Earth's Hottest Month

[rjpotts]

"Taxes, wages and regulations is why everything went to China."

We currently have huge (and very profitable) American corporations that pay little or no taxes. I think you can cross taxes off your list.

 

[buckeyefarmer]

Wow, still unlocked

 

[Doughknob]

Which brings up a good point. How many people think that just because what they think is happening around them, that means Global Warming is real?

Not me. I think global warming is real because of the melting polar ice caps and loss of permafrost regions.

Global warming is real. It is measurable and has been definitively shown to be happening. There is only one question: is it due to human activity or is it just a normal part of the planet's cyclical climactic variations?

 

[Doughknob]

...... We know scientists botched a lot of the recent virus pandemic.....

Yes, please explain

 

[MossRoad]

man oh man

gary had a special kind of reek to it. had to drive straight through prior to freeways

Remember everything was orange? Power lines. Power poles. Buildings. Houses. Playground equipment. Everything had an orange tint to it from the steel mills.

 

[Jstpssng]

Not me. I think global warming is real because of the melting polar ice caps and loss of permafrost regions.

Global warming is real. It is measurable and has been definitively shown to be happening. There is only one question: is it due to human activity or is it just a normal part of the planet's cyclical climactic variations?

I agree with all of the above... especially that in bold. HOWEVER...
I do know that my pickup, tractor, snowsled, chainsaw, et.al. emit toxic exhaust fumes. I also know that air and water pollution are real, and have watched the air quality in this state deteriorate over the last 40 years... all of those tall smokestacks from coal burners out west simply send their spew higher into the air to come down elsewhere. So what harm does it do to be aware of what I"m doing, shut the engine off when it doesn't need to be running, buy the most fuel efficent vehicle that will also do what I need it to do, and otherwise consider my impact?

OTOH we're hearing the same things from "environmentalists" which have been said for decades; and it's often obvious that they are merely advancing their agenda. If we are affecting the climate there are more subtle, less controversial things which could have been accomplished long ago; merely changing to a lighter colored roofing rather than black would have tremendous cooling impact on urban areas. One pet peeve of mine; you are on the main street of anytown and as the traffic light you are sitting at turns green you see the next one turn yellow. Every block requires you to stop at another traffic light. Think of all of the fuel and time which could be saved if the lights were synchronised, so that instead of stopping at every one you only had to stop at a few. Bracket racers say that the way to lose a pound is to shave an ounce 16 times...the same can be applied to reducing pollution.

 

[MossRoad]

...One pet peeve of mine; you are on the main street of anytown and as the traffic light you are sitting at turns green you see the next one turn yellow. Every block requires you to stop at another traffic light. Think of all of the fuel and time which could be saved if the lights were synchronised, so that instead of stopping at every one you only had to stop at a few. Bracket racers say that the way to lose a pound is to shave an ounce 16 times...the same can be applied to reducing pollution.

We just went through dealing with some of this in South Bend. When I was a kid, back in the 60's, the streets were 2-way, there was traffic stopped at all the lights, people walking around shopping at all the stores.

Eventually they made the streets one-way and timed all the lights. One effect of that is that it made it extremely un-pedestrian friendly, and, it made it hard to park as traffic was always moving so fast that you'd have a tough time parallel parking because people were riding up on your rear. Parking on the left side of the street posed a different hazard, as it's really hard to see traffic coming at you on your right side when trying to park or leave.

The last few years they've initiated the "smart street" program. They turned all the 3 lane one-way streets back into 2 lane two-way streets again. The lights are not timed so that you can zip through town anymore. It slows traffic down considerably. Sounds horrible at first, and can be quite frustrating to impatient people like myself.

However, now that traffic has to stop, and, it's easier to park on either side of the street, and, it's pedestrian friendly, the town is undergoing quite the revival. Small shops and tons of restaurants have opened since this happened. Apartments and town homes are all rented/leased. New construction is happening for the first time in 30 years in downtown.

What's trying to be promoted is that if you want to zip through town, go around it. If you want to live and work downtown, it's now possible. You won't mind the traffic jams because you can walk everywhere you need to walk.

So you have this back and forth between people wanting to zip through town as fast as possible VS people that want to live in town and don't want them zipping through at all.

It's an interesting dynamic. Personally, I like seeing downtown come back to life. It did add about 4 minutes to my 7 minute commute, so 11 minutes isn't bad in the big picture. But when you add up the numbers, about 40,000 cars go through town each day. If they used to spend an average of 10 minutes, and now it's 12 minutes, that's a 20% increase in car-hours. And, that's at lower speeds and idling, where cars are most inefficient. So I'd guess an increase of 20-25% in air pollution and fuel consumption from cars in the downtown area due to this much nicer downtown. No one has addressed those numbers here as of yet.

 

[dodge man]

See, this is where the facts are so easily skewed. This topic comes up all the time and I have personally seen it debunked here on TBN more than once. But I guess it's my turn now:

NO, SCIENTISTS DID NOT PREDICT AN COMING ICE AGE 40 YEARS AGO.

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

<p>1970s ice age predictions were predominantly media based. The majority of peer reviewed research at the time predicted warming due to increasing CO2.</p>

skepticalscience.com

That ’70s myth—did climate science really call for a “coming ice age?”

Claims that scientists flip-flopped on climate don’t reflect the science.

arstechnica.com

Climate myths: They predicted global cooling in the 1970s

See all climate myths in our special feature. Indeed they did. At least, a handful of scientific papers discussed the possibility of a new ice age at some point in the future, leading to some pretty sensational media coverage (see Histories: The ice age that never was ). One of the sources of...

www.newscientist.com

So, as you can see, it only takes 4 minutes of research and reading to learn that your talking point is completely fabricated. Not by you, but, you believed it. If you base your opinion off of this flawed starting point, your position is more understandable.

But this is why I implore everyone here, and everywhere, to just DO the actual research. I don't take beliefs from news headlines on any network, and neither should y'all.

IMO, we need to restructure and reduce our trade with China regardless of climate change.

I think one problem with the internet is you can cherry pick data and prove any point you want. I’m sure you know I could post links to show the opposite of what you linked.

My very strong opinion on this entire climate change is it’s not science, it’s opinions. Do I believe their opinions? Yes I do. How sure am I of them being correct. I’m 51% confident in the science, which means I have a lot of doubt.

 

[Jstpssng]

We just went through dealing with some of this in South Bend. When I was a kid, back in the 60's, the streets were 2-way, there was traffic stopped at all the lights, people walking around shopping at all the stores.

Eventually they made the streets one-way and timed all the lights. One effect of that is that it made it extremely un-pedestrian friendly, and, it made it hard to park as traffic was always moving so fast that you'd have a tough time parallel parking because people were riding up on your rear. Parking on the left side of the street posed a different hazard, as it's really hard to see traffic coming at you on your right side when trying to park or leave.

The last few years they've initiated the "smart street" program. They turned all the 3 lane one-way streets back into 2 lane two-way streets again. The lights are not timed so that you can zip through town anymore. It slows traffic down considerably. Sounds horrible at first, and can be quite frustrating to impatient people like myself.

However, now that traffic has to stop, and, it's easier to park on either side of the street, and, it's pedestrian friendly, the town is undergoing quite the revival. Small shops and tons of restaurants have opened since this happened. Apartments and town homes are all rented/leased. New construction is happening for the first time in 30 years in downtown.

What's trying to be promoted is that if you want to zip through town, go around it. If you want to live and work downtown, it's now possible. You won't mind the traffic jams because you can walk everywhere you need to walk.

So you have this back and forth between people wanting to zip through town as fast as possible VS people that want to live in town and don't want them zipping through at all.

It's an interesting dynamic. Personally, I like seeing downtown come back to life. It did add about 4 minutes to my 7 minute commute, so 11 minutes isn't bad in the big picture. But when you add up the numbers, about 40,000 cars go through town each day. If they used to spend an average of 10 minutes, and now it's 12 minutes, that's a 20% increase in car-hours. And, that's at lower speeds and idling, where cars are most inefficient. So I'd guess an increase of 20-25% in air pollution and fuel consumption from cars in the downtown area due to this much nicer downtown. No one has addressed those numbers here as of yet.

^^^^^
You just described why I don't shop in-town. Many Main Streets are the artery through the region or state, not just the town. If you want a quaint little shopping experience have it on the side streets. A four lane highway is no place to encourage pedestrian traffic...
especially since they don't understand what crosswalks are for.

Years ago I was travelling from my house to someplace in NY on what should have been a 10 hour drive. I got caught in construction, and going through Vermont is always a cluster. I hit Rutland about 3 hours behind schedule and somehow the traffic thinned out. I blistered down through town doing 45, hitting every light just as it turned yellow. I'm not saying that I was right' but that's what it took to somehow get moving. The rest of the trip was mostly rural and I made up for about an hour of what I had lost... pulling into where I had motel reservations just before they locked the doors for the night.

 

[plowhog]

folks like yourself come in with their minds made up

Couple of questions:

1. Might you be just as convinced (biased) in your arguments as others are in theirs?

2. Consider the very first sentence on NOAA's climate.gov website:

"For much of its history, our planet has been hotter—sometimes much hotter—than it is today."

Do you accept that the opening sentence at climate.gov is true?

What's the coldest the Earth's ever been?

Our planet’s history includes episodes of cold so extreme that glaciers reached sea level in equatorial regions.

www.climate.gov

Regarding science, a couple of questions:

1. Scientists claim Earth has had many previous ice ages followed by warming. Do you accept that science?

2. Earth's ability to warm itself from ice ages was not human affected, so something else caused the warming. Do you accept that science?

My point is-- anyone claiming to have definitive answers on exactly how our climate works is not disclosing just how much we do not know. Which is true whether the person is a laymen or a scientist.