AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Global cooling, er, I mean warming, er, wait...PT. 2
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
The average agw adherent is sincere, I just wonder what drives the preachers of it?

Money, power, what else?
(06-16-2015, 07:37 PM)Palladin Wrote: [ -> ]The average agw adherent is sincere, I just wonder what drives the preachers of it?

Money, power, what else?

Gore bungled the 'power' thing. But he's done a bang up job on the money. His net worth went from about $2 million when he left office to in excess of $300 million. CHAAAA CHINGGGG. That, my friend, is one helluva 'driver'!
Quote:Carbon Week: The sun raises the seas

The IPCC and others blame CO2 for increases in sea levels, ignoring evidence that shows the sun to be the cause

For many years we have been told that global warming is unprecedented over the past 100 years, that human industrial activity is by far the dominant driver of 20th century climate change, and that nothing else is important.

Years ago, I too accepted this idea. After all, it came from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),

It's only a matter of time before the Left ridicules and has this guy banned making media appearances.
What nobody seems aware, or perhaps not stating if they are knowledgeable, is that we are still coming out of the last glaciation period. So sea levels will continue to rise, albeit more slowly. Its the way the world works. When the oceans stop rising, it will be because we are again cooling down.
Yak,

Besides grants from the government, where do you think most the cash flow comes from and why?

In other words, who is paying Gore and why? Someone has to have huge benefits to fund this pr campaign.

I used to assume the cap and trade scheme allowed uber wealthy folks to trade carbon credits and make cash from that, but, I honestly don't know I'm right on that after thinking about it.
(06-17-2015, 07:18 PM)Palladin Wrote: [ -> ]Yak,

Besides grants from the government, where do you think most the cash flow comes from and why?

In other words, who is paying Gore and why? Someone has to have huge benefits to fund this pr campaign.

I used to assume the cap and trade scheme allowed uber wealthy folks to trade carbon credits and make cash from that, but, I honestly don't know I'm right on that after thinking about it.

Palladin. Go back and read the article I linked above. Look at the business models of GIM and CCX. Because of regulatory compliance, marketing (to greenies) and just plain "feel goodism", there is an massive industry in the trading of the 'right' to consume cheap energy. Presumably, the carbon emissions will be offset by somebody, somewhere maybe planting a tree ... or maybe a few hundred thousand people in some third world countries promising to starve and freeze quietly ... for all I know Kim Jong-un might be making a bundle off this. The money flows out of companies like Ford, DuPont, Dow Corning, American Electric Power, International Paper, and Waste Management ... along with various small businesses and consumers like me whose energy costs are going up even as the price of gas and coal have plummeted. It flows into the pockets of people like Blood and Gore (catchy title eh?). What everyone else gets out of the deal are vast quantities of diddly squat ... as I believe is indicated in the GAO report linked in that article. It's not all grant money and tax money ... but the regulations themselves that make Gore's scheme profitable do flow from government. And there IS a cost ... a very substantial one.

JohnL Wrote:What nobody seems aware, or perhaps not stating if they are knowledgeable, is that we are still coming out of the last glaciation period. So sea levels will continue to rise, albeit more slowly. Its the way the world works. When the oceans stop rising, it will be because we are again cooling down.

In the very long haul (Hundreds of millions of years) entropy pretty much guarantees things will probably get very cold. But in the shorter term? We can make predictions, but nobody really knows what the Sun has planned. The true believers are focused on a very tiny sliver of the earth's energy budget and ignore the effect of variations in the primary driver. It's like focusing on the potential temperature variation of a shadow cast by an insect and completely ignoring whether or not it's night or day. Look at the brilliant images of the Earth taken from space. That is an enormous amount of reflected light energy ... which pales against the enormous amount of energy absorbed ... vs the unseen and infinitesimally small amount of energy at 15um that GGGs are reflecting or emitting. The theory might become credible if it included the fact that the Sun is a dynamic and not static input ... but they either can't or won't .... so it doesn't.
The levels of stupidity continue to reach new heights: First it was the polar ice caps… now it’s BREAD that will shrink due to global warming.

And on top of it all, the absurd amount of intellectual dishonesty keeps chugging along: Earth enters sixth extinction phase with many species – including our own – labelled 'the walking dead'.

These idiots from the Church of Environmentalism have absolutely no shame.

I wonder if SunsetTommy is still out there fighting the good fight? Or is he finally just been worn down by these idiots?
I just feel the AGW movement is going to succeed in economically thieving the nation. Having both parties bought and paid for is hard to fight and the GOP is coming over to the AGW side slowly, but, surely.
(06-22-2015, 11:37 PM)Palladin Wrote: [ -> ]I just feel the AGW movement is going to succeed in economically thieving the nation. Having both parties bought and paid for is hard to fight and the GOP is coming over to the AGW side slowly, but, surely.

How ironic if they managed to join the party just as it is ending? It would serve the dumb sons a bitches right. On a local level, the planting season here in Colorado is totally f'ed up this year. I'll start to get green tomatoes ... right about the time they start freezing on the vine. That's probably a non sequitur as corn and especially wheat will probably do pretty well. We've had an unusual amount of moisture ... and now we're getting some clear skies conducive to growing. The south eastern part of the state was just dialed back from extreme drought. Still hot as hell, but I think another couple of brutal winters will probably have the local climate Illuminati scratching their heads but not enough to help the poor bastards in Northern Colorado as their livelihoods are destroyed with the closing of coal mines and one of the largest power plants in the state.
You're very naïve if you think the AGW crew will fail at thieving trillions from non wealthy global people. Facts are not important, cash flow is what counts. Shark attack, watch out, global warming is causing shark attacks!!!!!!

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/strange-spik...17&ref=yfp
WUWT has a rebuttal: That Didn’t Take Long: North & South Carolina Shark Attacks Blamed on Global Warming

I also have something else to throw in. More sharks are coming in to the shoreline. And it is almost certainly because they were following their food source: fish. As fish populations periodically grow out of control, they become more of a target for predators. And they naturally attempt to escape, so they get as close to the shoreline as possible, since they are smaller than sharks. Sharks are determined to go after them, and mistakenly think humans are prey, without realizing they are not fish.

These over population situations happen all the time. I am keen on squirrels, and know that about every five years or so, the population of squirrels grows to great numbers, due to good crops of nuts. In the Raleigh area, the squirrel population is at its peak, and they are constantly digging in my flower beds.

Then when there is a bad year of nuts, there is starvation and the cycle repeats itself. This is probably what is happening with the shark attacks on an over populated fish population.
Mark Prigg for The Daily Mail appears to have read John L. Is there anything in this column that hasn't been presented here, first?
(07-10-2015, 08:18 PM)WmLambert Wrote: [ -> ]Mark Prigg for The Daily Mail appears to have read John L. Is there anything in this column that hasn't been presented here, first?

That presentation, by Dr. Valentina Zharkova, took place at the Royal Astronomical Society's Annual National Astronomy Meeting of 2015, on the first day of the conference. The Royal Society's report on it is found right here.

As the science becomes more and more pronounced, the AGW fanatics are going to raise the rhetoric, as well as the noise level, in order to squeeze out every bit of power for politicians, grant monies for institutions/scientists, and exposure from the Media. Sooner or later, even "The Buzz" will have to realize that we are indeed headed into a major cooling phase. But he'll probably continue to blame the thing on greenhouse gases, instead of political hot air.
Answer me this.

I read where humanity adds ~3% to the CO2 output, does anyone know if this is a valid statement?

Then, the warmists do have a reasonable question, what then has caused the concentration of CO2 to go from ~300 ppm to 400 ppm in the last 60 years or so?

It's still negligible, but, it is not an unreasonable question.
Maybe in the past 60 years, the ocean has been saturated with all the CO2 it can hold.
That would be an answer, but, it can't be accurate. If it were, all humanity would die eventually even w/o burning fossil fuels. We'd suffocate shortly.
MSM is hitting the "Little Ice Age" thing pretty hard today. It also came up on my local station that I watch for weather in the morning. The morning anchor made a clumsy attempt to say something about it being offset by AGW. I suspect it's going to get even more awkward. I wonder what they are up to here? How are they they going to tie coal fired power power plants to solar activity (or lack thereof)? ... this is going to give somebody a nosebleed!
(07-13-2015, 03:38 PM)Ron Lambert Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe in the past 60 years, the ocean has been saturated with all the CO2 it can hold.

The ocean accumulates and expells CO2 based upon its temperature. Its just like a carbonated drink, which is oversaturated with CO2. When it is cold, it doesn't expel it readily. But the warmer the drink, the more it loses in the same time frame.

However, CO2 contains carbon, which readily latches on to other molecules and falls to the ocean floor, where it remains. Eventually plate tectonics drags it under the surface and into the mantle, where it merges with other elements, to form things such as hydrocarbons. Its a constant process that goes round and round, at least as old as the planet.

I believe that's what, about twelve thousand years? S5
(07-13-2015, 07:57 PM)mr_yak Wrote: [ -> ]MSM is hitting the "Little Ice Age" thing pretty hard today. It also came up on my local station that I watch for weather in the morning. The morning anchor made a clumsy attempt to say something about it being offset by AGW. I suspect it's going to get even more awkward. I wonder what they are up to here? How are they they going to tie coal fired power power plants to solar activity (or lack thereof)? ... this is going to give somebody a nosebleed!

Obviously whoever posted that article spent most of his/her time cutting and pasting from other articles. It all reads like a copy of a copy of a.............

And after all the cutting and pasting, there was this little insert that places everything totally out of context:

Quote:According to NASA, it it highly likely that these tiny ‘ices ages’ have occurred before in the past.

Wasn't the material he/she was pasting all about something from the past? Whoring brilliance at it very best. S13
(07-13-2015, 09:54 PM)John L Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote:According to NASA, it it highly likely that these tiny ‘ices ages’ have occurred before in the past.

Wasn't the material he/she was pasting all about something from the past? Whoring brilliance at it very best. S13

Yeah ... that was stunningly goofy after describing the Maunder Minimum in detail in the preceding text. But why the article in the first place? Again, news directors are all incestuous cousins with a herd mentality. Somebody directed them all to this particular Buffalo jump on the same day. Like I said, my local affiliate slipped this in. You can usually tell when somebody is trying to push some topic en masse. It would be interesting to know who ... and why.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27