Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 22, 2013 - 12:41am PT
|
... despite all this AGW stuff.
Ron, look up "non sequitur," you might learn something.
Also, I suppose you love that fracking stuff, because that's how we're now producing more oil. Personally, I don't think it's all that great.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 01:51am PT
|
Here's news that should cheer up all you jungle bunnies, even Mr. King Azzhole Mentalcase. So come out of your caves and take a gander.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/21/us-carbon-emissions-energy-lowest-1994/3146123/
And imagine that! We did it mainly through natural forces in the energy market and conservation without ever signing on to Kyota. This is something I've been telling all of you about for sometime. Not that it matters, since in the quantities we produce it, CO2 is much more effective as plant food than IR heat retention because of a whole host of negative natural feedback mechanisms.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 09:27am PT
|
Meanwhile Globally:http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/10/21/china-smog/3142201/?utm_source=
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/21/world/asia/australia-struggles-to-control-wildfires.html?
Rick ,that was probably one of your most positive posts.
That is exactly the premise of us neo-marxists.
PROVIDE ALTERNATIVES.
REDUCE CARBON OUTPUT.
If that takes NG,Wind,solar,then so be it.
Let alternatives have an EQUAL foooting.
Enough with the fear mongering that government will tax us to do it,let the FREE market work!
You and your side of this,ahem,DISCUSSION,should stray away from fear mongering.Seeing how that has worked so well in previous attempts.
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 11:39am PT
|
So where's the credibility??
with 97% of the Science community. Where's yours?
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 11:51am PT
|
You're getting closer to seeing the light Wilbeer, but let me make a few corrections for you. 1. As far as percentage of total energy production wind and solar, in their current form without viable energy storage to provide power when the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shining, total contribution is insignificant-less than 3% in this country in spite of hundreds of billions in subsidies and increased rates per KWH. 2. The largest reduction of CO2, by far, is the switch from Coal to NG in power generation, 50% reduction. This is largely a natural outcome of maturation of technology in the petro industry that found huge quantities of NG right under our feet at or near it's end point use. Commercial trucking and public transit fleets are also switching over from petrol/diesel to the cleaner burning NG. We have at least a 100 year supply at elevated usage levels thanks to Base and his compatriots in the field. 3. Energy efficiency standards is the one shining success of the constant harping from enviros-keep it up your squeaky wheels are being heard. 4. We need to get over the paranoia of nuclear and install the latest generation fission reactors on a wide scale. 5. Increased taxes-NO- Subsidies-NO. Let the free market work within reasonable environmental standards and regulation.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 22, 2013 - 12:07pm PT
|
You only had to go back to January of last year to find a relevant story.
You're a fool, Sketch. I found lots of interesting stories, even some posted yesterday, but that one caught my fancy.
Try it yourself, type "World news on climate change" into Google and see if you can find anything. Apparently, the likes of you and The Chief are having trouble with this very easy search.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 12:29pm PT
|
the consensus is that in order to understand the climate of the 20th and 21st centuries it is necessary to have a professional splain it
|
|
Brandon-
climber
The Granite State.
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 12:32pm PT
|
Reilly, it all makes sense now.
|
|
Brandon-
climber
The Granite State.
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 12:54pm PT
|
See? It's going back up!!
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 22, 2013 - 12:57pm PT
|
Let's look at how this played out.
I commented on the light coverage (or interest) on the latest IPCC report.
You responded with But go to some other countries, and the hum is quite loud.
Then The Chief responded with pictures that have nothing to do with AWG, and later that he could not find anything on AWG news.
There, I fixed it for you.
What's interesting is how you missed/ignored the most important point of the thread. From what I see, this is not unusual behavior from you, Sketch.
I can easily pull up something from yesterday. And you can too, if you wanted to look for it. Sorry you need mommy's hand to help you out here.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 01:25pm PT
|
then humans may have caused SOME of the warming since 1950 is the minimum standard for inclusion.
I see that you still don't understand the criteria used in the Cook et al. paper.
But really why can't you or someone else do your own literature search or poll so that you can show that the there are many scientist that don't believe that most of the warming is due to human activities?
And as Chiloe wrote, the Cook et al. paper is just one paper that paint a similar picture as several other papers have done.
|
|
Brandon-
climber
The Granite State.
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 01:28pm PT
|
Why do you guys keep photoshopping lame ass photos?
It makes you seem incredibly stupid.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 01:33pm PT
|
Why do you guys keep photoshopping lame ass photos?
Yeah, this is how it is done in the big leagues...
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 01:36pm PT
|
Go ahead and cite those papers Phooooole.
Why should I do anything for you?
There is actually a very easy way to find them... but you wouldn't know of course.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 22, 2013 - 01:45pm PT
|
Thanks for pointing out my typo The Chief.
And you did it in perfect form, the form of an as#@&%e.
Too bad you can't get out of that character that you play. Is it because you're really an as#@&%e, and you don't know how to be any other character?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 01:58pm PT
|
I believe that we have discussed that in over 20 posts or something. I doubt that you would ever get it. Read the paper and read old answers on this forum.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 02:32pm PT
|
As I recall, your contribution to that exchange was you repeatedly saying "you're wrong".
Please, read my posts. I am tired of you ignoring or forget the contents of other peoples posts.
How is "humans may have caused SOME of the warming" notably different from " research implies humans are causing global warming" or "research assumes greenhouse gas emissions cause warming without explicitly stating humans are the cause"?
Read about all criteria. I would also say that it should be obvious that your "may" is a large difference between your version and the real version. Your "SOME" is also different from the real version because they seem to use the 50% cut of in all criteria.
But I have already said the same things several times before.
Now have I read what you wrote one more time.
Do you really believe that
"humans may have caused SOME of the warming" is close to
"research implies humans are causing global warming"?
Is "humans may have caused SOME of the warming" also the same as
"humans have caused the warming" in your world?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2013 - 02:56pm PT
|
They don't because of obvious reasons. My interpretation is at least that the 50% criteria is the same in all criteria (but I and others have of course already made that point a couple of times).
You could of course also look at the negative criteria and try to find out where your "may" and "SOME" statement would fit.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 22, 2013 - 03:15pm PT
|
Sketch, you are right. We were discussing current media coverage with regards to AGW. And you are right, I came back with a blog that I found interesting; it was old news.
There now, feel better. I admit, I changed the focus a bit in midstream.
But none of this matters, your opinion about the coverage of AR5 or The Chief's ability to be the biggest A-hole I've ever encountered, WRT the fact that we're dumping enough CO2 into the atmosphere to create a deeply concerning rise in the Earth's temperature.
You can argue this way or that way, it doesn't matter; the science speaks for itself. You don't have to listen to what it says, the facts of the situation aren't changed by what you say.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!