Whether it is happening or not is almost not worth arguing - it STILL makes the most sense to NOT pee in your own wheaties or poison your own nest.
So to that end we should be looking to pollute as little as possible and to find the absolute cleanest fuels.
Do you need a study to tell you to get better at something?
Edited to fix bad grammar
What you say is logical and sensible. Polluting as little as possible and finding the cleanest fuels or energy sources do not require massive redistribution of wealth or international governance with global socialism.
Whether it is happening or not is almost not worth arguing - it STILL makes the most sense to NOT pee in your own wheaties or poison your own nest.
I think everyone gives a hoot, and doesn't want to pollute ... But ...
CO2 does no harm, at least not that I have seen proven. They increase it in greenhouse to help plants grow. You can swallow it ... breathe it ... no problem. But because it has gone from 300 to 380 parts per million somehow the world is going to end unless we take $6 trillion from these CO2 emitters and give it to eco friendly ... what? companies, organizations ... who is getting all that money the government now would get to control? And for what?
Another thing ... we have the cleanest air among major producers, as I understand. Certainly better than China. So our costs to produce go way up, then we buy more from China who can produce power cheap because their coal plants belch out all kinds of pollution. So we kill off our clean industry, and send it to China where there will now be even more real pollution.
This is not about peeing ... this is about breathing ... and it is choking US.
I think everyone gives a hoot, and doesn't want to pollute ... But ...
CO2 does no harm, at least not that I have seen proven. They increase it in greenhouse to help plants grow. You can swallow it ... breathe it ... no problem. But because it has gone from 300 to 380 parts per million somehow the world is going to end unless we take $6 trillion from these CO2 emitters and give it to eco friendly ... what? companies, organizations ... who is getting all that money the government now would get to control? And for what?
Another thing ... we have the cleanest air among major producers, as I understand. Certainly better than China. So our costs to produce go way up, then we buy more from China who can produce power cheap because their coal plants belch out all kinds of pollution. So we kill off our clean industry, and send it to China where there will now be even more real pollution.
This is not about peeing ... this is about breathing ... and it is choking US.
So, does that make you an atheist or agnostic in this new "religion?"
So, does that make you an atheist or agnostic in this new "religion?"
I'm not sure which religion you mean ... I am a believer in being clean and maintaining "nature" and I have about 40 acres of native woodlands to prove it. About 6AM I walked out and saw deer and turkeys, and I twice missed a cute little bunny rabbit eating my lettuce. I need my own way corps out here to clean up invasive species ... I have a lot of nice 100 year oaks ... and they have children coming up around them. I even got the cattle out of the creek.
But the so called green political machine and the AGW church of Al Gore ... no ... Al is a false prophet ... he is what vpw was to Christianity ... Gore and big government would love to extract $6 trillion from the economy to distribute to their friends. Of course McCain and Obama both voted in favor of the insanity.
I'm not sure which religion you mean ... I am a believer in being clean and maintaining "nature" and I have about 40 acres of native woodlands to prove it. About 6AM I walked out and saw deer and turkeys, and I twice missed a cute little bunny rabbit eating my lettuce. I need my own way corps out here to clean up invasive species ... I have a lot of nice 100 year oaks ... and they have children coming up around them. I even got the cattle out of the creek.
But the so called green political machine and the AGW church of Al Gore ... no ... Al is a false prophet ... he is what vpw was to Christianity ... Gore and big government would love to extract $6 trillion from the economy to distribute to their friends. Of course McCain and Obama both voted in favor of the insanity.
Okay... you started to reply. You apparently saw two possible "religions" and seemingly answered the actual question with regard to one of them... then regarding the other possibility (of religion) you again made it about Gore.
I appreciate that you recognized some ambiguity in the question, but would have preferred that you actually answer the question for both possibilities... SOOOOOOOOOO, what does that make YOU? An agnostic or an atheist? Just wondering. :)
Okay... you started to reply. You apparently saw two possible "religions" and seemingly answered the actual question with regard to one of them... then regarding the other possibility (of religion) you again made it about Gore.
I appreciate that you recognized some ambiguity in the question, but would have preferred that you actually answer the question for both possibilities... SOOOOOOOOOO, what does that make YOU? An agnostic or an atheist? Just wondering. :)
I guess you are being too vague or clever for me Rocky ... I think I was quite clear. What does what make me?
Atheist ... believes there is no god
Agnostic ... one who thinks one can't know if there is a god ...
Could you be more specific why you think this relates to global warming on Jupiter ... or on Earth?
Or maybe doojable will just answer or me ... nobody told me there would be a test ...
, the University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) published their satellite derived Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit data set of the Lower Troposphere for May 2008.
It is significantly colder globally, colder even than the significant drop to -0.046°C seen in January 2008.
The global ∆T from April to May 2008 was -.195°C
brrr ... it really has been a cool spring .. as David noted ... I feel a cold wind blowing ....
Rhino I am not going to address that from a global climate change perspective - too politically charged on this site.
However after having been involved in remote sensing earth science for 30 years - I'll toss you a hint - a) I was CO-PI on both AMSU/A and AMSU/B (which you correctly refer to as Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit altho you miss that there are two components). I will only state this - that graph is incredibly misleading as it does not mention a) sounders are 3-d cross sectional instruments b) a linear graph omits two of those dimensions - a graph over time (as posted) with no cross section in both geography and geostrophic heights is useless for long term analysis.
If you want more info on AMSU/A/B feel free to PM me - I'm just not gonna get into the whole discussion over all on GSC.
Rhino I am not going to address that from a global climate change perspective - too politically charged on this site.
However after having been involved in remote sensing earth science for 30 years - I'll toss you a hint - a) I was CO-PI on both AMSU/A and AMSU/B (which you correctly refer to as Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit altho you miss that there are two components). I will only state this - that graph is incredibly misleading as it does not mention a) sounders are 3-d cross sectional instruments b) a linear graph omits two of those dimensions - a graph over time (as posted) with no cross section in both geography and geostrophic heights is useless for long term analysis.
If you want more info on AMSU/A/B feel free to PM me - I'm just not gonna get into the whole discussion over all on GSC.
I didn't correctly refer to them as Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit ... that is just from my link ... as is the chart
My belief is there is a post glacial warming trend ... no glaciers in Illinois ... but lately it has stalled a little ... maybe even backed up. As I think you said ... models can be tweaked either way for CO2 or a hundred other details (my paraphrase) to get warming or cooling. And most of the "conclusive" stuff is based on models (and money).
I don't quite see why you want to stay so aloof ... but fine by me ... it still seems there is no good evidence man's CO2 is a cause. Also spring has been cool ... but a few years does not a trend make. I would suspect the slow warming will continue, it has since glaciers were here and will till it changes on Jupiter maybe.
If I get some energy on this subject again, I will pm you ... I appreciate the offer. For now the science seems clearly unsettled, and the $6 trillion is not to stop the inevitable rise of CO2, but to gain control of the money.
Never mind that LaNina years (like this past one) typically cast colder winters in areas as opposed to LaNino which heat things up. I got the following chart from:
A chart showing a more longterm trend than the one someone else posted (this one 1880 to 2008).
The guy asks "if this longterm chart was a stock would you short it?"
And concerning this past winter I found this to share:
Here's the ubiq-cerpt:™
"According to a host of climate experts,
including some who question the extent and risks of global warming
, it is mostly good old-fashioned weather, along with a cold kick from the tropical Pacific Ocean, which is in its La Niña phase for a few more months, a year after it was in the opposite warm El Niño pattern.
If anything else is afoot — like some cooling related to sunspot cycles or slow shifts in ocean and atmospheric patterns that can influence temperatures — an array of scientists who have staked out differing positions on the overall threat from global warming agree that there is no way to pinpoint whether such a new force is at work.
Many scientists also say that the cool spell in no way undermines the enormous body of evidence pointing to a warming world with disrupted weather patterns, less ice and rising seas should heat-trapping greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels and forests continue to accumulate in the air.
“The current downturn is not very unusual,” said Carl Mears, a scientist at Remote Sensing Systems, a private research group in Santa Rosa, Calif., that has been using satellite data to track global temperature and whose findings have been held out as reliable by a variety of climate experts. He pointed to similar drops in 1988, 1991-92, and 1998, but with a long-term warming trend clear nonetheless.
“Temperatures are very likely to recover after the La Niña event is over,” he said.
My point yesterday -- which several commentors elected to ignore -- was that confusing the short term trend with the longer term trend was simply wrong.
Using recent weather fluctuations to disprove climate change was like looking at the minute by minute S&P500 chart to determine long term markets trends . . .
Wasn't it YOU who proclaimed that Gore wanted to make it a religion? Or submitted replies framed in terms of Global Warming as religion?
I won't deny being too clever for you, but will say that I don't have any compelling need for anyone to actually believe it. :D
Make IT a religion? Maybe you could quote me so I would know what you are confused about this time. AGP ... man made global warming ... there has been warming since glaciers were in Illinois ... which was before the CO2 rise from man. But was there a CO2 rise anyway?
The warming trend is in line with trends that had nothing to do with man. The trend will probably continue regardless of what man emits in the way of CO2 ... as I see it. I see no empirical evidence to the contrary.
A chart showing a more longterm trend than the one someone else posted (this one 1880 to 2008).
The guy asks "if this longterm chart was a stock would you short it?"
I'm no expert, but I spent about 14 hours a day for two years working at working stock charts. My answer to that question is YES ... that stock is a short.
But it is not a stock, so the same rules don't apply. Still, the uptrend is clearly broken. But besides that, there is reason to question if we have accurate "global land ocean" temps, especially so far back. But even now, there is evidence of weather stations sitting on asphalt or by air conditioners ... it is not a controlled experiment.
Still, we know the glaciers left Illinois ... so there must be warming. The glaciers did not retreat from man, they will not return because of man, as I see it. Do we want to be colder, or warmer?
I don't quite see why you want to stay so aloof ... but fine by me ... it still seems there is no good evidence man's CO2 is a cause.
Aloof Rhino? That is quite that insult when I simply said I was not interested in the political charge on this site. It is most interesting to me that no one is allowed to stay neutral here without reaping insults whether the topic be climate or sexual orientation.
I'll drop off of this thread now - no need for your kind of responses
doing your best to "pollute as little as possible" in your own little corner of the world...
and being a good steward of God's creation...
is NOT the same thing as setting up a religion to honor the creation while ignoring the needs of people...
by taxing them for their "carbon footprints" and setting up a global system to redistribute the wealth of the world based on it...
i do see that this seems to be quite the hot topic!
some folks seem to be quite emotionally invested in global warming/climate change...
it borders on religious fervor, imho...
hey ron g... did you used to be arkie ron?
peace,
jen-o
Jen-o
I recall living in Davis, California when school children were singing hymns to "gaia" with such lyrics as "The earth is my mother and the sun is my father etc. etc." Seemed mighty religious to me...and school sponsored, too. Of course it was not only a sin, but illegal under the law of the Reich to even mention the TRUE God, the father of the Lord Jesus Christ.
I recall living in Davis, California when school children were singing hymns to "gaia" with such lyrics as "The earth is my mother and the sun is my father etc. etc." Seemed mighty religious to me...and school sponsored, too.
ron, they call this "multicultural education"...
of course, if you try to extend that to include the God of the bible, then they call for separation between church and state...
you can talk about any "god" you want (that's called tolerance)... except for the biblical God (they cannot tolerate the mention of HIS name)
Rhino I am not going to address that from a global climate change perspective - too politically charged on this site.
However after having been involved in remote sensing earth science for 30 years - I'll toss you a hint - a) I was CO-PI on both AMSU/A and AMSU/B (which you correctly refer to as Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit altho you miss that there are two components). I will only state this - that graph is incredibly misleading as it does not mention a) sounders are 3-d cross sectional instruments b) a linear graph omits two of those dimensions - a graph over time (as posted) with no cross section in both geography and geostrophic heights is useless for long term analysis.
If you want more info on AMSU/A/B feel free to PM me - I'm just not gonna get into the whole discussion over all on GSC.
sounds like: i disagree with you, but i'm not gonna tell you why...
i'll just throw you a "hint" and insinuate you are wrong...
let me mention my "experience" (maybe that's suppose to add weight to the opinion), but i don't want to get into the details...
what is the point of a post that says "i don't want to discuss this"
?!?
i've seen this before on another thread:
here's my opinion, i've got credentials, but i'm not gonna get into the details of supporting my opinion...
this kind of non-argument just cracks me up...
do people really think that this kind of unsupported opinion really adds anything to the conversation?
p.s. people who don't want to support their opinion seem extremely defensive...
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
6
6
15
7
Popular Days
Jun 4
20
Jun 5
14
Jun 2
12
Jun 3
10
Top Posters In This Topic
HAPe4me 6 posts
jen-o 6 posts
rhino 15 posts
RumRunner 7 posts
Popular Days
Jun 4 2008
20 posts
Jun 5 2008
14 posts
Jun 2 2008
12 posts
Jun 3 2008
10 posts
doojable
Here's my take on global warming:
Whether it is happening or not is almost not worth arguing - it STILL makes the most sense to NOT pee in your own wheaties or poison your own nest.
So to that end we should be looking to pollute as little as possible and to find the absolute cleanest fuels.
Do you need a study to tell you to get better at something?
Edited to fix bad grammar
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Hmmm. Interesting. Insightful. Inciteful?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Who knows. Maybe. Not my intention.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
What you say is logical and sensible. Polluting as little as possible and finding the cleanest fuels or energy sources do not require massive redistribution of wealth or international governance with global socialism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jen-o
ron g,
my thoughts exactly!
doing your best to "pollute as little as possible" in your own little corner of the world...
and being a good steward of God's creation...
is NOT the same thing as setting up a religion to honor the creation while ignoring the needs of people...
by taxing them for their "carbon footprints" and setting up a global system to redistribute the wealth of the world based on it...
i do see that this seems to be quite the hot topic!
some folks seem to be quite emotionally invested in global warming/climate change...
it borders on religious fervor, imho...
hey ron g... did you used to be arkie ron?
peace,
jen-o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
I think everyone gives a hoot, and doesn't want to pollute ... But ...
CO2 does no harm, at least not that I have seen proven. They increase it in greenhouse to help plants grow. You can swallow it ... breathe it ... no problem. But because it has gone from 300 to 380 parts per million somehow the world is going to end unless we take $6 trillion from these CO2 emitters and give it to eco friendly ... what? companies, organizations ... who is getting all that money the government now would get to control? And for what?
Another thing ... we have the cleanest air among major producers, as I understand. Certainly better than China. So our costs to produce go way up, then we buy more from China who can produce power cheap because their coal plants belch out all kinds of pollution. So we kill off our clean industry, and send it to China where there will now be even more real pollution.
This is not about peeing ... this is about breathing ... and it is choking US.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
So, does that make you an atheist or agnostic in this new "religion?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Threads like this are almost comical when you take a step back.
Play nice. Clean up and turn off the lights when you're done.
When you figure it all out, write a report and send it to the powers that be.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
I'm not sure which religion you mean ... I am a believer in being clean and maintaining "nature" and I have about 40 acres of native woodlands to prove it. About 6AM I walked out and saw deer and turkeys, and I twice missed a cute little bunny rabbit eating my lettuce. I need my own way corps out here to clean up invasive species ... I have a lot of nice 100 year oaks ... and they have children coming up around them. I even got the cattle out of the creek.
But the so called green political machine and the AGW church of Al Gore ... no ... Al is a false prophet ... he is what vpw was to Christianity ... Gore and big government would love to extract $6 trillion from the economy to distribute to their friends. Of course McCain and Obama both voted in favor of the insanity.
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Okay... you started to reply. You apparently saw two possible "religions" and seemingly answered the actual question with regard to one of them... then regarding the other possibility (of religion) you again made it about Gore.
I appreciate that you recognized some ambiguity in the question, but would have preferred that you actually answer the question for both possibilities... SOOOOOOOOOO, what does that make YOU? An agnostic or an atheist? Just wondering. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
I guess you are being too vague or clever for me Rocky ... I think I was quite clear. What does what make me?
Atheist ... believes there is no god
Agnostic ... one who thinks one can't know if there is a god ...
Could you be more specific why you think this relates to global warming on Jupiter ... or on Earth?
Or maybe doojable will just answer or me ... nobody told me there would be a test ...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jen-o
doojable,
what's so comical about discussing current events?
specifically, the manufactured global crisis regarding climate?
i don't think the "powers that be" want a report...
they want global control, and will use any vehicle they can to get it... (evidently, a climate crisis sounds good right now)
peace,
jen-o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
true jen-o ... we can joke about it .. and whistle past the graveyard ... and fiddle while Rome burns ...
here is more hilarity ...
brrr ... it really has been a cool spring .. as David noted ... I feel a cold wind blowing ....
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
Rhino I am not going to address that from a global climate change perspective - too politically charged on this site.
However after having been involved in remote sensing earth science for 30 years - I'll toss you a hint - a) I was CO-PI on both AMSU/A and AMSU/B (which you correctly refer to as Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit altho you miss that there are two components). I will only state this - that graph is incredibly misleading as it does not mention a) sounders are 3-d cross sectional instruments b) a linear graph omits two of those dimensions - a graph over time (as posted) with no cross section in both geography and geostrophic heights is useless for long term analysis.
If you want more info on AMSU/A/B feel free to PM me - I'm just not gonna get into the whole discussion over all on GSC.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
I didn't correctly refer to them as Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit ... that is just from my link ... as is the chart
My belief is there is a post glacial warming trend ... no glaciers in Illinois ... but lately it has stalled a little ... maybe even backed up. As I think you said ... models can be tweaked either way for CO2 or a hundred other details (my paraphrase) to get warming or cooling. And most of the "conclusive" stuff is based on models (and money).
I don't quite see why you want to stay so aloof ... but fine by me ... it still seems there is no good evidence man's CO2 is a cause. Also spring has been cool ... but a few years does not a trend make. I would suspect the slow warming will continue, it has since glaciers were here and will till it changes on Jupiter maybe.
If I get some energy on this subject again, I will pm you ... I appreciate the offer. For now the science seems clearly unsettled, and the $6 trillion is not to stop the inevitable rise of CO2, but to gain control of the money.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Wasn't it YOU who proclaimed that Gore wanted to make it a religion? Or submitted replies framed in terms of Global Warming as religion?
I won't deny being too clever for you, but will say that I don't have any compelling need for anyone to actually believe it. :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
Never mind that LaNina years (like this past one) typically cast colder winters in areas as opposed to LaNino which heat things up. I got the following chart from:
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/200...al-warming.html
A chart showing a more longterm trend than the one someone else posted (this one 1880 to 2008).
The guy asks "if this longterm chart was a stock would you short it?"
And concerning this past winter I found this to share:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Make IT a religion? Maybe you could quote me so I would know what you are confused about this time. AGP ... man made global warming ... there has been warming since glaciers were in Illinois ... which was before the CO2 rise from man. But was there a CO2 rise anyway?
The warming trend is in line with trends that had nothing to do with man. The trend will probably continue regardless of what man emits in the way of CO2 ... as I see it. I see no empirical evidence to the contrary.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
I'm no expert, but I spent about 14 hours a day for two years working at working stock charts. My answer to that question is YES ... that stock is a short.
But it is not a stock, so the same rules don't apply. Still, the uptrend is clearly broken. But besides that, there is reason to question if we have accurate "global land ocean" temps, especially so far back. But even now, there is evidence of weather stations sitting on asphalt or by air conditioners ... it is not a controlled experiment.
Still, we know the glaciers left Illinois ... so there must be warming. The glaciers did not retreat from man, they will not return because of man, as I see it. Do we want to be colder, or warmer?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
broken? ooooooooo-k
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
Aloof Rhino? That is quite that insult when I simply said I was not interested in the political charge on this site. It is most interesting to me that no one is allowed to stay neutral here without reaping insults whether the topic be climate or sexual orientation.
I'll drop off of this thread now - no need for your kind of responses
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
Jen-o
I recall living in Davis, California when school children were singing hymns to "gaia" with such lyrics as "The earth is my mother and the sun is my father etc. etc." Seemed mighty religious to me...and school sponsored, too. Of course it was not only a sin, but illegal under the law of the Reich to even mention the TRUE God, the father of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Yes, not only WAS I ArkieRon, I still am :)
Edited by Ron G.Link to comment
Share on other sites
jen-o
long time no see!
let me give you a hug ((arkie ron)) :)
it's good to see you again!
ron, they call this "multicultural education"...of course, if you try to extend that to include the God of the bible, then they call for separation between church and state...
you can talk about any "god" you want (that's called tolerance)... except for the biblical God (they cannot tolerate the mention of HIS name)
peace to you, my friend,
jen-o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jen-o
i'll just throw you a "hint" and insinuate you are wrong...
let me mention my "experience" (maybe that's suppose to add weight to the opinion), but i don't want to get into the details...
what is the point of a post that says "i don't want to discuss this"
?!?
i've seen this before on another thread:
here's my opinion, i've got credentials, but i'm not gonna get into the details of supporting my opinion...
this kind of non-argument just cracks me up...
do people really think that this kind of unsupported opinion really adds anything to the conversation?
p.s. people who don't want to support their opinion seem extremely defensive...
Edited by jen-oLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.