Global Warming?

[CCCP1999]

I quit 6 years ago by vaping (which I'm still doing today). How 'bout an e-cigar? lol



As far as the temp thing, just wait it out. It'll change. The only constant is change.

For some fun, check out this clip from George Carlin on "Saving The Planet" (he's too crude for my taste, but he does drive some points home)



For something more serious, here's a quote from Freeman Dyson, respected Theoretical Physicist and Mathematician:

http://www.wired.com/2014/03/quanta-freeman-dyson-qa/
"What I’m convinced of is that we don’t understand climate, and so that’s sort of a neutral position. I’m not saying the majority is necessarily wrong. I’m saying that they don’t understand what they’re seeing. It will take a lot of very hard work before that question is settled, so I shall remain neutral until something very different happens."

Never tried any e smoking. Don't miss it unless i think about it.

I live, eat and sleep weather since astronomy and offshore fishing have been a big part of my life since i was a kid.

If you don't live in my part of FL then it will be hard for anyone to understand what i am talking about.

Sponsored

 

[16 GT MM/Auto]

Never tried any e smoking. Don't miss it unless i think about it.

I live, eat and sleep weather since astronomy and offshore fishing have been a big part of my life since i was a kid.

If you don't live in my part of FL then it will be hard for anyone to understand what i am talking about.

If it weren't for vaping, I'm pretty sure I'd still be smoking analogs.

Astronomy was a passion of mine when I was younger (telescopes, telescopic photography, etc.). Would dream about owning a 152 mm refractor.

I believe you about Florida, but remember that someone else on earth might be experiencing just the opposite. That's why I go to critical experts like Dyson.

 

[CCCP1999]

If it weren't for vaping, I'm pretty sure I'd still be smoking analogs.

Astronomy was a passion of mine when I was younger (telescopes, telescopic photography, etc.). Would dream about owning a 152 mm refractor.

I believe you about Florida, but remember that someone else on earth might be experiencing just the opposite. That's why I go to critical experts like Dyson.

I have owned around 220 scopes and selling some off as i type this.

 

[16 GT MM/Auto]

I have owned around 220 scopes and selling some off as i type this.

Wow, how in the heck did you accumulate 220 of them. Run a business?

 

[CCCP1999]

Wow, how in the heck did you accumulate 220 of them. Run a business?

Buying and selling since 1976.

 

[Rhumbline]

Climatology was, and still is, largely an "instant view" science. They can look back a short distance in time (relatively), they can look out the window and record what's happening now, and from that they form some type of expansive all-encompassing theory on what they think is going to happen.

They can look back through a wide range of measurements and means for hundreds, thousands, even millions of years.

That is radical wacko liberalism at it's best. Current day climatology has developed into a secular, DNC backed pseudo religion.

As opposed to anti-science wacko conservatism? Climatology is what it is, a science, regardless of what any political ideology may think of it.

Sorry, I do not worship the "god" of science. It is a tool, which like anything else can be manipulated by people of ill will to say what they want it to.

Given that there is no god of science, neither does anyone else. Maybe a few scientist could fool a few people for a while, but implying anything else is just conspiratorialism taken to the Nth degree.

Silly arrogant little humans, for thinking they can actually alter the earth in any significantly permanent way as a result of their own little selves.

Us little selves could make the planet essentially unlivable in a matter of hours through a full-scale nuclear war. Pumping four billion tons of CO2 each and every year into the atmosphere is a more slo-mo catastrophe.

Weather records come, and weather records go. The earth warms, and it cools, and it warms, and it cools, etc., etc., etc.

The sun rises and the sun sets -- nice truisms, however pumping aforementioned 4 gigatons of CO2 into the air every year can drastically affect how much and how fast the earth warms.

Looking at a ten year, hundred year, or even thousand year record means little as it relates to the cycles of our earth. We must refrain from looking at our world through these narrow slivers of time and think we actually know what is going on, when all we are doing is looking at infinitesimally small gaps in time.

Which, as mentioned, we look at much more than that in a myriad of cross-cutting ways to arrive at a robust theory of AGW.

 

[lemers]

Science doesn't proclaim to always be the "right" answer. Its just the best explanation of the facts as they understand them.

Politics tends to use only the facts that support their side of the argument.

Have you noticed that the excepted term from has changed from "global warming" to "climate change"

Why?

 

[jtmat]

Have you noticed that the excepted term from has changed from "global warming" to "climate change"

Why?

Surface temp = global warming.

changes that increase carbon dioxide = climate change.

Search google, maybe you will come up with similar stuff I did.

 

[jtmat]

Us little selves could make the planet essentially unlivable in a matter of hours through a full-scale nuclear war. Pumping four billion tons of CO2 each and every year into the atmosphere is a more slo-mo catastrophe.

We are going to bring back DDT... nothing can go wrong there. We can't possibly do any hard to the world...

 

[mnmike59]

George Carlin hit the nail on the head!

 

[lemers]

Surface temp = global warming.

changes that increase carbon dioxide = climate change.

Search google, maybe you will come up with similar stuff I did.

Google isn't a pier reviewed source.

 

[jtmat]

Google isn't a pier reviewed source.

That is a bunch of bull s... I went to Chicago and I found great reviews on google for Navy Pier.

Not sure what the hell a pier has to do with the question I answered for you. Please try to stay on topic.

 

[lemers]

That is a bunch of bull s... I went to Chicago and I found great reviews on google for Navy Pier.

Not sure what the hell a pier has to do with the question I answered for you. Please try to stay on topic.

Let me correct my typo with...

Peer review


But I hope you already knew that

 

[LMS007]

Funny how almost all scientists are aligned on the warming thing and how CO2 is the main contributor, but how many non-scientists disagree. Its like the evolution debate, just an epic face palm over and over again.

facts:

1. sun rays generate crap tons of heat when it hits ground (fun fact, just 1 second of all the solor energy that hits the ground, if collected, could power all our cites for a year!)
2. co2 traps heat by not allowing it escape to space (<-- thats the kicker)
3. weather now is hotter than ever recorded and getting hotter each year.
4. warm spells and cool spells that have trended over time have to do with earth axis tilt which is related to other plants like Jupiter's orbit affecting our rotation. These are not so much patterns but planetary eccentricities which occur over very long periods of time and would not have the immediate and acute effects that we are seeing now. For example, the last ice age over 10,000 years ago, but our ice caps have all but melted in just 30 years! If we were going through a warming phase then you would have to balance that equation with a physical phenomenon such as axis tilting or the sun ejecting more cosmic rays or some other substantial reason other than "ya ya, earth goes thu phases, blah blah" --- that is not science, that's just bullshit because you don't have an answers and don't like the one presented to you.

 

[Built4Speed]

Which, as mentioned, we look at much more than that in a myriad of cross-cutting ways to arrive at a robust theory of AGW.

Three peer-reviewed journal contain data contradicting the AGW hypothesis.

the_agw_smoking_gun

... a robust theory of AGW.

Appears more like epic failure.

Climate models versus actual observations :

Sponsored