Global Warming?

[Short Game]

That is how medical researcher work. How about scientists work on the origins of the earth, or the universe? Do they have "controlled conditions" to test their theories?

The thing is, we have this single planet, and a fairly unique one at that in this local neighborhood. We don't get to use Mars or Venus as controls. In many ways they are a poor match for earth. The best scientific approach would, under such circumstances, be to follow the "precautionary principle." As Rob has stated, things would indicate that on too many fronts, we have forgone the precautionary principle and plunged forward, and too many of us still forgo it when there is a buck to be made by pretending that no serious risks exist.

 

[Redneck in training]

We as human beings we are in evolutionary crunch. We are smart enough to bring all the technology and progress but not smart enough to solve our problems. We don't destroy the planet. The planet destroys us.

 

[Egon]

[quote they just report what they can find, usually from relatively reliable sources NOT the "National Enquirer" sort of pubs.
][/quote]

Nothing wrong with The National Enquirer. Rolled up it makes a terrific fly swatter! :thumbsup:

"Real data"? You don't even know what a control condition is!

Uh-oh, we have a multitude of large underwater vessels roaming under the seven seas with no contact with civilization. Can we call them home??

Wild live animals were the Mobile Refrigeration system of the past!:thumbsup:

 

[patrick_g]

OK Pat, there is several questions you have ignored.
1) If the earth is in as dire dire outlook as you imply why is the NO DATA to back it up. 30 years is a long time to research and have little to show for it.
2) If Man's impact is say 1/3 of total warming or less, and China and India don't change their ways what impact can the US have?
3) How many factors are there that affect the temp of the earth. How many of those can we control? Where are the articles on DOE (design of experiments) finding which of those factors are significant?
4) If we really are at the highest CO2 levels ever as Short Game claims, why isn't the global temp. at the highest ever?
There is a lot of conflicting opinions by qualified scientists out the public domain. Kinda reminds me of medical research where the first blush reaction is different than when the data is fully analyzed.

Rob, Note:

1. I must not have read the part of my post where I said the earth has a dire outlook. Could you point that out to me?

2. Artificial scenario. I don't dispute your arithmetic, just the oversimplification of the situation and possible outcomes. What is your point? If you cant force the entire planet to do your will then don't try to make anything better? Is the glass 1/2 empty?

3. Why ask me, I'm not in charge.

4. Yup, we agree here. There are a lot of conflicting opinions.

I doubt that either of us is capable of causing meaningful change in the others point of view. I will from time to time post things at least on the periphery if not in the mainstream of the thread topic. I am not typically the author of the piece just the errand boy who takes it from one place and puts it somewhere else where there is a high probability of interest.

Taking exception with me regarding the snippets I post is inappropriate. If you have a complaint or problem with these snippets I suggest you complain to the staff at ScienceDaily. I will stipulate that I believe you are in opposition to much of what they provide and no further evidence from you is needed in that regard.

If you doubt my comment about the probability of your changing my mind then please be advised, I promise I will not become vegetarian irrespective of anything you could post unless it includes ridiculously high monetary rewards and a limited time of applicability.

I find our exchange tedious and repetitive and not reflecting credit on either of us. Lets just agree to disagree and give the others a break. If it would help, you claim victory and I'll not contest it.

Pat

 

[Short Game]

Climate Change Has Nothing to Do With Al Gore (Part 1): Paul Douglas - Bloomberg

Make up your own mind.

From TED.com

Hans Rosling is a master with data and visualization. Go to TED.com and search for more of his talks.

Hans Rosling's new insights on poverty | Video on TED.com

I do hope that many of us took the time to appreciate these links.

 

[Short Game]

We don't destroy the planet. The planet destroys us.

Whuddaya mean? Whuddaya mean? It din't lay a glove on me. Why, I'll moider it. Bring it on, bring it on!

 

[Rob-D]

Climate Change Has Nothing to Do With Al Gore (Part 1): Paul Douglas - Bloomberg

"How did so much of the Republican Party enter perpetual denial? We致e turned climate science into a bizarre litmus test for conservatism. To pretend that heat-trapping gases can be waved away with a nod and a smirk is political fairytale. No harm. No foul. Keep drilling."

I'll tell you exactly how this got to be. We now live in a corporate oligarchy, corporations control this country. This is why Monsanto can sue Vermont.

When researchers found out that Colony Collapse Disorder (vanishing bees) was the result of pesticides Monsanto bought the research company.

Prison Planet.com Blamed for Bee Collapse, Monsanto Buys Leading Bee Research Firm

"Monsanto, the massive biotechnology company being blamed for contributing to the dwindling bee population, has bought up one of the leading bee collapse research organizations. Recently banned from Poland with one of the primary reasons being that the company痴 genetically modified corn may be devastating the dying bee population, it is evident that Monsanto is under serious fire for their role in the downfall of the vital insects. It is therefore quite apparent why Monsanto bought one of the largest bee research firms on the planet."

Massey Energy in WV had 85,000 environmental violations. Where was the EPA? The EPA is filled with people like Linda Fisher, ex. Dupont Corporation executive. You can't have these conflicts of interest in a watch dog group and expect to have them making sure coal plants have scrubbers. You can't have these conflicts and corporations like Massey,the people famous for blowing off the tops of mountains, follow regulations. Don Blankenship ex. CEO of Massey walked away with 190 million bucks after being CEO for 18 years. The people of WV were left with leaking coal slurries, poverty and cancer.

Welcome to a corporate oligarchy, we gave corporations the rights of individuals and this is what we got for it. Pretty soon all the lobby money (read bribe) flowing into DC won't have to flow, they already own the government.

Rob

 

[Short Game]

Someone started another "warming" thread in the blind alley known as, "Friendly Politics." I posted this there:


So few seem to understand what more heat in the atmosphere means. The spot checking presented as proof that warming isn't happening, as the averages go up, is actually more proof of the collected thermal energy than a refutation of heating.

More heat into the atmosphere means more evaporation of surface waters. The warmer the atmosphere, the greater amount of water it can hold. When there is more water in the atmosphere, there is more potential energy that will be shown up as motion. The atmosphere cools, locally, via the motion of the centripetal vortex, a.k.a., cyclonic motions. These motions are what we call, "weather." More snow, rain, cyclonic wind, is the fallout of the greater amounts of evaporation in a generally warmer, more saturated, air mass. It is the payoff for the retention of heat.

These forces cause extreme cellular cooling and unpredictable and extreme variations of the jet stream (speed and path), causing increased local cloud coverings, precipitation, and in many cases, locally colder temperatures. Watch the averages and understand that the high and low extremes are what the atmospheric capture of solar energy predict. Every vortex that cools the air is an engine, a motor, if you will. We have hot-rodded our atmosphere, and it's hitting on all cylinders.

We can enjoy a mild winter or spring, but we certainly can't count of having many of them. I'd say, "batten down the hatches." We're in for large helpings of the unexpected.

 

[hosspuller]

Climate change happens. The Sun drives everything. Can we affect the Sun ? CO2 forcing is just a theory used to scare people. We can only adapt to the climate. It is ultimate arrogance to assume we know what is the best climate and think we can maintain it. A warming trend will be helpful to agriculture. Greenland used to be Green. When the "normal temperatures" we experience came ... the people lost Greenland

Don't let the "agenda" of Al Gore et al lead you into something that benefits them more than you.

 

[Rob-D]

Rob, Note:

If you doubt my comment about the probability of your changing my mind then please be advised, I promise I will not become vegetarian irrespective of anything you could post unless it includes ridiculously high monetary rewards and a limited time of applicability.



Pat

I'm not asking you to be anything, show me where I said that? As I've said before, walk down the street with a needle sticking out of your arm if you want to, that's your business.

BUT a vegetarian diet is a healthier diet for both people and the planet, that is what I said and that is what science shows. Does the meat lobby want you to know that? I don't think so. They want you to blindly repeat a mantra without ever looking into or considering scientific facts.

Here's the irony:

Pat:
" Exercise care. You will be entering a science zone where your favorite dogma may be run down by their karma."

Apparently science doesn't apply to Pat.

Rob