Official Global Warming thread (merged)

#327
#327
"Pearl Harbor" was a solid movie, but that had more to do with the story. I believe I could have hit a homerun on that one.
 
#330
#330
BeecherVol said:
True.

IIRC he and his buddy was from TN.
Click to expand...

Back in my freshman year of high school I drew a movie poster for that movie. It depicted several action shots and stuff blowing up. The tag line read, "Skip to tape two." I'm pretty sure that's the exact project I was working on on 9/11.
 
#331
#331
VOLatile said:
Back in my freshman year of high school I drew a movie poster for that movie. It depicted several action shots and stuff blowing up. The tag line read, "Skip to tape two." I'm pretty sure that's the exact project I was working on on 9/11.
Click to expand...

Yeah my wife enjoys the first part better :loco:, I enjoy the action and history of it, which is better addressed in the "tape two".:)

Deep irony with the 9/11 connection.
 
#334
#334
VOLatile said:
23, we may or may not have gone over this. Possibly in the thread that turned into discussion about fish? Related: I ate some ballin' salmon burgers last night.
Click to expand...

Salmon burgers? Is that like a salmon patty on a bun?

Thats a new one.
 
#335
#335
IPorange said:
I know that 98 % of climate scientists agree with me. Statistically, that says a lot. I know the ones that don't agree with me wear the nicest suits at meetings and get truckloads of funding from corporate interests. That's what I know.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Show me where 98% of climate scientists agree with you.

You lie!

Corporate funding vs governmental funding is small in comparison.

Here is someone who disagress and isn't funded by corporations.

Dr. Fred Singer, who holds a Ph.D. in physics from Princeton and is a former director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service and the Center for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Maryland, has said the following about global warming:

There is no proof that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from human activity. Ice core records from the past 650,000 years show that temperature increases have preceded—not resulted from—increases in CO2 by hundreds of years, suggesting that the warming of the oceans is an important source of the rise in atmospheric CO2. As the dominant greenhouse gas, water vapor is far, far more important than CO2. Dire predictions of future warming are based almost entirely on computer climate models, yet these models do not accurately understand the role or water vapor—and, in any case, water vapor is not within our control. Plus, computer models cannot account for the observed cooling of much of the past century (1940–75), nor for the observed patterns of warming—what we call the “fingerprints.” For example, the Antarctic is cooling while models predict warming. And where the models call for the middle atmosphere to warm faster than the surface, the observations show exactly the exact opposite.

The best evidence supporting natural causes of temperature fluctuations are the changes in cloudiness, which correspond strongly with regular variations in solar activity. The current warming is likely part of a natural cycle of climate warming and cooling that’s been traced back almost a million years. It accounts for the Medieval Warm Period around 1100 A.D., when the Vikings settled Greenland and grew crops, and the Little Ice Age, from about 1400 to 1850 A.D., which brought severe winters and cold summers to Europe, with failed harvests, starvation, disease, and general misery. Attempts have been made to claim that the current warming is “unusual” using spurious analysis of tree rings and other proxy data. Advocates have tried to deny the existence of these historic climate swings and claim that the current warming is "unusual" by using spurious analysis of tree rings and other proxy data, resulting in the famous “hockey–stick” temperature graph. The hockey-stick graph has now been thoroughly discredited. (The Great Global Warming Swindle, Independent Institute, The Great Global Warming Swindle: Newsroom: The Independent Institute)

Global warming is a myth being peddled by left-wing scientists and liberals who want to use it as an excuse to impose more government controls on our economy and to push through income-redistribution schemes masked as "energy" and/or "climate" bills (such as the horrendous cap-and-trade bill that the Dems are now trying to ram through Congress), (or using federal agencies to mandate such idiotic programs while bypassing congrteesional control.)
 
#337
#337
BeecherVol said:
Salmon burgers? Is that like a salmon patty on a bun?

Thats a new one.
Click to expand...

Pretty much, I guess. I got them from the local seafood place. I didn't feel like putting much effort into my dinner so he gave me 4 of these patties and I threw them in a pan and steamed some carrots.
 
#338
#338
VOLatile said:
Pretty much, I guess. I got them from the local seafood place. I didn't feel like putting much effort into my dinner so he gave me 4 of these patties and I threw them in a pan and steamed some carrots.
Click to expand...

Not a big fan of salmon, granny used to, well still does fry up patties often. Never took a liking to em.
 
#339
#339
Oldvol75 said:
I was actually wondering. But why would my 53 years of living everyday not be considered an reliable source of data? I may have a diary that I've been keeping. And I did also live during the time period when scientists where saying we were fixing to have another ice age. They were sure of their science too.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Can you provide me the wealth of academic papers that suggested this? Short answer is no, because they didn't exist. Sure, it made the cover of Times/Newsweek as some talked about it. But, it was not a hot topic in the literature at all - I once looked up the numbers, but I don't remember them now. What I can say is that it was no where near the ball park of what is going on with AGW today.
 
#340
#340
Just an interesting note with regard to the dichotomy between oil/gas and the AGW crowd.

The lab I am in is funded largely by oil and gas. This includes Exxon, BP, Saudi Aramco, StatoilHydro, among other entities. The PI of my lab is an "AGW guy" - he even teaches a class in sustainable energy under the context of AGW (in addition to other factors). He is a former Exxon employee. It isn't like this is an epic battle between tree-hugging communists and oil-guzzling capitalists. Among those who have taken the time to look at the science in a formal capacity, I find few who disagree with the basic points of AGW science. There are all kings of disagreements about effects of warming, nuance of how much warming, etc. But, the basic points of increasing CO2 and increased greenhouse effect are very widely accepted in A LOT of circles.
 
#342
#342
gsvol said:
Show me where 98% of climate scientists agree with you.

You lie!

Corporate funding vs governmental funding is small in comparison.

Here is someone who disagress and isn't funded by corporations.

Dr. Fred Singer, who holds a Ph.D. in physics from Princeton and is a former director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service and the Center for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Maryland, has said the following about global warming:

There is no proof that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from human activity. Ice core records from the past 650,000 years show that temperature increases have preceded—not resulted from—increases in CO2 by hundreds of years, suggesting that the warming of the oceans is an important source of the rise in atmospheric CO2. As the dominant greenhouse gas, water vapor is far, far more important than CO2. Dire predictions of future warming are based almost entirely on computer climate models, yet these models do not accurately understand the role or water vapor—and, in any case, water vapor is not within our control. Plus, computer models cannot account for the observed cooling of much of the past century (1940–75), nor for the observed patterns of warming—what we call the “fingerprints.” For example, the Antarctic is cooling while models predict warming. And where the models call for the middle atmosphere to warm faster than the surface, the observations show exactly the exact opposite.

The best evidence supporting natural causes of temperature fluctuations are the changes in cloudiness, which correspond strongly with regular variations in solar activity. The current warming is likely part of a natural cycle of climate warming and cooling that’s been traced back almost a million years. It accounts for the Medieval Warm Period around 1100 A.D., when the Vikings settled Greenland and grew crops, and the Little Ice Age, from about 1400 to 1850 A.D., which brought severe winters and cold summers to Europe, with failed harvests, starvation, disease, and general misery. Attempts have been made to claim that the current warming is “unusual” using spurious analysis of tree rings and other proxy data. Advocates have tried to deny the existence of these historic climate swings and claim that the current warming is "unusual" by using spurious analysis of tree rings and other proxy data, resulting in the famous “hockey–stick” temperature graph. The hockey-stick graph has now been thoroughly discredited. (The Great Global Warming Swindle, Independent Institute, The Great Global Warming Swindle: Newsroom: The Independent Institute)

Global warming is a myth being peddled by left-wing scientists and liberals who want to use it as an excuse to impose more government controls on our economy and to push through income-redistribution schemes masked as "energy" and/or "climate" bills (such as the horrendous cap-and-trade bill that the Dems are now trying to ram through Congress), (or using federal agencies to mandate such idiotic programs while bypassing congrteesional control.)
Click to expand...

I'm actually in the field. You're the liar, pal. A report stating what I said was in the news just a week or two ago. I guess your kook fringe sites must have missed it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#344
#344
Rasputin_Vol said:
.
Click to expand...

"Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite."

Dwight Eisenhower's farewell speech.

Your Marcus quote reminds me of a conversation I once had with a guy who had an FBI carreer and retired as a judge on the federal bench on the topic of sanity and he mentioned a book by a German scholar whose thesis was that we often had insane politicians in great postitions of authority.

This isn't a far fetched idea if you consider Hitler, Stalin and even Obama in that equation.

Eisenhower was a great American and what I consider the last great president of the USA, with the possible exception of JFK whose reign was terminated by a bullet or two.

It has all been downhill since then imo.




IPorange said:
I'm actually in the field. You're the liar, pal. A report stating what I said was in the news just a week or two ago. I guess your kook fringe sites must have missed it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Since you are in the field then perhaps you would provide your bonafides at this time??

Where did one of your articles appear in the news??

Waiting on baited breath for your response.

What did I lie about??

Again, waiting on baited breath about what my lie may be.
 
#345
#345
GS- are you saving Eisenhowers words directly warning about the military-industrial complex for another thread? I figure his words warning about resource utilization (and not mortaging our grandchildrens livlihood for our own current comfort) will also pop up later today as well.

I agree that Eisenhower was a sharp guy. And, this is a very famous and good speech.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#346
#346
I know a few people on this board will find it hard to believe, but there are allot of educated people out there that are not concerned with man's impact on climate change. As shown by the geologic record, the climate never remains the same.
 
#347
#347
TennTradition said:
Can you provide me the wealth of academic papers that suggested this? Short answer is no, because they didn't exist. Sure, it made the cover of Times/Newsweek as some talked about it. But, it was not a hot topic in the literature at all - I once looked up the numbers, but I don't remember them now. What I can say is that it was no where near the ball park of what is going on with AGW today.
Click to expand...

TT, first I can't link with this phone. But I just went back around 20-30 pages on google. The scientific stuff is there. Newspaper clippings are also posted. You first have to get through all of the sites that there sole purpose is to debunk. Remember the Internet as we know it today was not around. People couldn't put stuff out there and call it fact. If people want to change peoples views from one point to another, the Internet is a great tool for that. The Internet was not as handy for putting out their information as it is today.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#348
#348
gsvol said:
"Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite."

Dwight Eisenhower's farewell speech.

Your Marcus quote reminds me of a conversation I once had with a guy who had an FBI carreer and retired as a judge on the federal bench on the topic of sanity and he mentioned a book by a German scholar whose thesis was that we often had insane politicians in great postitions of authority.

This isn't a far fetched idea if you consider Hitler, Stalin and even Obama in that equation.

Eisenhower was a great American and what I consider the last great president of the USA, with the possible exception of JFK whose reign was terminated by a bullet or two.

It has all been downhill since then imo.






Since you are in the field then perhaps you would provide your bonafides at this time??

Where did one of your articles appear in the news??

Waiting on baited breath for your response.

What did I lie about??

Again, waiting on baited breath about what my lie may be.
Click to expand...

What about Ronny?
 
#349
#349
overseasorange2 said:
I know a few people on this board will find it hard to believe, but there are allot of educated people out there that are not concerned with man's impact on climate change. As shown by the geologic record, the climate never remains the same.
Click to expand...

Then they are not fully informed of the problem nor the paleoclimatic record.
 
#350
#350
overseasorange2 said:
I know a few people on this board will find it hard to believe, but there are allot of educated people out there that are not concerned with man's impact on climate change. As shown by the geologic record, the climate never remains the same.
Click to expand...

Then they don't know what they're talking about. Probably oil company geologists who are thinking in terms irrelevant to the last few hundred thousand years, ecology, or the impact on civilization.

Oil company geologists. Tell me I'm wrong.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top