Global Warming?

[tcreeley]

I'd settle for some planning to deal with GW on a state and local level- to deal with the local impacts. Forget the fossil fuel stuff. Too much ballast to switch quickly anyway. Offering people alternatives is always good money. People will switch on their own without being forced.
It gets old pretending nothing is happening. One large cranberry grower said he didn't think in 20 years he'd be in business unless he found a variety of cranberry that could tolerate the increased heat. He said he was looking at shifting his cranberry operation to Nova Scotia, from Plymouth, Mass. . He said cranberry growers were even talking about setting up operations in Chile.
This is just a little example of planning for GW and dealing with it. It is real life- not talk on a thread.

 

[IslandTractor]

Not really. It was wealth produced by capitalism that allowed us to improve our lives. The Soviet Union, China, Cuba.....the list is long, all are heavily regulated yet, are bastions of poverty, pollution and poor living conditions.

The FDA and EPA are corrupt as any mafia organization.

CO2 is not a pollutant even if 5 lawyers in black suits call it such.

One of the great things about arguing with you guys is that you destroy your own credibility so quickly and effectively.

Look at the top twenty countries in the world for life expectancy or any other health parameter of your choosing and compare the ranking of "socialist" countries to our own. I forget exactly where we rank these days but it ain't in the top ten and virtually all the counties in the top twenty are considered socialist by dittoheads. If I recall correctly, Cuba has the same life expectancy as the USA while spending a tiny fraction of what we do on healthcare.

I don't have a lot of experience with EPA but know a fair amount about the FDA and to call them corrupt is ludicrous. Nothing comes out of the FDA without many layers of review and congressional oversight. Most churches are more corrupt.

 

[skspurling]

That may be your world- I know many people that would not fudge a number- even if it meant their job. I think you'd be surprised at how many people would not be dishonest.

Just one example of this type of behavior by scientists...
Calls for crime lab to shut down amid more evidence doubts | Minnesota Public Radio News

Not the topic at hand, but if I posted anything about climategate or the issues with the credibility of the IIPC you would just scream obscenities and question my sanity. It's the same excuse you use when questioning the scientists that don't accept AGW. You point at funding sources and say they aren't neutral. Most government research is being funded in a very odd way in this case. Usually money is given based on the grant proposal, and the value the grant committee give to the thing being investigated. In this case, the regulators are looking to fund things that will help them support more regulations, the researchers want more money to cover their labs.

In the above case, you would think the primary purpose of the justice system would be justice... right? Well, it's been perverted because the police are more eager to close cases than to get the right person. The lab knows the people footing the bill are looking for something specific, so they make themselves look good by fudging the results. Innocent people have spent years in prison because they said something was conclusive when it was not. It happens. Social pressures are there in the scientific community, if you aren't toeing the line with these guys they will marginalize you and possibly ruin your career. Dr. Mann has said as much.

 

[skspurling]

... If I recall correctly, Cuba has the same life expectancy as the USA while spending a tiny fraction of what we do on healthcare. ....

That's because Che killed off all the weak ones.

 

[mostly_gas]

Working in a lab teaches you to think through experimental design, methods, and analysis as well as how to use the literature. You clearly don't have such skills. I don't know what field you were in but i bet there are analogous experiences and credentials that you looked for in colleagues or employees. A basis in scientific method is not learned off political blogs where most of you find your reading material. Moan and groan all you want about evil elitists and scientists at the trough but I would still prefer to hear and read their thoughts on the matter over a group of guys who last studied science in high school and probably weren't paying attention then. I would feel the same way about amateur self taught weldors versus schooled and certified weldors. There is a difference.

Yes there is, and the difference depends on the person more than the training. Can't tell you how many people I have seen with good credentials and have no clue. Had instructors with PhD that could not teach, engineers (ME or EE) could not tune or repair a car, you get my drift.
I recall a study by East Angelica UK that included temp. data from tree rings. How did you verify the accuracy of that data. What are the pitfalls of using data of differing accuracies together?

 

[Rainbody]

That's because Che killed off all the weak ones.

You just don't count the slaves, I mean peasants.

 

[mistermcgoo]

One of the great things about arguing with you guys is that you destroy your own credibility so quickly and effectively.

Look at the top twenty countries in the world for life expectancy or any other health parameter of your choosing and compare the ranking of "socialist" countries to our own. I forget exactly where we rank these days but it ain't in the top ten and virtually all the counties in the top twenty are considered socialist by dittoheads. If I recall correctly, Cuba has the same life expectancy as the USA while spending a tiny fraction of what we do on healthcare.

I don't have a lot of experience with EPA but know a fair amount about the FDA and to call them corrupt is ludicrous. Nothing comes out of the FDA without many layers of review and congressional oversight. Most churches are more corrupt.

Once you linked to Skeptical Science, your credibility was already destroyed. See how easy it is using your debate etiquette? I said it, therefore it must be true. To strengthen my case I should start the name calling, and maybe declare you unqualified to comment. Please dispense with the personal attacks as nobody knows anybody from Adam; you could say you are a former Navy SEAL and nobody can prove you wrong. Likewise, I could say my field of work is 30 years in Aerospace; prove me wrong. If you want to have a discussion, fine, but dispense with the superiority complex. Personally I find farmers are more knowledgeable of climate than myriads of climate modelers in their cubical.

I digress.

Considering many countries do not count deaths of infants at birth or several days after, attempts at comparing to U.S. infant mortality rates is at best misleading. Look it up. And no, Cuba is not listed as having a higher life expectancy than the U.S., but why would anyone believe what Cuba says?

The FDA has a long history of corruption including but not limited to being a revolving door for pharmaceutical to FDA and vice versa. This is not difficult to verify with Google. I generally don't engage in link wars, so will give but one example, an official letter to POTUS by FDA employees and physicians dated 2009 as highlighted in this article:
FDA Corruption Charges Letter Verified

Isn't the thread supposed to be about global warming?

 

[RobertBrown]

1) There hasn't been one landfall hurricane in the U.S. in over 7 years; a "record".

Incorrect!
The truth is: there hasn't been a cat 3 or stronger hurricane make land fall in the US in 7 years. I suspect you altered this statement to help prove your point and I would like to use this as an example of what is wrong with this thread currently. Misinformation and the use of insults to try and mitigate perceived embarrassment, resulting in a wizzing contest (http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/related-topics/91234-global-warming-133.html#post3059204)

There have been many unprecedented weather events in recent years but it has already been established here that these are not necessarily relevant to either argument. It's the average temperature rise, and climate that is unpredictable, causing crop failures and subsequent food shortages. This is cause for concern.

When people start starving they get desperate, they exercise poor judgment and that is much more disconcerting then an average temperature rise of 1.5 degrees over 10 years. People fighting over food and water are much more likely to affect us and our economy than any specific weather event.
This is what makes climate change worthy of several thousand posts and hundreds of insults . The climate discussion is something we should appreciate and participate in regardless of who we vote for.
No one knows what the future holds, doesn't matter who's journals you read or what pundit you listen too. Furthermore, if you can't trust anyone who is human to tell the truth ( catdriver http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/related-topics/91234-global-warming-149.html#post3078753) all you have to go on is your short and long term memory. Apparently some of us remember the cold days and some of us remember the hot days.

I am of the opinion that the climate is changing and it's getting warmer, although slowly, I see it as problem. I am also of the opinion that there are plenty of us who are keen enough to make some dollars promoting, or using climate change and mans potential role in same to promote profits. It's the "American way" and I have no problem with that, let's just not get confused and label free enterprise the "liberal agenda".

I have decided that warming is a reality because of what I have seen and what I have read or otherwise been exposed to. Those who are trained and educated in the meteorological fields seem to agree that this is happening. I am not convinced of man's role in the process as of yet. I find it difficult to believe that all of these scientists and engineers have conspired and are lying and covering it up in an effort to achieve some kind of common goal, monetary or otherwise. It seems paranoid to me however, I choose not insult those that do believe in this perceived deception.

Using my own meager powers of deduction, I know that it feels much hotter on a parking lot than it is in the forest given the same proximity, time of day and relevant ambient temperature. Therefore I assume that there is more heat generated from radiant energy, or radiant energy converted to convective energy, however you want to express it, the sun makes things hot. The radiant heat from the sun can measure 1 Kw per square meter per hour when directly overhead.

The average power intercepted at any time by the earth's surface is around 127.4 X 106 X 106 X 200 = 25.4 X 1015 Watts or 25,400 TeraWatts.

Having said that, it's not a surprise to me that the planet is getting warmer, not considering green house gases, but as evidenced by the radiant heat that is not absorbed by the diminishing number of plants and the increasing numbers of pavement and roof tops, globally. So it would not surprise me to see the rate of rise in average temperatures increase in the near future.

I check this thread several times a day. I do this for several reasons but I would like to think it's because I will learn something about the climate. I'm convinced that I do learn something every time I check but more often than not, it's a lesson on how not to treat someone who is voicing his opinion. Or why you should let things go when someone is trying to get your goat. Or, how one should keep their expectations low when trying to show someone why you think the way you do, as it's entirely unlikely they will not admit that you're correct and you changed their viewpoint..... even if you did.

 

[Gator6x4]

Not really. It was wealth produced by capitalism that allowed us to improve our lives. The Soviet Union, China, Cuba.....the list is long, all are heavily regulated yet, are bastions of poverty, pollution and poor living conditions.

The FDA and EPA are corrupt as any mafia organization.

CO2 is not a pollutant even if 5 lawyers in black suits call it such.

I think you had better get out more. Caves start to smell musty after a while. The backward countries you name have for years had features and advantages the US is only now attempting to emulate. High speed rail, 4g phone service for a reasonable price, longer life expectancy, better medical (Regardless of what some politician says) and the list is long.

Know where the fininacial captial of the world is? China, try out Hong Kong they even have one of those good ole American Captialist staples, DISNEYLAND.

And if you want to see bastions of poverty, pollution and poor living conditions, visit the backwoods of Louisiana and Mississippi.

CO2 is not a pollutant even if 5 lawyers in black suits call it such.

I for one will accept what scientific studies have revealed over that of an opinion rendered from a soapbox by someone lacking scientific credentials or accreditation.

 

[tungularafishcamp]

One simple contribution we can easily make weither we believe in AGW or not is the next time we reroof our houses, go for a lighter color. Think all those thousands of acres of black roofs are helping things? Promote global cooling! make white the new black:laughing: