Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Global Warming is over.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by gwb72tii View Post
    got up on the wrong side of the bed today rwh?
    the lefty who claims to be unbiased?
    the guy who claimed the 90's were terrible for investing in stocks?
    the guy who criticized me for charging for opinions, yet earns a living doing exactly the same thing?
    the guy who thinks the bailout of gm was good and the chevy volt is awesome?

    i take your opinions for what they are worth LOL.
    LOL. Nah, like everyone else on this site - just tired of your dumb banter.


    I'm not a lefty. But you're misinformed - last I checked I've voted mostly Republican. Although I began disappointed, like most with a brain, of what the GOP has become. We argued on the same side in the last election, in case you are senile and can't remember. Not unbiased? I use facts and truth. Try it sometime. Do you think that it is impossible for someone to be on the right and also follow science? Is it some requirement or restriction that one has to choose between the two? Isn't that a bit biased?? Is science just for hippies?

    Yeah, I know it must be challenging for someone who doesn't understand reality to get sarcasm but it was to point out how horribly inaccurate your assumption that bonds and stock can only interact one way was. Based on your assertion, the 90s ought to have been terrible and my sarcasm pointed that out, but you don't seem mentally capable of understanding it.

    You again are misinformed and ignorant.

    So you think it wasn't good? Yet your industry was bailed out, was that good or bad? And the Volt is awesome. Why exactly don't you think so?



    Maybe you should consider the facts that I post even if you don't like the opinions that I base them on. But then, that would mean you could understand the difference between facts and opinion.

    Maybe try to use facts to respond to Q5's post, or are you going to continue avoiding it? Or any question towards you?
    Last edited by rwh11385; 12-31-2012, 02:42 PM.

    Comment


      Originally posted by Q5Quint View Post
      Yes because 'phil jones', or anyone, is unable to make a claim for or against anything without the rest of the scientific community, and their research, to back them up. That is what science is~ a slow lumbering logical progression of knowledge. Guess how flat the earth is? Guess who causes acid rain? Guess who is destroying all the coral reefs and putting lead into our drinking water?

      I still remember our geology professor explaining some new theories of plate tectonics and that we had to learn the old theories for our test until, literally, the old scientists died off and they could move on.

      The climate argument among scientist is and has been over. You can cherry pick a fellow now and then but most are waiting on the gubbment to actually listen to them so they can move on.

      Climate change or not we need to curb and stop emissions for pollution, health, and economic reasons~ whether that lingering pollution is going to cause the largest extinction since the cretaceous period is a separate question and will probably be blamed on those that prevented us from acting sooner.


      The epa answeres most of your questions:
      Comprehensive information from U.S. EPA on issues of climate change, global warming, including climate change science, greenhouse gas emissions data, frequently asked questions, climate change impacts and adaptation, what EPA is doing, and what you can do.


      as well as the skeptics site:
      Examines the science and arguments of global warming skepticism. Common objections like 'global warming is caused by the sun', 'temperature has changed naturally in the past' or 'other planets are warming too' are examined to see what the science really says.




      It is because you are arguing against 1000 other scientists and peer-reviewed research. You would come up against the same wall if you tried to say the earth was flat or was the center of the universe. In the face of overwhelming evidence you still want to hold on, for some reason, to your belief. Also Santa Clause and God are not real, but people tend to get more angry about one of them in particular if you try and 'prove it'.

      "A survey of all peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject 'global climate change' published between 1993 and 2003 shows that not a single paper rejected the consensus position that global warming is man caused. 75% of the papers agreed with the consensus position while 25% made no comment either way, focusing on methods or paleoclimate analysis (Oreskes 2004)."

      NOT A SINGLE PAPER. I look forward to reading "Phil Jones' upcoming paper.

      "Schulte's paper makes much of the fact that 48% of the papers they surveyed are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject anthropogenic global warming. The fact that so many studies on climate change don't bother to endorse the consensus position is significant because scientists have largely moved from what's causing global warming onto discussing details of the problem (eg - how fast, how soon, impacts, etc)"

      Science has 'moved on' to discussing impacts of climate change instead of bothering with a few crazy objectionists.... because surprise! it is actually happening according to prediction.
      Just self quoting so you don't have to scroll backwards.

      I always wondered why some of the more 'right wing' folks are so against taxes. When I was in church I learned that we should help our brothers and sisters- volunteer at the homeless shelter- work in the food bank etc- wouldn't taxing the shit out of all those baby-eating atheists so we could just pay somebody to do that make more sense? Or was the purpose not to actually help people but just convert them? hmmm? The folks I knew seemed like they were just trying to help and not over-jesus anyone so I dont really see why raising taxes to help people in need is bad.

      When I cant even eat the fish in my own pond I am going to go out on a limb and say our planet is in need, too. We have an opportunity to build a better world and create our own little freedom paradise but we have to decide that things like fossil fuels, although they make some people shittons of money, are dropping lead into my pond. What is the value lost from that?

      Comment


        Like I said - the environment is like a credit card, and we haven't made a payment in 100 years. the bill is coming due.
        Build thread

        Bimmerlabs

        Comment


          Originally posted by Q5Quint View Post
          I always wondered why some of the more 'right wing' folks are so against taxes. When I was in church I learned that we should help our brothers and sisters- volunteer at the homeless shelter- work in the food bank etc- wouldn't taxing the shit out of all those baby-eating atheists so we could just pay somebody to do that make more sense? Or was the purpose not to actually help people but just convert them? hmmm? The folks I knew seemed like they were just trying to help and not over-jesus anyone so I dont really see why raising taxes to help people in need is bad.

          Because doing it because you want to vs. doing it because you are required to.

          If you do it because you have to, then the whole point is lost. It becomes meaningless to give because you are required to.

          Comment


            hey nando, what do you say now about AGW since the snow pack is about 150% of norm and rainfall is well ahead of average? it wasn't too long ago that you were saying the lack of rain this summer was proof the climate has changed, which in the case of dry summers in the PNW, i'm all for.

            and Q5, it's always humorous to see the argument you and others make that somehow doubting that AGW is a proven theory must automatically mean that person is pro-pollution, that they go hand in hand. LOL
            “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
            Sir Winston Churchill

            Comment


              yeah, we set more weather records again, so that means nothing is happening to the climate!

              and more record warming in the south for 2012 after our winter started.
              Build thread

              Bimmerlabs

              Comment


                Originally posted by gwb72tii View Post
                hey nando, what do you say now about AGW since the snow pack is about 150% of norm and rainfall is well ahead of average? it wasn't too long ago that you were saying the lack of rain this summer was proof the climate has changed, which in the case of dry summers in the PNW, i'm all for.
                Quick wiki search. I don't portray it as gospel, but it does potentially explain the rainfall/snowfall, be it increases and decreases.

                Historically (i.e., over the 20th century), subtropical land regions have been mostly semi-arid, while most subpolar regions have had an excess of precipitation over evaporation. Future global warming is expected to be accompanied by a reduction in rainfall in the subtropics and an increase in precipitation in subpolar latitudes and some equatorial regions. In other words, regions which are dry at present will generally become even drier, while regions that are currently wet will generally become even wetter. This projection does not apply to every locale, and in some cases can be modified by local conditions. Drying is projected to be strongest near the poleward margins of the subtropics (for example, South Africa, southern Australia, the Mediterranean, and the south-western U.S.), a pattern that can be described as a poleward expansion of these semi-arid zones.[11]
                Weather is weather, it happens. It also happens in different areas in different ways, ways which you wouldn't expect. There are plenty of climate models which predict the types of weather changes areas should be seeing in the decades/centuries to come if we carry down this path. They're also consistent with what's presently occurring.
                Last edited by cale; 01-03-2013, 12:50 PM.

                Comment


                  consistent exactly how?
                  low rainfall would ordinarily be a result of global cooling, not warming
                  and now above average rainfall.
                  twice the fun for the same price
                  “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
                  Sir Winston Churchill

                  Comment


                    The fact that you associate any weather trend that isn't warming/drying with proof that climate change isn't real proves how very little you understand the science behind it.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by CorvallisBMW View Post
                      The fact that you associate any weather trend that isn't warming/drying with proof that climate change isn't real proves how very little you understand the science behind it.
                      before you chime in here corvallis you might read the whole thread, starting with nando stating the dry summer was evidence of AGW.

                      i was poking fun at him.
                      “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
                      Sir Winston Churchill

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by gwb72tii View Post
                        consistent exactly how?
                        low rainfall would ordinarily be a result of global cooling, not warming
                        and now above average rainfall.
                        twice the fun for the same price
                        Consistent in that they're consistent.

                        Tell me, are you basing that assumption in fact or your "common sense" argument once again?

                        Comment


                          no



                          :)
                          “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
                          Sir Winston Churchill

                          Comment


                            Bring up that post then, I'd be curious to see the context it was made in.

                            Comment


                              ask nando, he knows what 'm talking about
                              “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
                              Sir Winston Churchill

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by gwb72tii View Post
                                before you chime in here corvallis you might read the whole thread, starting with nando stating the dry summer was evidence of AGW.

                                i was poking fun at him.
                                it wasn't just a dry summer, it was a record dry summer. If you don't see how a record wet winter is related I don't know what to tell you.

                                What do you suppose follows a winter where you get 6' of snow in the mountains in a single day, then lots of rain and rising temperatures the next spring?
                                Build thread

                                Bimmerlabs

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X