3rd Coldest Winter in American History

[WHAMPOM]

Huh, what? You must be kidding. Where do you come up with this stuff?

Lets look at America. The total amount of land used for farming dropped from 1.2 billion acres in 1950 to .95 billion acres today (a 20% decrease) while total crop yields rose drastically. This reduction in farming land occurred EVEN though vast portions were turned over for non-food (ETHANOL) production! If you are really worried about food shortages why are global warming supporters ACTIVELY supporting measures that negatively impact food production?

In 1870, 70-80% of the American population was directly involved in farming, that number is now less than 2%. Remember, some of that 2% is involved in ETHANOL creation and not food creation at all.

I am aware of nothing that supports your assertions other than models created out of the vivid imaginations of one climate scientist or other. The objective evidence certainly suggests and possibly proves the exact opposite.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_the_United_States

http://www.livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe50s/life_11.html

If you ever take a road trip you may notice the many housing developments build on what used to be prime farm land and accounts for the decrease in crop land. And you may also notice the fence rows disappearing as cash crop farmers buy up smaller farms. And the huge cultivating, planting and harvesting equipment used by those few farmers to work the land.

 

[raildogg]

You think man can destroy the planet? What intoxicating vanity. Let me tell you about our planet. Earth is four-and-a-half-billion-years-old. There's been life on it for nearly that long, 3.8 billion years. Bacteria first; later the first multicellular life, then the first complex creatures in the sea, on the land. Then finally the great sweeping ages of animals, the amphibians, the dinosaurs, at last the mammals, each one enduring millions on millions of years, great dynasties of creatures rising, flourishing, dying away -- all this against a background of continuous and violent upheaval. Mountain ranges thrust up, eroded away, cometary impacts, volcano eruptions, oceans rising and falling, whole continents moving, an endless, constant, violent change, colliding, buckling to make mountains over millions of years. Earth has survived everything in its time. It will certainly survive us. If all the nuclear weapons in the world went off at once and all the plants, all the animals died and the earth was sizzling hot for a hundred thousand years, life would survive, somewhere: under the soil, frozen in Arctic ice. Sooner or later, when the planet was no longer inhospitable, life would spread again. The evolutionary process would begin again. It might take a few billion years for life to regain its present variety. Of course, it would be very different from what it is now, but the earth would survive our folly, only we would not. If the ozone layer gets thinner, ultraviolet radiation sears the earth, so what? Ultraviolet radiation is good for life. It's powerful energy. It promotes mutation, change. Many forms of life will thrive with more UV radiation. Many others will die out. Do you think this is the first time that's happened? Think about oxygen. Necessary for life now, but oxygen is actually a metabolic poison, a corrosive glass, like fluorine. When oxygen was first produced as a waste product by certain plant cells some three billion years ago, it created a crisis for all other life on earth. Those plants were polluting the environment, exhaling a lethal gas. Earth eventually had an atmosphere incompatible with life. Nevertheless, life on earth took care of itself. In the thinking of the human being a hundred years is a long time. A hundred years ago we didn't have cars, airplanes, computers or vaccines. It was a whole different world, but to the earth, a hundred years is nothing. A million years is nothing. This planet lives and breathes on a much vaster scale. We can't imagine its slow and powerful rhythms, and we haven't got the humility to try. We've been residents here for the blink of an eye. If we're gone tomorrow, the earth will not miss us.

Michael Cichton

Yes, you are right. What I was saying was that human beings are disrespecting the Earth by exploiting her to satisfy their greed, ambition and whatever other motive. I don't believe that fracking and extracting oil from deep within the Earth is all too healthy in any way. I don't believe that this science and technology is living harmoniously with the Earth. There is a clash right now between modern man and the Earth. The Western man especially is focused entirely on exploiting the Earth as much as possible for his gain. The Eastern man and other people all over the world are following his example.

But yes, it is very sad what humans are doing right now. The Earth may flourish again if and when humans aren't around to pollute it.

 

[monovillage]

Yes, you are right. What I was saying was that human beings are disrespecting the Earth by exploiting her to satisfy their greed, ambition and whatever other motive. I don't believe that fracking and extracting oil from deep within the Earth is all too healthy in any way. I don't believe that this science and technology is living harmoniously with the Earth. There is a clash right now between modern man and the Earth. The Western man especially is focused entirely on exploiting the Earth as much as possible for his gain. The Eastern man and other people all over the world are following his example.

But yes, it is very sad what humans are doing right now. The Earth may flourish again if and when humans aren't around to pollute it.

.............human beings are disrespecting the Earth by exploiting her to satisfy.........

wtf?

 

[raildogg]

wtf?

I thought it was clear. We humans have no respect at all for this planet. We say we do though. I don't need to list all the examples of what humans have done or are doing to make this statement. It should be apparent.

 

[Fayd]

Nice to see you now selectively quoting the EPA, while continuing to refuse to control for technological advancement, etc. What's the point of even discussing this with someone who is so far gone?

since technological advancement is tied with CO2 rise.. how do you expect to "control" for the impact of the tech advancement? how do you intend to separate the two effects?

guess what. just because someone releases a paper, doesn't make it right. a number of 'academic' journals pay only lip service to fact-checking and peer review.

 

[Darwin333]

Routinely hitting -20 or worse. Especially in the mornings when it has been negative real temps. They close the schools when it gets to -35 and that has happened 3 times since the 1st of Jan with a few near misses.

Holy mother of WTFBBQ, NEGATIVE 35 degrees is when they decide to close schools????? They close schools here at around the same positive temp (actually any snow/ice whatsoever triggers entire government/school shutdown... temp really has nothing to do with it).

Who the hell would live in a place where it gets down to friggen -35?!?!?

 

[waggy]

Holy mother of WTFBBQ, NEGATIVE 35 degrees is when they decide to close schools????? They close schools here at around the same positive temp (actually any snow/ice whatsoever triggers entire government/school shutdown... temp really has nothing to do with it).

Who the hell would live in a place where it gets down to friggen -35?!?!?

yeah my kids had to go to school at -35. they ride the bus. I had them sitting inside until it came up. No way in hell was i sending them outside in -35 weather.


after they left i got to thinking i should have just kept htem home. if the buss broke down it could have been deadly.

 

[werepossum]

since technological advancement is tied with CO2 rise.. how do you expect to "control" for the impact of the tech advancement? how do you intend to separate the two effects?

guess what. just because someone releases a paper, doesn't make it right. a number of 'academic' journals pay only lip service to fact-checking and peer review.

Classic example is measuring the expansion of the universe. We all knew that gravity was slowing the expansion, but the rate at which it slowed would determine if the universe would eventually reach stability, stop and begin contracting, or continue expanding forever at an ever-slowing rate. Every measurement, every experiment, concluded that the expansion rate was slowing. However, once we got proper instruments into space we realized that the universe's expansion is actually accelerating.

One would think that this information would have a radical effect on cosmology. After all, our understanding of our universe was fundamentally flawed. Not so; scientists merely made dark matter a bit weirder so that it acts as anti-gravity over large distances. The moral of the story is that most scientists, like most of any human groups, are sheeple. They do happen to be uncommonly smart sheeple on average - for instance, I've known some engineers who are dumb as soup, but I've yet to meet an unintelligent physicist or mathematician - but by and large they find what they expect to find absent some happy accident. Those happy accidents and a few very brilliant people are how science advances in leaps, whereas otherwise science advances slowly, by good old hard work.

 

[Sulaco]

If it kills the damn stinkbugs, it will have been worth it.

 

[Thebobo]

I thought it was clear. We humans have no respect at all for this planet. We say we do though. I don't need to list all the examples of what humans have done or are doing to make this statement. It should be apparent.

Mono don't take kindly to wacky eco hippy talk around here. He's busy looking up in the Rush Limbaugh Name Calling Guidebook on what to write back. Be patience.

 

[BUnit1701]

I thought it was clear. We humans have no respect at all for this planet. We say we do though. I don't need to list all the examples of what humans have done or are doing to make this statement. It should be apparent.

What should also be apparent but you seem to miss is the planet does not require respect. It is a ball of molten rock with a thin candy shell.

 

[Darwin333]

yeah my kids had to go to school at -35. they ride the bus. I had them sitting inside until it came up. No way in hell was i sending them outside in -35 weather.


after they left i got to thinking i should have just kept htem home. if the buss broke down it could have been deadly.

The day I walk outside and its negative ANYTHING is the day that I start thinking that I need to move. Good lord, how long can a person survive outside in -35 temps and how many layers of clothes does it require???

How the hell do you keep your feet warm? When I was working offshore I would wear 3 pairs of socks and my work boots and my feet still froze like hell and it wasn't even below freezing.

 

[Hacp]

Its safe to say today that this whole Climate Change thing is NOT settled science. What would make it settled? When these Climate "Scientists" would come up with a model that can accurately predict future temperatures.

So far, all the models that we've been presented with are based on fits with past data.OK that's fine. But to truly see if a model is worth a dam, you need to see how it predicts the future. So far, the models are extremely disappointing in their ability ti predict the future. Until we get this, climate change is "unsettled" science.

 

[raildogg]

What should also be apparent but you seem to miss is the planet does not require respect. It is a ball of molten rock with a thin candy shell.

Well, sir or mam, when humans don't have respect for themselves and each other, one cannot expect them to respect nature in any way shape or form. And they don't. They have been treating the Earth like its something to profit from.

I understand what you're saying. That Earth is a entity that's just there. But really, Earth is a living thing too. If it were dead then we surely would not be here. Everything else that we call "nature" would not be here either. So again, should we be kinder to her or frack, dredge and dig away? And remove all sorts of gems, and stones and other so-called "precious" items.

 

[BUnit1701]

Well, sir or mam, when humans don't have respect for themselves and each other, one cannot expect them to respect nature in any way shape or form. And they don't. They have been treating the Earth like its something to profit from.

I understand what you're saying. That Earth is a entity that's just there. But really, Earth is a living thing too. If it were dead then we surely would not be here. Everything else that we call "nature" would not be here either. So again, should we be kinder to her or frack, dredge and dig away? And remove all sorts of gems, and stones and other so-called "precious" items.

What your not getting is not one of these tiny activities that humans are participating in are reducing the planets ability to support life. There may be some temporarily poor conditions for current life forms, but life overall will go on long after we are gone.

 

[raildogg]

What your not getting is not one of these tiny activities that humans are participating in are reducing the planets ability to support life. There may be some temporarily poor conditions for current life forms, but life overall will go on long after we are gone.

Ok, but does that mean we should conduct ourselves like we're doing? Trashing everything we touch? It seems like this argument is more of a justification of our present way of living.

I don't consider drilling for oil and fracking to be tiny activities. I don't consider the extinction of species of animals that humans are responsible for to be minor events. The birds and large mammals that may soon become extinct is a shame, or should be a shame, for mankind. Yes, the Earth may go on but shouldn't we humans feel some shame in how we have lived upon it? Sorry to sound so dramatic.

 

[werepossum]

Well, sir or mam, when humans don't have respect for themselves and each other, one cannot expect them to respect nature in any way shape or form. And they don't. They have been treating the Earth like its something to profit from.

I understand what you're saying. That Earth is a entity that's just there. But really, Earth is a living thing too. If it were dead then we surely would not be here. Everything else that we call "nature" would not be here either. So again, should we be kinder to her or frack, dredge and dig away? And remove all sorts of gems, and stones and other so-called "precious" items.

Hopefully you can see the irony of decrying these things on a freakin' computer.

Hint: They can call them Apples but they can't grow them on trees.

 

[raildogg]

Hopefully you can see the irony of decrying these things on a freakin' computer.

Hint: They can call them Apples but they can't grow them on trees.

So what do you want me to do? Run away from this world? Live in a forest? I am a part of this world too even in the condition it is in. I have to work and eat and use the things, such as computers and cars. That doesn't mean that they are the right thing (or wrong thing). I am also part of the problem I'm sure but I don't want to run away into some sort of secluded area.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Those happy accidents and a few very brilliant people are how science advances in leaps, whereas otherwise science advances slowly, by good old hard work.

Nah.

Science advances one funeral at a time.

 

[bshole]

Well here they go again.....

Viewed by The Independent in draft form prior to its upcoming release, the report predicts that climate change will substantially lower crop yields, resulting in malnutrition and unrest worldwide.

As median crop yields fall by around 2 percent each decade, malnutrition among children will rise by about a fifth, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change study.

If nothing changes, the number of undernourished children under the age of five will increase by 20-25 million globally, or by 17-22 percent, by 2050.

I have to say.... BASED on WHAT???!!!!! Where is the gawd damn science!!!??? Jesus Christ, yield is going through the roof and has been for more than a century. We are diverting untold masses of food crops over to crappy fuel production. Those crops could be feeding people instead of being wasted on ethanol. And here they are again predicting DISASTER that never actually happens but is just around the corner... UNLESS we ACT now and destroy the economy.


http://www.autoworldnews.com/articl...predict-disastrous-climate-change-by-2050.htm

 

[fskimospy]

Well here they go again.....




I have to say.... BASED on WHAT???!!!!! Where is the gawd damn science!!!??? Jesus Christ, yield is going through the roof and has been for more than a century. We are diverting untold masses of food crops over to crappy fuel production. Those crops could be feeding people instead of being wasted on ethanol. And here they are again predicting DISASTER that never actually happens but is just around the corner... UNLESS we ACT now and destroy the economy.


http://www.autoworldnews.com/articl...predict-disastrous-climate-change-by-2050.htm

Uhmmm, the IPCC reports cite their sources so when it's released you will know. That's what real science is all about.

I simply cannot believe that the idiot who started this thread out with the argument of 'it's cold in the US so global warming isn't real' is still going.

 

[Genx87]

The day I walk outside and its negative ANYTHING is the day that I start thinking that I need to move. Good lord, how long can a person survive outside in -35 temps and how many layers of clothes does it require???

How the hell do you keep your feet warm? When I was working offshore I would wear 3 pairs of socks and my work boots and my feet still froze like hell and it wasn't even below freezing.

Dont go outside is how we survive. Hunker in your home unless you have to do things like grocery shop or work.

I am seriously debating moving south after this winter.

 

[Jaskalas]

Uhmmm, the IPCC reports cite their sources so when it's released you will know. That's what real science is all about.

I simply cannot believe that the idiot who started this thread out with the argument of 'it's cold in the US so global warming isn't real' is still going.

In his defense there is a constant drum beat of Climate Change stories to get people riled up. Perhaps this is not what they intended.

 

[bshole]

In his defense there is a constant drum beat of Climate Change stories to get people riled up. Perhaps this is not what they intended.

It is actually like clockwork. I have a google news as my home page. I would say, that I see headlines every other week on the dire consequences of global warming. I am thinking of using this thread to start posting the global warming stories. After you read enough of them, it becomes clear that this is not science, it is fundamentalist religion. Every single cult does the same thing, they predict disaster and cataclysm just around the corner. The nuts are running the asylum.

 

[fskimospy]

It is actually like clockwork. I have a google news as my home page. I would say, that I see headlines every other week on the dire consequences of global warming. I am thinking of using this thread to start posting the global warming stories. After you read enough of them, it becomes clear that this is not science, it is fundamentalist religion. Every single cult does the same thing, they predict disaster and cataclysm just around the corner. The nuts are running the asylum.

The total lack of self awareness or irony here is hilarious.

You really are just the liberal version of spidey or maybe boomerang.