2010 shaping up to be the warmest year on record

[drebo]

Given the dissonance of reality between the two camps of this political and religious argument, you might be surprised to learn that if you simply cast aside this dogmatic reason for cutting emissions, you’d find that you have many more people who support the end goal.

It is your reason that is unreasonable, and your means that are meaningless. Our destination is much more destined if you simply cast aside old hatreds and speak positively about the good clean renewable energy will bring.

A negative portrayal of the end of the world will, and obviously has, cause such a divide that you will only murder your own cause. Surrender now and join us in a clean future, or be stuck in the filthy mud of partisan politics. The choice is yours.

Abandon Global Warming. Abandon Cap and Trade. Reach for clean renewable energy.

This is a good point. While I do not believe MMCC or AGW actually exist, I am not against alternative energy sources. Nor am I against finding an economically viable alternative to gasoline or oil.

My complaint comes from the government using tax dollars to subsidize technologies that are not yet mature enough to be economically viable under the guise of "saving the planet". Our oil reserves will last another 100 years. Our oil shale reserves will last another 100 years after that. I'm sure that at some point in the next 200 years, we will have a break through that will allow us to harness fusion and battery technology will be significantly improved making electronic cars extremely viable.

Right now, though, an EV that takes 8 hours to charge and has a range of 40 miles simply isn't viable to 90% of US citizens and most of the ones it is viable for don't need cars (due to having very good public transit systems in their metro areas). Likewise, solar and wind power are simply not viable as a 100% solution.

We need to work on refining our current methods of energy production to be as efficient and as safe as possible while our scientists work on permanent solutions to our energy demands. Nuclear fission, while not the most efficient, is our safest and cleanest method of energy production currently. We should be exploiting it, not arguing about the fact that our uranium deposits will only last another 300 years.

 

[maluckey]

I saw this http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/...t-82-friday-the-13th-the-temperature-shelter/

and it's not the ONLY reported weather station that's like it........makes me say FOUL!!!!

In my line of work, garbage in = garbage out.

 

[bfdd]

I saw this http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/...t-82-friday-the-13th-the-temperature-shelter/

and it's not the ONLY reported weather station that's like it........makes me say FOUL!!!!

In my line of work, garbage in = garbage out.

head over to www.surfacestations.org and just check out the whole mess rofl. how anyone could believe anything spit out about temperatures after visiting that site is beyond me.

 

[Throckmorton]

Yet you still cling to a faith that has you ignoring the facts that CO2 is a trace gas in our atmosphere with a logarithmic curve reducing its effect, with historical evidence of CO2 lagging BEHIND temperature and thus not driving temperature change.

There's no evidence of a earth ending catastrophe even if we had 2,000 PPM.

The inherent flaw in your effort is by using a polarizing method of fear mongering. One has to wonder what your priorities really are as pursing this will not result in clean renewable energy.

You want results? Drive people down to the gulf and have them take a swim. That will have a profoundly greater effect than religious dogma. Particularly since the cool shift in the PDO is going to result in global cooling for the next few decades. The fear of global warming is DEAD until that shifts back into a warm cycle.

You're either not reading my posts or not understanding them. Which is it?

How many times do I have to say that the greenhouse effect of the "trace" CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is measurable, before you understand that?

Get it through your skull. Increasing CO2 from 280ppm to 400ppm is creates a measurable increase in heat retention, regardless of whether you *believe* or *want* it to be insignificant because it *sounds* like a small number to you.

And how many times do I have to explain that the reason CO2 has historically lagged behind temperature is that HUMANS WERE NOT BURNING FOSSIL FUELS UNTIL NOW? Did they not teach you about independent and dependent variables in the 4th grade?

I'm not advocating anything here, I'm trying to convince you that basic physical properties of greenhouse gases are unchangeable. Faith-based wishy washy arguments piss me off.

 

[William Gaatjes]

You're either not reading my posts or not understanding them. Which is it?

How many times do I have to say that the greenhouse effect of the "trace" CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is measurable, before you understand that?

Get it through your skull. Increasing CO2 from 280ppm to 400ppm is creates a measurable increase in heat retention, regardless of whether you *believe* or *want* it to be insignificant because it *sounds* like a small number to you.

And how many times do I have to explain that the reason CO2 has historically lagged behind temperature is that HUMANS WERE NOT BURNING FOSSIL FUELS UNTIL NOW? Did they not teach you about independent and dependent variables in the 4th grade?

I'm not advocating anything here, I'm trying to convince you that basic physical properties of greenhouse gases are unchangeable. Faith-based wishy washy arguments piss me off.

The problem as always is that people take sides.

One group only believes that CO2 is solely responsible for a possible global temperature shift while blindly and passionately ignoring the effects of other sources of global temperature variations that can have a far more bigger impact then CO2 can ever have.

The other group blindly refuses to accept that human pollution does have an impact and that a closed sustained circle is far better.

It is Babylon all over again. Separation, separation and separation. Because of occam's razor, born out of stupidity and greed. D:

The truth as always can be found in the middle.

 

[umbrella39]

Its been unseasonably cold and dark in Seattle since March or so. Its not a one day phenomenon. Relax, sport.

So? Local != Global That's the point. This isn't a thread about rising temps in the US where posts about the regional climate in Seattle might hold some water.

 

[Jaskalas]

You're either not reading my posts or not understanding them. Which is it?

As I already stated pages ago, CO2 could rise to 2,000 ppm and I wouldn't care. The effects of its warming are largely in the first 20-50 ppm in the atmosphere.

The logarithmic curve of diminishing returns only reinforces the ice core charts that prove temperature drives the release of CO2 into the atmosphere. While CO2 has greenhouse properties, and we are emitting a lot of it, the effect is negligible!

The current warmth could mean anything. From the continuation of a 20,000 year warming trend, to solar activity, to variations in water vapor. The temperature of this planet was not driven by CO2 in the past, and it will not be driven by in the future.

This "problem" will solve itself before anything significant occurs.

 

[Deeko]

So? Local != Global That's the point. This isn't a thread about rising temps in the US where posts about the regional climate in Seattle might hold some water.

I was responding to someone that got pissy over someone else posting that one day doesn't matter. I say to you as well - relax, sport.

 

[NoWhereM]

I saw this http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/...t-82-friday-the-13th-the-temperature-shelter/

and it's not the ONLY reported weather station that's like it........makes me say FOUL!!!!

In my line of work, garbage in = garbage out.

I followed your link. I even followed a link from your link to another link, I think.

Anyway, one of the comments posted regarding these temperature measuring stations is right on point.

Certainly looks like a case of man made global warming to me.

 

[BudAshes]

The entire midwest is going to run out of water as we completely deplete underground reservoirs. The Nuclear powerplants aren't going to have water to cool themselves. They make massive amounts of heat and need massive amounts of water to cool them.

 

[NeoV]

"The current warmth could mean anything. From the continuation of a 20,000 year warming trend, to solar activity, to variations in water vapor. The temperature of this planet was not driven by CO2 in the past, and it will not be driven by in the future."

/facepalm

CO2, in the past, was all 'naturally' produced

CO2 levels, post ice-ages, are very different trends to consider vs. the current situation

I think it's time to put down the GOP 'GW isn't true' talking points

 

[monovillage]

The entire midwest is going to run out of water as we completely deplete underground reservoirs. The Nuclear powerplants aren't going to have water to cool themselves. They make massive amounts of heat and need massive amounts of water to cool them.

They can recycle the water by using holding tanks/ponds and then reuse it to cool. It's just not that much water.

 

[NoWhereM]

I think it's time to put down the GOP 'GW isn't true' talking points

No, it's time to accept that the vast majority of people have been taught the basic principles of the scientific method. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

You know, basic principles like these:

Among other facets shared by the various fields of inquiry is the conviction that the process must be objective to reduce biased interpretations of the results. Another basic expectation is to document, archive and share all data and methodology so they are available for careful scrutiny by other scientists, thereby allowing other researchers the opportunity to verify results by attempting to reproduce them. This practice, called full disclosure, also allows statistical measures of the reliability of these data to be established.

I could go on and on but everyone who is interested in this topic already knows what climategate is just as they know exactly what a fraud the hockey stick chart is.

You can keep trying to promote a debunked theory and be part of the problem or you use rational arguments to promote green technology and green energy and work to debunk the green technology and green engergy scams that are becoming so prevasive and which actually hurt our enviornment and our economy.

 

[sandorski]

No, it's time to accept that the vast majority of people have been taught the basic principles of the scientific method. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

You know, basic principles like these:



I could go on and on but everyone who is interested in this topic already knows what climategate is just as they know exactly what a fraud the hockey stick chart is.

You can keep trying to promote a debunked theory and be part of the problem or you use rational arguments to promote green technology and green energy and work to debunk the green technology and green engergy scams that are becoming so prevasive and which actually hurt our enviornment and our economy.

fail

 

[Brigandier]

fail

Fail, how?

 

[drebo]

Fail, how?

Don't be upset, it's the only word sandorski knows how to post. Forget trying to get him to JUSTIFY his opposition--if you don't agree with him, you're automatically FAIL.

Maybe if you ignore him, he'll go away...like a herpes sore, or something.

 

[Tristicus]

The temps are high, global warming.
The temps are low, global warming.
A polar bear dies, global warming.
A glacier drips, global warming.
A new glacier forms, global warming.
Etc, etc.

 

[drebo]

The temps are high, global warming.
The temps are low, global warming.
A polar bear dies, global warming.
A glacier drips, global warming.
A new glacier forms, global warming.
Etc, etc.

I've always said that AGW proponents are in a win-win-win position...

They get to claim that they were right regardless of the outcome: if temps never change, they can parrott how well their methods for combatting GW worked and ask for money to keep it going; if temps go up (regardless of the cause), the get to ask for more money to try harder; and, if temps go down, they get to say "ohhh...warming? we meant CHANGE, yeah, that's the ticket...we meant AGC not AGW...give us money".

Buncha jokers.

 

[Jaskalas]

CO2, in the past, was all 'naturally' produced

CO2 levels, post ice-ages, are very different trends to consider vs. the current situation

The current situation is nothing. CO2 will rise, temperature will barely rise. The PDO shifting to its cool cycle will have more impact than CO2 ever will.

 

[woolfe9999]

wolf that would work if he was imaging something fake. the problem is there really is a huge giant fucking ball of fire that has a significant impact on the Earths climate. so your link in order to "pwn" him kind of self pwns you

Sorry I missed this one a couple days ago. Yes, I think Drebo's remark was basically an argument from personal incredulity, if not a very close analog to it. It's a fallacy either way.

Arguments from incredulity usually incorporate, or are based entirely, on real facts. But the facts are either not relevant or are not used in any meaningful way. They are used only in a superficial way to create the outer appearance of implausibility.

A creationist may say, "I simply cannot believe in evolution. It requires trillions and trillions of mutations of certain exact types to just randomly produce human beings." The creationist might be accurately stating the facts, after a fashion. But the argument is completely unscientific. He's just saying it doesn't seem right to him, intuitively. Drebo is saying, how can we influence climate when there is this giant fireball. Totally meaningless statement of personal incredulity, in spite of the fact that the sun does exist. There isn't an ounce of science in his statement. Nothing empirical, or even theoretical, which cuts one way or another. He's just saying, I don't believe in MMCC because it just seems like too wild a theory for me. In context of a logical discussion, it's an empty statement of zero value.

- wolf

 

[dainthomas]

The current situation is nothing. CO2 will rise, temperature will barely rise. The PDO shifting to its cool cycle will have more impact than CO2 ever will.

Or the axial wobble. Or the orbital variation. Or a combination of the two.

 

[Throckmorton]

Or the axial wobble. Or the orbital variation. Or a combination of the two.

Those things control the Milankovich cycle. The current warming is a clear departure from that natural cycle. We're supposed to be in a gradual cooling phase of Milankovitch. If global warming were a lot less severe it might have actually helped us by preventing an ice age.

 

[NoWhereM]

While I don't post that often I really do love this forum.

 

[sandorski]

Fail, how?

Wrong question.

 

[Throckmorton]

While I don't post that often I really do love this forum.

Why am I in your sig?