2008-financial-crisis/)
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Sloppy_Snood on March 29, 2014, 07:27:47 AM
Okay,,, I've stayed quiet on this topic but I will begin to interject my chemist's monkey wrench.

Global Warming Flaws:

1.  As scientists can only produce tangible,accurate data for the last 800 to 1000 years, there is simply no reliable way of knowing what "normal" global temperatures, sea levels, CO2 levels, etc. have been over the lifetime of the earth.  Scientists speculate that the earth is some 4.5 billion years old.... great, wonderful, "that's so awesome...."

So what?  Let's say every human being lives a mere 100 years,,,, with the existence of man on our beloved earth for some 200,000 years.

Let's just look at the numbers for argument's sake....

Human Being Lifespan : 100 years
Existence of Man on Earth: 200,000 years
Age of the Earth: 4,500,000,000 years

Again, so what?

Well,,, I'll tell you what... math helps a great deal here.

If we are soooooooooooooooo concerned with CO2 emissions, consider that the Industrial Revolution began in about 1760 or so.... some 254 years ago.  Let's "blame"  the Global Warming phenomenon all these man-made machines that consume and combust fossil fuels for varying purposes.

Ask yourself: what is a 254-year length of time over the 4,500,000,000 years of the earth's age?

(254 years / 4,500,000,000 years) * 100% = 0.0000546%

This means that the entire global warming "theory" (laughable hoax really) is roughly based on human events with fossil fuels over a whopping 0.0000546% of the earth's life. 

That's right folks..... an entire "indisputable fact" that global warming is devastating the earth based on a couple hundred years (use thousands if you like, it doesn't matter) of man's concern with the use of fossil fuels on the planet.

I am an advanced degreed scientist and science has served me well but it is pretty simple to see that the entire global warming "fact" (and all of its knee-jerk associated EPA and governmental reactions and regulations) is based on events that amount to no more than a "blink of an eye" relative to the age of the earth itself.  Simple statistics will tell you that there exists a normal oscillation of attributes over time (like earth temperature and sea levels, etc.) and no one can positively say that any slight increase or decrease in these attributes are not part of the normal variance of the earth.  Sorry "indisputable facts".... math and statistics win this round.  :o

There is simply no way of definitively knowing if any increase in sea levels, ice thickness at the polar caps, recent minute increased temperatures of the earth are (or are not) normal variances of the earth itself.... we simply have not existed on the planet long enough, we don't live long enough, and we do not know when the life of the earth actually "ends."

Bummer huh?  :'(  LOLOLOL!!!!
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Ched Bull on March 29, 2014, 07:49:51 AM
 Sloop, you are Absolutly Correct my friend!
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Pinehouse4 on March 29, 2014, 10:05:45 AM
Well said guys.

As the saying goes  " common sense is not so common. "

Bob
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 29, 2014, 10:39:38 AM


How you equate anything about your farming enterprise to the data that I presented and believe to be accurate and agree with (btw as does your buddy Roy!) to fecal coated poison is astounding.  You realize of course you just touted the work of "one of the most respected climatologist on the planet" as you say, as feces coated poison...   Now, you seem to have logged yourself square in the depths of an extremely hypocritical position.  Not the smartest debate move ever made I must say... 


Personally however, you do seem to suffer from ignorance, incomprehension, and airlock.  I'm calling a spade a spade here.


Let me draw you a picture...so to speak...with my words.
The "poison" is your view of climate change (global warming).
The "fecal coating" is the manner in which you present your illogical conclusions based on your interpretations of "theories".
Let me expand on your manner a bit. You present yourself as a condescending, character debasing, know it all.
Sooo...."fecal coated poison" should be understood this way by you:
"Your condescending, character debasing, know it all attitude is not  an effective way to sell your global warming theories".
 Very, very easy to comprehend. I'd wager that you are the only individual reading this thread who couldn't grasp the deeply hidden meaning of "fecal coated poison". Sorry about that. I'll try harder next time.


If being ignorant, lacking the ability to comprehend, and remaining in a perpetual air locked state are definitions that do not resemble you in any way, shape, or form, yet fully represent the current state of my existence, I'd like to sincerely THANK YOU for the compliments!!!

Troll on, my friend!!!!!!
Utter crap.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 29, 2014, 11:23:10 AM
NA, in my humble opinion you have the liberty to support and promote any theories that you wish, what really bothers me is that I personally do not think it is my responsibility to fund your theories, fund your own research and theories and I'll have no problem with what you are promoting but to steal hard working Americans money to promote it all and knowingly allow China or any other country to destroy our economy by not adhering to the same guidelines that your crowd and our government forces upon us here is just plain leaving a bad taste in my mouth!
The theory that the planet has warmed significantly over the past 200 years is something I very much support and promote. 

If you think that cooperative funding of research about or climate is not all our responsibility I will simply disagree with you on a fundamental level.

As much as we all (I assume here) think that government is far to large, they are still responsible for some things, and science for we citizens should be one of those things.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 29, 2014, 11:46:04 AM
Okay,,, I've stayed quiet on this topic but I will begin to interject my chemist's monkey wrench.

Global Warming Flaws:

1.  As scientists can only produce tangible,accurate data for the last 800 to 1000 years, there is simply no reliable way of knowing what "normal" global temperatures, sea levels, CO2 levels, etc. have been over the lifetime of the earth.  Scientists speculate that the earth is some 4.5 billion years old.... great, wonderful, "that's so awesome...."

So what?  Let's say every human being lives a mere 100 years,,,, with the existence of man on our beloved earth for some 200,000 years.

Let's just look at the numbers for argument's sake....

Human Being Lifespan : 100 years
Existence of Man on Earth: 200,000 years
Age of the Earth: 4,500,000,000 years

Again, so what?

Well,,, I'll tell you what... math helps a great deal here.

If we are soooooooooooooooo concerned with CO2 emissions, consider that the Industrial Revolution began in about 1760 or so.... some 254 years ago.  Let's "blame"  the Global Warming phenomenon all these man-made machines that consume and combust fossil fuels for varying purposes.

Ask yourself: what is a 254-year length of time over the 4,500,000,000 years of the earth's age?

(254 years / 4,500,000,000 years) * 100% = 0.0000546%

This means that the entire global warming "theory" (laughable hoax really) is roughly based on human events with fossil fuels over a whopping 0.0000546% of the earth's life. 

That's right folks..... an entire "indisputable fact" that global warming is devastating the earth based on a couple hundred years (use thousands if you like, it doesn't matter) of man's concern use of fossil fuels on the planet.

I am a scientist and science has served me well but it is pretty simple to see that the entire global warming "fact" (and all of its knee-jerk associated EPA and governmental reactions and regulations) is based on events that amount to no more than a "blink of an eye" relative to the age of the earth itself.  Simple statistics will tell you that there exists a normal oscillation of attributes over time (like earth temperature and sea levels, etc.) and no one can positively say that any slight increase or decrease in these attributes are not part of the normal variance of the earth.  Sorry "indisputable facts".... math and statistics win this round.  :o

There is simply no way of definitively knowing if any increase in sea levels, ice thickness at the polar caps, recent minute increased temperatures of the earth are (or are not) normal variances of the earth itself.... we simply have not existed on the planet long enough, we don't live long enough, and we do not know when the life of the earth actually end.

Bummer huh?  :'(  LOLOLOL!!!!
That's all well and good, but the length of existence of the planet doesn't prove or disprove man's present impact on the present climate.  The two things are not mutually inclusive, nor are they exclusive.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: skorpyd on March 29, 2014, 12:14:50 PM
The same can be said for your charts graphs and theories.

They do not prove or disprove man's present impact on present climate or the degree of any correlation.  Nor the degree that unilaterally, dramatically, changing our lifestyle will effect the perceived problem.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on March 29, 2014, 04:32:33 PM
So please stop stealing my money in the form of taxes to pay for one sided (Scientific) explanations designed to strip more of my liberties away!
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: willieG on March 29, 2014, 04:41:54 PM
global what?...its the second week of spring and i still have  5 feet of frost in my ground
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 29, 2014, 05:38:59 PM
I amazes me that the government is worried about the smoke from my boiler, yet when they cleared the right of way that ultimately took our house for a new highway they did not sell the timber off  many acres, in fact they would not allow me to cut trees off my place to use for firewood.


Instead they doused them with diesel and burned thousands of dollars worth of timber and enough oak hickory and ash logs to last me 100 lifetimes of burning my owb...

I did manage to snag a few logs and drag them over onto our new place, although without permission.  The contractors left some for me to get, but officially I wasn't supposed to.

State just did the same across the road today with a old house thats in the state park, but unlike you or me they didn't have to pull the shingles, vinyl siding or any other potentially toxic materials, instead they gave it to the local fire departments for "training".  Accidentally burn a few shingles around here and look out.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Sloppy_Snood on March 29, 2014, 07:07:49 PM
That's all well and good, but the length of existence of the planet doesn't prove or disprove man's present impact on the present climate.  The two things are not mutually inclusive, nor are they exclusive.  Neal

Agreed Neal.... and your response further proves my point:  global warming is theory with some data that supports it,,, and a good portion that does not actually. 

In difference to your previous statement

Global warming is happening it is proven fact.

....global warming is anything but "proven fact."  You may certainly disagree and buy into the global warming theory but you or I may or may simply not be alivelong enough to see the normal oscillation of sea levels down, additional ice formation at the polar caps, decreased global temperatures when global cooling occurs.  Perhaps there will be EPA regulations requiring increased production of CO2 emissions.  :-\  Something to think about.

If you believe in global warming, you certainly must believe in the mutually inclusive possibility of global cooling.... it might just be what the next 254 years has in store for the planet.  We just haven't personally experienced it due to our limited life span expectancy and the fact that accurate temperature measuring devices did not exist really until the 17th century.  ;)

I fully encourage you to believe whatever you choose to believe but please present your argument as "... this data supports (whatever the data supports; e.g. increased global temperature)" but please note that global warming is a theory, not a fact.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Pinehouse4 on March 29, 2014, 09:33:41 PM
You put it perfectly Sloppy, and used his own words to show that.

Never-the-less I am sure we will see some more charts and data soon enough.

On a side note.

I have noticed that I have not seen any advertising by General Motors on the Chevy Volt lately.

Now I recall that when your Congress and my Federal government were heavily invested to the tune of ( brace yourself Slimjim ) billions of tax payer dollars in keeping them afloat that was promoted as the car of the future, a greener future using electricity instead of gasoline, that dreaded fuel that comes from oil.

Now GM seems to be quite proud of their 450 odd horsepower Cadillac. See a lot of that advertised. What an about face they have made.

Why would they do that?

In 45 years of driving various vehicles I have never had anything with that kind of power.

Bob



Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 04:54:47 AM
That's all well and good, but the length of existence of the planet doesn't prove or disprove man's present impact on the present climate.  The two things are not mutually inclusive, nor are they exclusive.  Neal

Agreed Neal.... and your response further proves my point:  global warming is theory with some data that supports it,,, and a good portion that does not actually. 

In difference to your previous statement

Global warming is happening it is proven fact.

....global warming is anything but "proven fact."  You may certainly disagree and buy into the global warming theory but you or I may or may simply not be alivelong enough to see the normal oscillation of sea levels down, additional ice formation at the polar caps, decreased global temperatures when global cooling occurs.  Perhaps there will be EPA regulations requiring increased production of CO2 emissions.  :-\  Something to think about.

If you believe in global warming, you certainly must believe in the mutually inclusive possibility of global cooling.... it might just be what the next 254 years has in store for the planet.  We just haven't personally experienced it due to our limited life span expectancy and the fact that accurate temperature measuring devices did not exist really until the 17th century.  ;)

I fully encourage you to believe whatever you choose to believe but please present your argument as "... this data supports (whatever the data supports; e.g. increased global temperature)" but please note that global warming is a theory, not a fact.
For a scientist you don't seem to understand the scientific method. 

A theory (in the scientific sense we are speaking of) is a valid explanation of fact and measurement.  The theory is not supported simply by "some" data, but all of it.  A scientific theory is falsifiable, however if it is a theory (and global warming is indeed a valid scientific theory), it has yet to have any evidence that proves it false, or that disagrees with it.  Surely you would wish to correct yourself if you claim to be a scientist...

If you have any evidence that shows the planet was not warming over the past 200 years I (along with many others) would love to see it. 

Global warming is indeed a proven theory, supported by factual data (over the 200 year time period originally mentioned).  Again, if you have any evidence or data to the contrary I, and many others would love to see it.  I have provided mine.

In this case I choose to believe the data, and the theory that is supported by the data.  It's that simple. 

Neal



Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 04:57:32 AM
You put it perfectly Sloppy, and used his own words to show that.

Never-the-less I am sure we will see some more charts and data soon enough.

On a side note.

I have noticed that I have not seen any advertising by General Motors on the Chevy Volt lately.

Now I recall that when your Congress and my Federal government were heavily invested to the tune of ( brace yourself Slimjim ) billions of tax payer dollars in keeping them afloat that was promoted as the car of the future, a greener future using electricity instead of gasoline, that dreaded fuel that comes from oil.

Now GM seems to be quite proud of their 450 odd horsepower Cadillac. See a lot of that advertised. What an about face they have made.

Why would they do that?

In 45 years of driving various vehicles I have never had anything with that kind of power.

Bob
Ya, keep those pesky data and facts away from you!!!!   ::)

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on March 30, 2014, 05:25:04 AM
I have owned GM products all my adult life, NO MORE, I already supported them , they mismanaged that support then stole my taxpayer dollar to prop themselves up again, never again, FORD or TOYOTA for me thanks.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Sloppy_Snood on March 30, 2014, 05:45:39 AM
For a scientist you don't seem to understand the scientific method.

Not to toot my own horn too loudly, the review panels of the Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS) and Tetrahedron Letters might disagree with you quite a bit... they seem to like what I've researched and written on organic superconductor materials.  ;)  I have lived the scientific method for 40 plus years thank you... I understand clearly what it is (but more importantly, what it is not ;) ).

Per a general definition from Wikipedia,

Theory is a group of ideas meant to explain a certain topic of science, such as a single or collection of fact(s), event(s), or phenomen(a)(on). Typically, a theory is developed through the use of contemplative and rational forms of abstract and generalized thinking.

I bolded the word "or" in the definition not to disagree or correct with you.... rather, to point out that "theory" can also be called "group of ideas" and "a collection of events or phenomena."  This is important because many global warming theories are indeed that:  theories based on a group of ideas as a collection of events/phenomena. 

In my line of scientific critical thinking, the err of your use of the word "theory" occurred when you Googled up and read the global warming theory you choose to believe and assert that these are definitively now "facts."  That may or may not be true but we can leave it to the current American media to purport that the theories are indeed fact.

A theory (in the scientific sense we are speaking of) is a valid explanation of fact and measurement.  The theory is not supported simply by "some" data, but all of it.  A scientific theory is falsifiable, however if it is a theory (and global warming is indeed a valid scientific theory), it has yet to have any evidence that proves it false, or that disagrees with it.  Surely you would wish to correct yourself if you claim to be a scientist...

It would seem to me you missed my point.  :-\   For your argument, you seem to agree with the data collected in the last couple hundred years.  That's fine.... but it is indeed limited data for a VERY short period of time of the theorized 4.5 billion year old age of planet earth.  Again, you choose to believe those scientific opinions and data that support your belief based on events, phenomena, and some data for an incredibly short period of the earth's life cycle.  I do not.   Pretty simple really.  Much like seasonal variation, rising and lower sea levels, etc., I choose to believe that the minute temperature fluctuation of the planet is merely a short time period of normal global temperature variance that will be offset in net effect by global cooling in the years ahead (that most likely will occur beyond my lifetime; much like it most probably did in the previous 4,499,999,746 years predating Industrial Revolution).

If you have any evidence that shows the planet was not warming over the past 200 years I (along with many others) would love to see it.  Global warming is indeed a proven theory, supported by factual data (over the 200 year time period originally mentioned).  Again, if you have any evidence or data to the contrary I, and many others would love to see it.  I have provided mine.  In this case I choose to believe the data, and the theory that is supported by the data.  It's that simple.  Neal

You seem to be quite adept with Google so I am surprised to see that you cannot find theories or data that do not support your belief in the theory of global warming.  There is a rather large consortium of highly respected, scientists (400+ if memory serves me) that clearly disagree with the theory in general but not surprisingly, the media doesn't seem too interested in reporting on it objectively.  As you can see, scientific methodology is anything but infallible as scientists on both sides of the global warming topic exists.... the non-believers seem to be mutually excluded in large part.  I'll dig up some nice information for you in the future though (a bit busy right now putting in my Indiana-warming OWB... ;-) ).  -Scott
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 05:50:13 AM
I have owned GM products all my adult life, NO MORE, I already supported them , they mismanaged that support then stole my taxpayer dollar to prop themselves up again, never again, FORD or TOYOTA for me thanks.
Both of those have also been given vast amounts of taxpayer dollars in loans though.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on March 30, 2014, 06:07:50 AM
Really Neal, I'm not sure where, could you please explain, I'm not talking about a tax break to open a new plant, I'm talking about the legalized theft of my money to BAIL OUT an irresponsible corporation, I would be happy to see proof of Toyota or Ford accepting money from the BAIL OUT, we obviously disagree on several fronts, the largest to me is how can you justify the increases in the size of govt. Look at the TSA, do you actually feel safer in the skies with TSA on the job, How do you feel about Social security, Obamacare, seatbelts, and helmet laws, personally I think they are ALL bullsheet, I guess Venezuela and Cuba are doing great with there socialist govt's in your view correct. Why is it such a crime in the socialists mind to wish to think and do for yourself and then be responsible for your own actions, in other words if you choose to believe in Global warming and wish to do something about it then by all means do it, just don't steal my money to promote your agenda.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 06:16:33 AM
For a scientist you don't seem to understand the scientific method.
Per a general definition from Wikipedia,

Theory is a group of ideas meant to explain a certain topic of science, such as a single or collection of fact(s), event(s), or phenomen(a)(on). Typically, a theory is developed through the use of contemplative and rational forms of abstract and generalized thinking.

I bolded the word "or" in the definition not to disagree or correct with you.... rather, to point out that "theory" can also be called "group of ideas" and "a collection of events or phenomena."  This is important because many global warming theories are indeed that:  theories based on a group of ideas as a collection of events/phenomena. 

We are in agreement thus far.

The theory of global warming is thus: over the past 200 years the planet has increased in temperature. 

This phenomena is indeed explained by facts, and is falsifiable (yet to be done).   

You stated that there was ample evidence that proved the theory incorrect.  I asked you to produce said evidence as you said it existed.


In my line of scientific critical thinking, the err of your use of the word "theory" occurred when you Googled up and read the global warming theory you choose to believe and assert that these are definitively now "facts."  That may or may not be true but we can leave it to the current American media to purport that the theories are indeed fact.
Utter nonsense. 

I have done my own research utilizing data to back up the theory.  This data is factual, and I presented it previously (charts and link(s)).

Again, I choose to believe the data, which is used to support the theory that the planet has warmed.  If you have evidence or data to the contrary I'd be more than willing to look at it.  I remain, however, skeptical.  Show me, as I have shown you.

It would seem to me you missed my point.  :-\   For your argument, you seem to agree with the data collected in the last couple hundred years.  That's fine.... but it is indeed limited data for a VERY short period of time of the theorized 4.5 billion year old age of planet earth.  Again, you choose to believe those scientific opinions and data that support your belief based on events, phenomena, and some data for an incredibly short period of the earth's life cycle.  I do not.   Pretty simple really.
Show me the data that contradicts the theory that the planet has warmed over the last 200 years.  I am more than willing to change my position if you can provide some data that shows the planet has not warmed, and that the previously known data that shows warming is incorrect.

The age of the planet is irrelevant to the present topic.  However short the last couple of hundred years is in comparison to the age of the earth does not change the data that has been gathered over the short time period.  Nor does the age of the planet have any bearing on the theory that the planet has warmed over the past 200 years.  Pretty simple really.

You seem to be quite adept with Google so I am surprised to see that you cannot find theories or data that do not support your belief in the theory of global warming.  There is a rather large consortium of highly respected, scientists (400+ if memory serves me) that clearly disagree with the theory in general but not surprisingly, the media doesn't seem too interested in reporting on it objectively.  As you can see, scientific methodology is anything but infallible as scientists on both sides of the global warming topic exists.... the non-believers seem to be mutually excluded in large part.  I'll dig up some nice information for you in the future though (a bit busy right now putting in my Indiana-warming OWB... ;-) ).  -Scott

My ability to utilize Google is irrelevant, however Googling the earth temperature history (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=earth+temperature+history) does not show any data to the contrary of the what I have presented, nor anything that you have promoted to exist.

I look forward to that future and data.   :thumbup:

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: skorpyd on March 30, 2014, 06:36:55 AM
Here's some data to look at.

http://www.wjr.com/common/page.php?pt=beckmannglobalwarming&id=1733&is_corp=0 (http://www.wjr.com/common/page.php?pt=beckmannglobalwarming&id=1733&is_corp=0)
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 06:42:19 AM
Really Neal, I'm not sure where, could you please explain, I'm not talking about a tax break to open a new plant, I'm talking about the legalized theft of my money to BAIL OUT an irresponsible corporation, I would be happy to see proof of Toyota or Ford accepting money from the BAIL OUT, we obviously disagree on several fronts, the largest to me is how can you justify the increases in the size of govt. Look at the TSA, do you actually feel safer in the skies with TSA on the job, How do you feel about Social security, Obamacare, seatbelts, and helmet laws, personally I think they are ALL bullsheet, I guess Venezuela and Cuba are doing great with there socialist govt's in your view correct. Why is it such a crime in the socialists mind to wish to think and do for yourself and then be responsible for your own actions, in other words if you choose to believe in Global warming and wish to do something about it then by all means do it, just don't steal my money to promote your agenda.
It is quite well known that Ford and Toyota (to a lesser degree) have been given federally guaranteed loans in the past not part of the bail out, nor did I say that those loans were part of that.

Ford took loans in 2009 and did back and request to be part of the bail out if necessary (it wasn't however):
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/ford-motor-co-does-u-turn-on-bailouts/ (http://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/ford-motor-co-does-u-turn-on-bailouts/)

Toyota:
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2010/12/report-ford-took-federal-funds-too.html (http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2010/12/report-ford-took-federal-funds-too.html)

As for the bailout in general I am opposed to any portion of it that gave money away without the expectation of repayment.  I am more lenient on the government loaning (with full principle and interest to be repaid) in a timely manner.  This was not done with GM for example, the taxpayers lost about 10 billion or so on bailing out GM.  I think an option could have been put in place to guarantee repayment, sadly it was not done.

Personally I am for fiscal conservancy and social liberalism.  Libertarian is the best match for a political label for me. 

I am all for smaller overall government, I think it is plainly absurd how large our government has become.  That said, I am all for large reductions in military, and social programs, while expanding education and sciences (NASA, NSF, ect,).  The increases to those departments would not require the entire reduction from the previous.

I think that Social Security should be an opt in yearly (filed with tax return) program that is lockboxed. 

I think Obamacare is a giant mess that set us back in decades for a properly discussed and funded UHC program.  I am not a huge fan of either a private healthcare solution, nor a UHC solution, however it is quite apparent that we will need to have a UHC solution in the not so distant future.  I wish that we could take a few years to site down and work on a solution that is agreed upon by most.  Obamacare was nothing of this sort, and was simply a welfare program for health insurance companies. 

I think seatbelts and helmets should be a state government decision, however providing people who are stupid enough not to use either with a choice is questionable also...

A good/great government (state and federal) IMO is a fair mix of communism and democracy.  We need communistic ideals like sharing the burden for things like roads, schools, environmental protection (although the EPA is out of hand in many cases), education, and the like.  We need democracy as well to keep our motivations high, improvement comes though involvement, and aptitude, not being inept or ignorant.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 06:47:24 AM
Here's some data to look at.

http://www.wjr.com/common/page.php?pt=beckmannglobalwarming&id=1733&is_corp=0 (http://www.wjr.com/common/page.php?pt=beckmannglobalwarming&id=1733&is_corp=0)
Like half the links are 404ed now, and some are links to techno thriller (fiction) books.

This wasn't supposed to be any evidence to argue against the planet warming over the past 100 or 200 years, right?

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: skorpyd on March 30, 2014, 07:23:11 AM
Didn't have time to go through all the links.

Let's stipulate that the planet is warming as in natural climate cycles.   That is still not "proof" we are causing it or that it's natural causes or what degree of each.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 07:56:54 AM
Didn't have time to go through all the links.

Let's stipulate that the planet is warming as in natural climate cycles.   That is still not "proof" we are causing it or that it's natural causes or what degree of each.
It was never stipulated that it was only due to man.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 30, 2014, 08:40:18 AM



Personally I am for fiscal conservancy and social liberalism.  Libertarian is the best match for a political label for me. 



That caught me off guard, I can't see the two being the least bit compatible, if both belonged to the UFC it would be a cage match to the death.

Could you please explain in detail how a country could be fiscally conservative and still cater to the it ain't fair, throw some money at it till it's fixed crowd? Or how a country can be fiscally conservative and still cater to those that can't or won't take care of themselves and instead rely on my tax dollars to survive?
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Homerglide on March 30, 2014, 09:34:05 AM
Two points to state:

1. Don't you boys look tough gangbanging one individual. Is that the honorable thing to do?

2. Silly how a person gets upset over a dollar spent researching global warming but doesn't squeak a dirty word about all the DOLLARS spent in search of weapons of mass destruction that the intelligence community said did not exist...........................

Even if our industrialization isn't the reason for the ice caps melting away, shouldn't we determine what is going on in our house (the planet Earth)? If your basement or crawl space began smelling bad and moisture was becoming evident, wouldn't you investigate in order to fix the problem?

It is sad that people are losing their objectivity for the benefit of political party rhetoric. When I was a boy back in the 60's I volunteered to hand out flyers in support of a candidate in an upcoming presidential election. An elderly gentleman spent some time discussing various political issues with me (just a kid). This was a time of solid cold war with Russia. Anyway, a statement he made has been with me ever since. He said, "Kid, we won't need to worry about foreign powers defeating us, our defeat will come from within.

You see this very thing happening right now in DC. Who is to blame for dividing Americans? Do ya think our present congress is doing anything near just? Whoever has anything to gain from a divided America, IS NOT A LOYAL PATRIOT.

Someone has an agenda to take this country down from within. Who would gain from that? who would gain power over others in a societal downfall? A poor family in Appalachia? A recent immigrant family from Vietnam? A tree hugger? A plumber from Vermont? A conglomerate of corporations? Lawyers?

Do you want to help with that agenda or be independent minded.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: skorpyd on March 30, 2014, 10:21:03 AM
Homerglide,

Not debating heartfelt opinions and standing up for your beliefs is what would be dishonorable.  Allowing ourselves to be shouted down and run over by leftists is what is bringing down this country. 

Oh your #2,    When not winning in the war of ideas change the subject, and redirect.   I knew it would get around to being George Bush's fault.

Spending money on research is not the problem, it's the radical changes that people are trying to propose based on unproven theories.

Some sure do have an agenda to take us down from within and they are in power right now.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 10:53:11 AM



Personally I am for fiscal conservancy and social liberalism.  Libertarian is the best match for a political label for me. 



That caught me off guard, I can't see the two being the least bit compatible, if both belonged to the UFC it would be a cage match to the death.

Could you please explain in detail how a country could be fiscally conservative and still cater to the it ain't fair, throw some money at it till it's fixed crowd? Or how a country can be fiscally conservative and still cater to those that can't or won't take care of themselves and instead rely on my tax dollars to survive?
Being socially liberal doesn't mean throwing money at all the problems, that is a ill conceived partisan ideal in your head.  Being a supporter of equal right for minorities, gays, women, ect. for example.  Allowing birth control to be distributed to teens.  Being against voter rights.  Being against sexual harassment.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 10:54:34 AM
Homerglide,

Not debating heartfelt opinions and standing up for your beliefs is what would be dishonorable.  Allowing ourselves to be shouted down and run over by leftists is what is bringing down this country. 

Oh your #2,    When not winning in the war of ideas change the subject, and redirect.   I knew it would get around to being George Bush's fault.

Spending money on research is not the problem, it's the radical changes that people are trying to propose based on unproven theories.

Some sure do have an agenda to take us down from within and they are in power right now.
Radical changes eh?  What radical changes have you faced from the government due to global warming, more fuel efficient cars? 

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 30, 2014, 11:06:13 AM



Personally I am for fiscal conservancy and social liberalism.  Libertarian is the best match for a political label for me. 



That caught me off guard, I can't see the two being the least bit compatible, if both belonged to the UFC it would be a cage match to the death.

Could you please explain in detail how a country could be fiscally conservative and still cater to the it ain't fair, throw some money at it till it's fixed crowd? Or how a country can be fiscally conservative and still cater to those that can't or won't take care of themselves and instead rely on my tax dollars to survive?
Being socially liberal doesn't mean throwing money at all the problems, that is a ill conceived partisan ideal in your head.  Being a supporter of equal right for minorities, gays, women, ect. for example.  Allowing birth control to be distributed to teens.  Being against voter rights.  Being against sexual harassment.

Neal

Neal

Please elaborate.  think you might have a grammatical error, being against voter rights?

Indiana is extremely fair, voter ID for all, if you can't afford a ID, the state will give you one.

Far as birth control for teens, you can give them all you want, doesn't mean they'll use it.

Im a libertarian as well. I've finally admitted it, saving me a ton of money as well when the various republicans this that or the other thing call and are looking for handouts.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 11:20:59 AM



Personally I am for fiscal conservancy and social liberalism.  Libertarian is the best match for a political label for me. 




Neal

That caught me off guard, I can't see the two being the least bit compatible, if both belonged to the UFC it would be a cage match to the death.

Could you please explain in detail how a country could be fiscally conservative and still cater to the it ain't fair, throw some money at it till it's fixed crowd? Or how a country can be fiscally conservative and still cater to those that can't or won't take care of themselves and instead rely on my tax dollars to survive?
Being socially liberal doesn't mean throwing money at all the problems, that is a ill conceived partisan ideal in your head.  Being a supporter of equal right for minorities, gays, women, ect. for example.  Allowing birth control to be distributed to teens.  Being against voter rights.  Being against sexual harassment.

Neal

Neal

Please elaborate.  think you might have a grammatical error, being against voter rights?

Indiana is extremely fair, voter ID for all, if you can't afford a ID, the state will give you one.

Far as birth control for teens, you can give them all you want, doesn't mean they'll use it.

Im a libertarian as well. I've finally admitted it, saving me a ton of money as well when the various republicans this that or the other thing call and are looking for handouts.
Yes it was a grammatical error.  For voter rights!  I don't think that mean's not having to show an ID btw.

True, but if they don't have access to them they will not ever use them.

It's a decent way to be.  Not a perfect platform but better than either of the main ones.  :thumbup:

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 30, 2014, 12:24:37 PM


It's a decent way to be.  Not a perfect platform but better than either of the main ones.  :thumbup:

Neal

Problem is, especially the last decade or so, you can't tell the difference between the two parties except for the (D) or (R) after their names. With either party its just more of the same, the same being a turd sandwich.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 12:29:27 PM


It's a decent way to be.  Not a perfect platform but better than either of the main ones.  :thumbup:

Neal

Problem is, especially the last decade or so, you can't tell the difference between the two parties except for the (D) or (R) after their names. With either party its just more of the same, the same being a turd sandwich.
Indeed, reelection is far to important to do the right thing.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Homerglide on March 30, 2014, 12:40:59 PM


Oh your #2,    When not winning in the war of ideas change the subject, and redirect.   I knew it would get around to being George Bush's fault.



Some sure do have an agenda to take us down from within and they are in power right now.

If you read that I am blaming Bush for all the money wasted on that war, you are incorrect. The decision to go to war was discussed and voted on by both sides of the isle. We have been enlightened by investigations and individuals after the fact on how that all went down.

Tell us the gain for the liberal left after they take us down. In a societal breakdown, there probably will not be any social programs remaining. In my opinion, it is not a political issue but of powerful forces using the political system to divide the citizens of this country enabling them to achieve their goals. Divide and conquer has been around long before you and I got here.

Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: skorpyd on March 30, 2014, 03:03:42 PM
If not the current administration dividing and conquering to achieve "fundamental transformation of the USA", who would be these powerful forces you speak of.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on March 30, 2014, 03:30:06 PM
Sorry guys I have been busy today and may not have followed the thread entirely, my point to be made is that we as individuals need to be responsible for our own actions, this idea certainly should pertain to our elected officials, if they feel that they are doing what they were elected for then they will have no problem explaining themselves to the voters, lets face it, we all make mistakes, I'm simply tired of excuses and government not being held to the same level of responsibility as I am, both parties  seem to use this excuse and the taxpayer is always held responsible for the governments mistakes
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 04:14:18 PM
If not the current administration dividing and conquering to achieve "fundamental transformation of the USA", who would be these powerful forces you speak of.
Someone from the other party most likely.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 04:16:21 PM
Sorry guys I have been busy today and may not have followed the thread entirely, my point to be made is that we as individuals need to be responsible for our own actions, this idea certainly should pertain to our elected officials, if they feel that they are doing what they were elected for then they will have no problem explaining themselves to the voters, lets face it, we all make mistakes, I'm simply tired of excuses and government not being held to the same level of responsibility as I am, both parties  seem to use this excuse and the taxpayer is always held responsible for the governments mistakes
I agree.  Term limits, benefits that end when office is left, prohibit anyone who has served from becoming a lobbyist, ect... would go a long ways...

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Homerglide on March 30, 2014, 04:23:24 PM
If not the current administration dividing and conquering to achieve "fundamental transformation of the USA", who would be these powerful forces you speak of.

You answer my questions and then I will answer yours.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: skorpyd on March 30, 2014, 05:30:53 PM
If not the current administration dividing and conquering to achieve "fundamental transformation of the USA", who would be these powerful forces you speak of.

You answer my questions and then I will answer yours.

I believe my answer was in the question.  What exactly was your question?
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: skorpyd on March 30, 2014, 06:08:19 PM
Homerglide,

Not debating heartfelt opinions and standing up for your beliefs is what would be dishonorable.  Allowing ourselves to be shouted down and run over by leftists is what is bringing down this country. 

Oh your #2,    When not winning in the war of ideas change the subject, and redirect.   I knew it would get around to being George Bush's fault.

Spending money on research is not the problem, it's the radical changes that people are trying to propose based on unproven theories.

Some sure do have an agenda to take us down from within and they are in power right now.
Radical changes eh?  What radical changes have you faced from the government due to global warming, more fuel efficient cars? 

Neal

How about the EPA basically shutting down the coal industry and several power plants that rely on coal.   How about the proposed "cap & trade" legislation that they tried to ram through.   How about the further proposed regulations on heavy trucks, that will make shipping much more expensive.  How about not basically shutting down federal land leases for energy exploration both oil and natural gas.  Cheap energy fuels America's economy and we have lot's of it we wont go after.

What about wasting billions on so called "Green Energy"  companies like Solyndra where many of the higher ups in the companies had ties to fundraising for the current administration.

Nothing wrong with "Green Energy" as long as it works in the free market without taxpayer subsidies. I'm all for new technology and innovation, I just believe it has to make it in the free market, not politically funded agendas.

.   
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on March 30, 2014, 08:23:56 PM
Homerglide,

Not debating heartfelt opinions and standing up for your beliefs is what would be dishonorable.  Allowing ourselves to be shouted down and run over by leftists is what is bringing down this country. 

Oh your #2,    When not winning in the war of ideas change the subject, and redirect.   I knew it would get around to being George Bush's fault.

Spending money on research is not the problem, it's the radical changes that people are trying to propose based on unproven theories.

Some sure do have an agenda to take us down from within and they are in power right now.
Radical changes eh?  What radical changes have you faced from the government due to global warming, more fuel efficient cars? 

Neal

How about the EPA basically shutting down the coal industry and several power plants that rely on coal.   How about the proposed "cap & trade" legislation that they tried to ram through.   How about the further proposed regulations on heavy trucks, that will make shipping much more expensive.  How about not basically shutting down federal land leases for energy exploration both oil and natural gas.  Cheap energy fuels America's economy and we have lot's of it we wont go after.

What about wasting billions on so called "Green Energy"  companies like Solyndra where many of the higher ups in the companies had ties to fundraising for the current administration.

Nothing wrong with "Green Energy" as long as it works in the free market without taxpayer subsidies. I'm all for new technology and innovation, I just believe it has to make it in the free market, not politically funded agendas.

.
Coal needed a huge wakeup call, the plants were gigantic pollution generators.  Most of the coal plants that have been rejected are by state governmental authorities, not the EPA, and not to mention the declining economy in 2008 or so being responsible for many cancellations.   That said coal has cleaned up significantly, and still remains the dominate power generation source.  The bigger influence now is that the market price of natural gas is phasing out desire for new coal plants.

Cap and trade didn't make it though, therefore no radical change....

I haven't heard that new emissions on heavy trucks has increased shipping costs.  Do you have some examples or studies showing so?  I would wager the price of fuel is far more significant in terms of radical price changes for shipping that emissions regulations.

The total number of leases of federal lands is hovering right around 50,000, the same area it has been for several decades.  Number of new leases has declined, however the total number of acres leased is right around 40 million, where it has been for the past several decades. That would indicate that most new leases are for larger parcels of federal land than previously applied for.  It also shows an interesting trend towards conglomerations.  There are fewer lease applicants for the same number of acres.  If you look at the number of productive well bores on federal land the number is continually increasing.   Thus we have the same number of acres leased for the past few decades but increased the number of wells by 40% or so.  If that indicates any radical change, it is that we are ever increasing our production on federal lands, basically the opposite of what you infer by saying that we are shutting down federal lands.

There certainly was cronyism going on with some of the green energy deals, no question. 

Well many new green technologies require taxpayer subsidies to get into place.  I see nothing wrong with that, after all we give huge amounts of government dollars to the old guard of energy production companies.  To no invest in the beginning of new technologies is awfully short sighted, especially looking at the history of coal, natural gas, and nuclear power when they first came about.  I do agree that removing politics from new tech funding is a great idea however, I'm all for that.  We should also be massively investing in nuclear production.  That's the part of the industry that has been hamstrung by government.

Neal

Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: mlappin on March 30, 2014, 10:22:41 PM
Last I understood heavy truck emissions haven't taken place, yet. Of course it will increase costs, every gizmo thats added to an engine increases it production cost, each production cost is passed on to the purchaser of said truck, the purchasers pass that cost on in increased freight rates.

Unless there is practically an unlimited supply of nat gas, eventually increased usage will lead to increased prices.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on March 31, 2014, 05:27:20 AM
I give up, go ahead and continue to steal our monies Neal, govt has a great record of responsibly pissing away that money, sooner or later we will all pay for those great investments that have been subsidised, nobody in the private sector has the money or the brains to succeed without govt. involvement. Looking at it another way, if I were filthy rich and could solve a large portion of our energy problem with a true investment, tell me why I would invest in a country and product that the winners and losers are hand picked by polititians, You win I give up!!!
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: oldchenowth on March 31, 2014, 06:14:33 AM
I still think Grandpa said it best.

"You can tell exactly what a man doesn't know by how much he tells you he does know."

Then there are people like me that don't know squat about anything.  Is there a law that reminds me to breathe?  Maybe I can get Govmt money for that. 

Doesn't climate change everyday?  Today is warmer than yesterday.  Later in the week will be coller than today.  Isn't that a change in climate?

Told you I didn't know anything!
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Homerglide on March 31, 2014, 01:16:22 PM

Even if our industrialization isn't the reason for the ice caps melting away, shouldn't we determine what is going on in our house (the planet Earth)? If your basement or crawl space began smelling bad and moisture was becoming evident, wouldn't you investigate in order to fix the problem?

Someone has an agenda to take this country down from within. Who would gain from that? who would gain power over others in a societal downfall? A poor family in Appalachia? A recent immigrant family from Vietnam? A tree hugger? A plumber from Vermont? A conglomerate of corporations? Lawyers?

These questions from my post that you responded to. Believe me when I say I do not believe it is one political party or another but someone is puppet stringing our politicians. Where is the money coming from? Who would have something to gain (money, power, influence etc) by crashing our society? Someone is instigating unrest with the population of the USA.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: skorpyd on March 31, 2014, 03:15:31 PM
NA,  I never said all the "Radical Changes" had happened yet.   Most of what I was referring to is the proposed changes, as in cap and trade.   The new wood stove standards are another example.   The trucking industry changes that Obama talked about recently but are not law yet.

It's not just what has happened already it's what they would like to happen using unproven theories as the reason for the "change",  which boils down to more government control of every aspect of our lives.



Homer,

I never said not to investigate, I just said don't go making radical changes that effect all of our lifestyles and put us at a competitive disadvantage with other world powers that are doing nothing to combat this unproven theory.

How much more plain can I be,   I think the present administration would gain from a societal  downfall, as in taking us from the socialist country we are now, to a totalitarian regime with them and your mysterious backer taking total control.

I don't know what your list of different segments of society has to do with it or what you are trying to say there.

I also believe there could powerful people or organizations behind the scenes.

So are you going to tell us who or what you believe it is.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Homerglide on March 31, 2014, 05:37:46 PM
My belief, that it is a group of Rich "railroad industry types" who want control of the geography and all its inhabitants of the USA. Greed would be the driver as was in the game we played as children (monopoly). There are Christian extremists, Islamic extremists, greed extremists, and power extremists, etc.... Truly it would great to explicitly say those 10 people right there, but I cannot.

Follow the money, I guess. Who buys elections by financing election campaigns? Why are campaign ads so GD negative these days? I get pissed when I see fellow Americans bad rapping each other just for their political views. How has this become acceptable behavior?
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Sprinter on March 31, 2014, 06:16:32 PM
Christians fighting radical extremists, fixed it for you.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on March 31, 2014, 07:36:57 PM
Homer, may I try to explain it with a story, My father in law and I used to argue politics at the dinner table, my father in law ( GOD REST HIS SOUL ) was an old time Democrat, as you can imagine sometimes the debates got very heated, this does not mean that we did not love one another as individuals very much and I cannot think of another man dead or alive that I still respect more, he had the right as an AMERICAN to voice his opinion and he fought for my right to do the same, I would dishonor him by not sharing what is in my heart as well as listening to opposing views, in my opinion the problem with North American culture is that we are for the most part afraid as individuals to speak our minds and form our own opinions, when families and friends stopped talking about the things that matter to them as individuals, we gave up our LIBERTIES for the safety of non argument, people (the citizen) with his head buried in the sand allowed us to get where we are today, I AM NOT PROUD OF WHERE WE ARE, WE CAN DO SO MUCH BETTER, it all starts with constructive conversation, ( Rand Paul 2016 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Homerglide on April 01, 2014, 08:43:08 AM
Slim, I totally understand what you are saying. Unfortunately in the current times, people will immediately dismiss the opposing view just because it is from "the other side". I don't have enough digits on my body to keep track of the number of people who have claimed to me that they are Independent and yet have no understanding of the term 'objective research'.

In our work, Church or Lodge environment we coexist with our fellow members, Yes? And yet anything of a political nature gets viscerally piled-on rather than objectively discussed. Where did the nudge come from to cross previous ethical boundaries? Look to DC and we can see the etiquette violations of some members there in the chambers. College educated people behaving as if the lived in a low rent trailer park.

As you stated "WE CAN DO SO MUCH BETTER".
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on April 01, 2014, 11:34:15 AM
I give up, go ahead and continue to steal our monies Neal, govt has a great record of responsibly pissing away that money, sooner or later we will all pay for those great investments that have been subsidised, nobody in the private sector has the money or the brains to succeed without govt. involvement. Looking at it another way, if I were filthy rich and could solve a large portion of our energy problem with a true investment, tell me why I would invest in a country and product that the winners and losers are hand picked by polititians, You win I give up!!!
Perhaps of  thinking it is a you versus me issues you could expand your horizons and see what is best for our society as a whole.  Granted not every government action or degree of program implementation is, but we do need to contribute to all of our general needs as a society.   You getting all the policies you want or me getting all the policies I want may not be what is best for both of us. Most topics should not be a battle but a cooperative effort to solve or understand a problem.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on April 01, 2014, 11:47:27 AM
Cooperative effort to me is voluntary, the moment that somebody is forced in the form of stolen tax dollars to participate in any program it then sways from cooperative to mandatory, I do support lots of local projects in my community, Our new fire barn, my wife mans the voting station things like this are voluntary and I get involved where I choose, I do not give to the United Way because I found out 25 years ago that they support Planned parenthood/ abortion clinics, can I possibly be any clearer, it is my money and time and I will do as I please with it, you are free to do as you wish with yours.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on April 01, 2014, 02:14:14 PM
Cooperative effort to me is voluntary, the moment that somebody is forced in the form of stolen tax dollars to participate in any program it then sways from cooperative to mandatory, I do support lots of local projects in my community, Our new fire barn, my wife mans the voting station things like this are voluntary and I get involved where I choose, I do not give to the United Way because I found out 25 years ago that they support Planned parenthood/ abortion clinics, can I possibly be any clearer, it is my money and time and I will do as I please with it, you are free to do as you wish with yours.
Your argument is unbounded.  One could use your argument as a point for every tax.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: TheBoiler on April 01, 2014, 04:03:16 PM
When you have a system where the best investment a Business can make is buying Politicians you have problems.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Roger2561 on April 01, 2014, 04:18:16 PM
When you have a system where the best investment a Business can make is buying Politicians you have problems.

 :post: :thumbup:
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: Roger2561 on April 01, 2014, 04:20:14 PM
Cooperative effort to me is voluntary, the moment that somebody is forced in the form of stolen tax dollars to participate in any program it then sways from cooperative to mandatory, I do support lots of local projects in my community, Our new fire barn, my wife mans the voting station things like this are voluntary and I get involved where I choose, I do not give to the United Way because I found out 25 years ago that they support Planned parenthood/ abortion clinics, can I possibly be any clearer, it is my money and time and I will do as I please with it, you are free to do as you wish with yours.

 :post: :thumbup:  Where the heck is that "like" button?
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on April 01, 2014, 05:07:12 PM
When you have a system where the best investment a Business can make is buying Politicians you have problems.
That's the big problem.

People think our government is turning socialist, when in fact the opposite is well true, it is turning more and more corporatist.

Neal
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: slimjim on April 01, 2014, 05:21:52 PM
PASS THE PIPE NEAL, it's not nice to BOGART the smoke!!
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: ijon on April 01, 2014, 05:58:42 PM
People think its going commie, because it is. Big brother is going to take care of everybody.
Title: Re: Global warming, climate change? Article
Post by: NaturallyAspirated on April 01, 2014, 06:37:55 PM
People think its going commie, because it is. Big brother is going to take care of everybody.
It's taking care of the wealthy.  It's throwing bones to the rest.

Neal