RUPERTKBD Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 So, from Harvey to Maria in the space of a few weeks....are people still denying Climate Change? Gotta hand it to the Chinese....they sure know how to sell a hoax.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clam linguine Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 17 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said: So, from Harvey to Maria in the space of a few weeks....are people still denying Climate Change? Gotta hand it to the Chinese....they sure know how to sell a hoax.... Sorry, it's just business as usual, and fear mongering as usual. https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2017/09/18/yes-hurricane-season-has-been-worse-than-usual/677360001/ Blast from the past? Yet, as bad as it's been, some of this season's intensity is really just a blast from the past. Irma, for instance, was "reminiscent of the great hurricanes that unleashed their fury on Florida in the first seven decades of the 20th century ... and then for the most part disappeared," said Weather Channel meteorologist Bryan Norcross before the storm hit. "Mother Nature’s hurricane-output cycle has its ups and downs," he added, "and a lull came along in the 1970s, 80s, and early 1990s — Hurricanes Frederic, Hugo and Andrew notwithstanding." Meanwhile, especially in typically hurricane-prone states such as Florida, a race to build along the shore went unfettered. The hoax is that CO2 controls the climate. If global warming is a critical concern, humans should take an active role in climate management. Why fool around with ineffective CO2 initiatives. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Big science at it again. Hopefully that plucky band of oil billionaires make it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 1 hour ago, inane said: Big science at it again. Hopefully that plucky band of oil billionaires make it. Don't worry, they'll be able to sleep on the piles of money they make when the prices of oil go up because a few refineries go dark in Texas for a couple weeks from the weather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clam linguine Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Wilbur said: Don't worry, they'll be able to sleep on the piles of money they make when the prices of oil go up because a few refineries go dark in Texas for a couple weeks from the weather. You're responsible for burning fossil fuel. You're free to stop giving oil companies piles of money to sleep on any time. It's so unbelievably lazy to blame them for your consumption. Edited September 19, 2017 by clam linguine 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 28 minutes ago, clam linguine said: You're responsible for burning fossil fuel. You're free to stop giving oil companies piles of money to sleep on any time. It's so unbelievably lazy to blame others for your consumption. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 26 minutes ago, clam linguine said: You're responsible for burning fossil fuel. You're free to stop giving oil companies piles of money to sleep on any time. It's so unbelievably lazy to blame others for your consumption. It's also incredibly myopic to put so much blame on climate change. Despite the fact of the historical data you referred to (which is important, and yet too often ignored), even if everyone accepted the premise on climate change... what are we going to do about it? Temperatures and CO2 were going to rise anyhow (happens every 100K years or so, and we're in a rising period). Even if we all agreed that human impact accelerated matters, the increases were still going to happen. Hop in a time machine, go back and prevent the industrial revolution, and climate change is still in humanity's future. Ok, we can't time travel, so let's start with where we are now and then imagine a world where everyone signed (and follows) the Paris accords and cut CO2 emissions. Does anyone think it can get to a point where it would make a noticeable impact? The oceans would still be warm, and these storms could still hit warm patches and be more strong than if they didn't hit a warm patch. The world would still be warming, and if history is any predictor, it will cool again... chances are much more than we would like. But sure, let's keep finger pointing at the "deniers". Sorry, I'd rather focus on making sensible changes to improve the environment, while simultaneously dealing with the real world problems we are facing. Carbon taxes or credits that are championed by Al Gore and his sycophants and focus more on wealth or pollution redistribution are not the answer. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Yes, it's a comic. No, it's not perfect. But it speaks to the whole 'the climate changes all the time' bs. The answer is yes, but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 (edited) 36 minutes ago, inane said: Yes, it's a comic. No, it's not perfect. But it speaks to the whole 'the climate changes all the time' bs. The answer is yes, but... Unfortunately it's extremely in accurate and very misleading as it uses averages for every 500 and 100 years and then decide to make a sample on 16 years to draw a conclusion from. In the process it completely misses all the spikes that actually happens, simply because it wouldn't support it's position. And if you are actually interested in actual science.You can read this article which talks about solar insolation angles being the main cause for change in temperature of the earth over the last 20,000 years. I guess it's less fun then to point fingers and blame other people, but the real enemy is likely just the sun. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/09/29/earths-obliquity-and-temperature-over-the-last-20000-years/ Edited September 19, 2017 by ForsbergTheGreat 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 I'm not that interested nor do I have the education to really understand it all. That's why we have scientists. I tend to believe them. They overwhelmingly believe it's manmade, so I'll believe them. I know clam and maybe you think it's all a scam for money, that all these scientists from around the world over decades have come up with this scheme, but meh. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 20 minutes ago, inane said: Yes, it's a comic. No, it's not perfect. But it speaks to the whole 'the climate changes all the time' bs. The answer is yes, but... 58 minutes ago, Kragar said: Ok, we can't time travel, so let's start with where we are now and then imagine a world where everyone signed (and follows) the Paris accords and cut CO2 emissions. Does anyone think it can get to a point where it would make a noticeable impact? The oceans would still be warm, and these storms could still hit warm patches and be more strong than if they didn't hit a warm patch. Even taking the chart you posted as reasonable, the best case doesn't fix things... it keeps it where it is. I like the idea of transportation without exhaust, and factories without smokestacks spewing like crazy. I appreciate Elon Musk's work. But too much money and resources are being wasted fighting this out in political arena. We've had misguided model after misguided model forced on us with the next impending doom resulting from of climate change, but despite Rup's earlier comment, there is no evidence to support an increase in hurricane strength and frequency. There's been so much "chicken little" going on for the last few decades, it's hard to take some people seriously anymore. It's entirely possible that the majority is correct, and the models are close but just need some work, but I could get more on board with people trying to fix the problem instead of fixing the blame. All this BS on pointing fingers at "deniers" and using climate change as a political tool rather than recognizing it as a problem to solve is not going to bring people together. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clam linguine Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 3 minutes ago, Kragar said: It's also incredibly myopic to put so much blame on climate change. Despite the fact of the historical data you referred to (which is important, and yet too often ignored), even if everyone accepted the premise on climate change... what are we going to do about it? Temperatures and CO2 were going to rise anyhow (happens every 100K years or so, and we're in a rising period). Even if we all agreed that human impact accelerated matters, the increases were still going to happen. Hop in a time machine, go back and prevent the industrial revolution, and climate change is still in humanity's future. Ok, we can't time travel, so let's start with where we are now and then imagine a world where everyone signed (and follows) the Paris accords and cut CO2 emissions. Does anyone think it can get to a point where it would make a noticeable impact? The oceans would still be warm, and these storms could still hit warm patches and be more strong than if they didn't hit a warm patch. The world would still be warming, and if history is any predictor, it will cool again... chances are much more than we would like. But sure, let's keep finger pointing at the "deniers". Sorry, I'd rather focus on making sensible changes to improve the environment, while simultaneously dealing with the real world problems we are facing. Carbon taxes or credits that are championed by Al Gore and his sycophants and focus more on wealth or pollution redistribution are not the answer. So true. For all the hysteria, the rise in sea level has not been accelerating. Here's a chart right out of the climate changers bible, Skeptical Science. Since 1930 a straight line can easily be plotted showing a rise of about an inch every 10 years. Not exactly scary. Good luck getting this info from the scare mongers or Obama's government agencies. You have to work for it. They'll throw in whatever red herring they can....like the phony mildly curved trend line below. That being said, sea levels are rising some, so no harm in planning for future defense of the coastline in some areas if necessary. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 16 minutes ago, clam linguine said: That being said, sea levels are rising some, so no harm in planning for future defense of the coastline in some areas if necessary. Exactly. Even that mild curve is reasonable... melting accelerates with warmth, and we have obviously had some warming over that time period. What I have yet to see one of the CC crowd admit is that there is a limit. There's only so much water in glaciers... once that melts, there's no more water to rise, aside from using up freshwater sources faster than they can be replenished. Icebergs melting do not raise sea levels. Takings some simple steps now, and perhaps being a little more careful when developing in flood zones, and our coastlines will be fine... as much as they can be considering continental drift and other geological impacts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Lots of currently powerful, vested interests trying to deflect & obfuscate. Doesn't really matter, either way, what people choose to believe. Too many feedbacks kicking in. Brace for impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 16 minutes ago, Kragar said: Exactly. Even that mild curve is reasonable... melting accelerates with warmth, and we have obviously had some warming over that time period. What I have yet to see one of the CC crowd admit is that there is a limit. There's only so much water in glaciers... once that melts, there's no more water to rise, aside from using up freshwater sources faster than they can be replenished. Icebergs melting do not raise sea levels. Takings some simple steps now, and perhaps being a little more careful when developing in flood zones, and our coastlines will be fine... as much as they can be considering continental drift and other geological impacts. The CC crowd lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 (edited) Latest reports on Wunderground have Hurricane Maria at 905 millibars pressure, & wind speeds up to 180 mph. Puerto Rico in crosshairs. Speed almost equals Typhoon Haiyan, that wiped out Tacloban, Phillippines, killing thousands in 2012. Atlantic storms were not supposed to equal Pacific intensities, were they? This monster went from Cat1 to Cat 5 in only 27 hrs! Edited September 20, 2017 by Nuxfanabroad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clam linguine Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 37 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said: Latest reports on Wunderground have Hurricane Maria at 905 millibars pressure, & wind speeds up to 195 mph. Puerto Rico in crosshairs. Speed equals Typhoon Haiyan, that wiped out Tacloban, Phillippines, killing thousands in 2012. Atlantic storms were not supposed to equal Pacific intensities, were they? This monster went from Cat1 to Cat 5 in only 27 hrs! I guess lack of the usual dust from the sahara is resulting in a tougher hurricane season. It must not be hot enough over there. 2 hours ago, inane said: I'm not that interested nor do I have the education to really understand it all. That's why we have scientists. I tend to believe them. They overwhelmingly believe it's manmade, so I'll believe them. I know clam and maybe you think it's all a scam for money, that all these scientists from around the world over decades have come up with this scheme, but meh. The 97% consensus is a baseless lie from a fool that Obama chose to repeat. It was then gobbled up by his drool bucket media. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/#7ae2fdb53f9f 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 7 minutes ago, clam linguine said: I guess lack of the usual dust from the sahara is resulting in a tougher hurricane season. It must not be hot enough over there. The 97% consensus is a baseless lie from a fool that Obama chose to repeat. It was then gobbled up by his drool bucket media. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/#7ae2fdb53f9f Sorry where did I say 97%? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clam linguine Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 6 minutes ago, inane said: Sorry where did I say 97%? Where did I say you did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 9 minutes ago, clam linguine said: Where did I say you did? I said overwhelmingly and you replied directly to that by rebutting the 97% thing. Were you replying to someone else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now