Global Warming is over.

[decay]

Missed this post somehow. Compare us petrol heads to a cargo ship lane then? You hit that nail for sure with the media and google educated

Yeah. I like that analogy. It's not going away in the near-term. Save it for the people who actually need it. Keeps costs down for us (and the businesses who need it as a consumable, like yours I imagine) and is more environmentally responsible overall. I don't want to stop owning gassers, I haven't had a Porsche yet.

Now that I think of it, this discussion has made me curious about the raw materials that go into synthetic oils.

LET ME GO GOOGLE THAT

[ForcedFirebird]

Yeah. I like that analogy. It's not going away in the near-term. Save it for the people who actually need it. Keeps costs down for us (and the businesses who need it as a consumable, like yours I imagine) and is more environmentally responsible overall. I don't want to stop owning gassers, I haven't had a Porsche yet.

Now that I think of it, this discussion has made me curious about the raw materials that go into synthetic oils.

LET ME GO GOOGLE THAT

Lol. I try and purchase domestic as much as possible, problem is, even things "Made in USA" are really "Assembled in the USA with Chinese parts". It irks me to no end when I purchase something, open a side panel and there it is, plain as day.

I also purchase equipment used/broken/repairable. Doesn't make sense the way our society is so disposable. If something is broken, throw it in the land fill and buy another. Our grand (and great grand) parents are rolling in their graves. They had a depression where there was no money, no work, and lucky to just have food in general. They knew how to turn nothing/junk into something. My grandfather would tell me stories about things he made, and would say of the like "if we wanted to have something, we made it". And I'm not talking even making toys from scraps for the kids, he made fishing boats, scraped together cars, even made tools to make them. Imagine what the learning curve this current generation would deal with if we were struck again. That's why I joked earlier about "the great EMP". Google would be a myth before long, a name mentioned in stories near the campfire.

[cale]

I think what fuels most skepticism....

I think you're giving them far too much credit. There are some outspoken individuals who reject the conclusions made by the majority of science on the basis that they do not agree with their research, however these are not the majority. The majority are products of their media intake, be it non-science media outlets like WSJ, Fox, Forbes, or specific anti-AGW sources like some of the ones linked here. They actively seek out sources of information which do not meet the criteria for being considered scientific by any stretch, and then attempt to claim intellectual superiority. They are often legitimately stupid in terms of understanding scientific basics such as definitions and reading statistics.

When you have to stop and explain what constitutes theory, evidence, or trends just so you can continue on with a conversation you are wasting your time on someone who is trying to argue with an elementary school level understanding of science.

[Morrison]

^ I concur.

[BraveUlysses]

You are capable of reading are you not, you should be able to click on any one of the sources listed on that website and find actual scientific literature straight from the sources to back up the material presented on the website.

Or are you really so willfully ignorant that you intentionally look over referenced literature?

lol:

i'm an old mechanical engineer so logic/data means a lot to me.

[gwb72tii]

no i've read the literature ad naseum because it is predominant. you actually have to look for skeptic literature to find it, hence links from you all call skeptic websites (duh!)

here's the issue. your models don't match reality. the predicted warming is not happening.
there is no disaster.

man undoubtedly has some affect on climate, but apparently not nearly as much as you all warmista's would have us all believe.

measured data does not support the warmist propeganda of catastrophic global warming

so here's a serious question for brave et al

is the IPCC a scientific organization?

and what was the stated purpose of the IPCC when it was established?

and here is a link to scientists that have published peer reviewd studies that i guess weren't polled by Cook with his 97% consensus claim LOL

http://notrickszone.com/2016/12/22/the-hockey-stick-collapses-50-new-2016-scientific-papers-affirm-todays-warming-isnt-global-unprecedented-or-remarkable/#sthash.m8OitLRS.dpbs

[cale]

no i've read the literature ad naseum because it is predominant. you actually have to look for skeptic literature to find it, hence links from you all call skeptic websites (duh!)

Type global warming or anthropogenic global warming into google, and both will yield first page results which are dismissing AGW as a reality. The most popular TV news channel in the US, Fox News, flat out rejects and even goes as far as to condescend to those that don't dismiss it.

Your assertion that one needs to actually put effort into finding forms of media which dismiss AGW is ridiculous.

[BraveUlysses]

http://arstechnica.com/science/2017/01/noaa-temperature-datas-accuracy-confirmed-despite-congressional-objections/

[LEANE30]

I've been working oil and gas for almost 6 years now... If I play my cards right I may be able to quit after an 18-20 year career. Then who knows, maybe I'll hug trees or build electric cars or something to amend for my sins. Hahaha.

Working concrete many moons ago, my boss always said "fuck the babies that don't exist, rape and pillage now, they will never miss what they never had." Back then I didn't really understand it and thought he was just a complete asshole.

Serious note however, only the people who are willing to actually build things are the one who have the power to assure its built correctly and will not fail. ...perhaps that is why companies fund studies, not to just manipulate data, but to assure it is actually accurate.

Sent from my LGLS740 using Tapatalk

[MR E30 325is]

EV's do little to nothing to reduce pollution when you consider the power plant's electricity generation

lol. Just lol.

I wanted to avoid this thread fully, but this was just too good to pass up without having a laugh.

[Wschnitz]

lol. Just lol.

I wanted to avoid this thread fully, but this was just too good to pass up without having a laugh.

Especially when considering the entire point of some of these new EV's is that they are built in a factory powered by solar/wind/hydro.

[ForcedFirebird]

lol. Just lol.

I wanted to avoid this thread fully, but this was just too good to pass up without having a laugh.

Especially when considering the entire point of some of these new EV's is that they are built in a factory powered by solar/wind/hydro.

What power the plants that builds them has nothing to do with what the power companies are burning to recharge them.

[LEANE30]

That is a damn good gif!

Sent from my LGLS740 using Tapatalk

[ForcedFirebird]

That is a damn good gif!

Sent from my LGLS740 using Tapatalk

Stole it from here:

http://vott.tk/map-us-power-plants/

[Wschnitz]

I too get my maps/graphs from opinion blogs.



Not to mention the fact there are no hard numbers in it, painting it as though coal makes up 50% of the countries energy when its at 33% and falling. NG being another 33%.