Conservatives waking up to climate change

[Flopper]

Each year we see forest fire devastation growing, the melting of glaciers increasing at alarming rates, heat indexes rising, and the intensity of storms increasing.

I have absolutely no faith in the governments of this planet taking any action that might remedy the situation. Scientist have not been able to tell us that we can take action which would stop the climate change. What seems to make sense is that the nations should work together to prepare for the disasters that are forthcoming, yet nothing is being done. Some of us labor under the false assumption that the nations of this planet will wake up to the danger. That is simply not going to happen.

Well, up in Yellowstone Park a number of years ago, the environmentalist Park Service refused to allow a forest fire to be controlled. As a consequence, over one million acres of irreplaceable forests were burned down. The kill of small fauna was heart-wrenching, because their population was protected there where they prospered, and few remained. The towering forests were gone, and the spring melt took years of the best soil to eventually muddy the Columbia River/Pacific and tributaries to the Gulf of Mexico/Atlantic. It was not a pretty sight for years. The environmentalists could only agree on one thing--something would come back. But the solemn beauty of the forest before was gone. I saw it in summer and in winter before and after. I missed the majesty of the awesome home for millions of birds and tiny creatures. Their loss was legion, and it will take hundreds of years to get back what was, except some things will never come back. If they had just spared a hundred thousand acres, that would have helped.

Not one person I knew while living in the Equality State where most of the burn occurred was happy about it and were plum angry.

Mankind is part of nature and could have done quite a bit to prevent the massive loss of trees that one million acres wears, and it was a shame to see nature so naked afterward. There are no guarantees in a modern world that has so many people in it people see blank land as a place to put another landfill for human wastes that will not recover due to anaerobic failures. Garbage that is buried 50 feet below will still be garbage in a hundred years, because *snap* stuff is preserved where there is no air!

/soapbox

I don't understand the National Park Service reasoning on allowing fires to burn. Do they really know whether a fire was caused by man or a natural event at the time of the the fire. I doubt it.

 

[idb]

Each year we see forest fire devastation growing, the melting of glaciers increasing at alarming rates, heat indexes rising, and the intensity of storms increasing.

I have absolutely no faith in the governments of this planet taking any action that might remedy the situation. Scientist have not been able to tell us that we can take action which would stop the climate change. What seems to make sense is that the nations should work together to prepare for the disasters that are forthcoming, yet nothing is being done. Some of us labor under the false assumption that the nations of this planet will wake up to the danger. That is simply not going to happen.

The forest fires are due to mismanagement. The Arctic sea ice is 1.5 MILLION sq. km GREATER than last year. Heat indexes rise thanks to the Urban Heat Island effect. Rural weather stations are showing a temperature decrease. Storm intensity is actually DECREASING. We have seen fewer and fewer tornado's and of lower intensity than were seen in the 1940's.

You need to read some real science and not the propaganda you are focusing on....

The Arctic sea ice is 1.5 MILLION sq. km GREATER than last year.

Sorry Westwall, I can't find evidence for that anywhere.
If you've already provided a link I apologise but can you do so again?

 

[westwall]

Each year we see forest fire devastation growing, the melting of glaciers increasing at alarming rates, heat indexes rising, and the intensity of storms increasing.

I have absolutely no faith in the governments of this planet taking any action that might remedy the situation. Scientist have not been able to tell us that we can take action which would stop the climate change. What seems to make sense is that the nations should work together to prepare for the disasters that are forthcoming, yet nothing is being done. Some of us labor under the false assumption that the nations of this planet will wake up to the danger. That is simply not going to happen.

The forest fires are due to mismanagement. The Arctic sea ice is 1.5 MILLION sq. km GREATER than last year. Heat indexes rise thanks to the Urban Heat Island effect. Rural weather stations are showing a temperature decrease. Storm intensity is actually DECREASING. We have seen fewer and fewer tornado's and of lower intensity than were seen in the 1940's.

You need to read some real science and not the propaganda you are focusing on....

The Arctic sea ice is 1.5 MILLION sq. km GREATER than last year.

Sorry Westwall, I can't find evidence for that anywhere.
If you've already provided a link I apologise but can you do so again?

No problem...here you go...



"The melting of sea ice in the Arctic is well on its way toward its annual "minimum," that time when the floating ice cap covers less of the Arctic Ocean than at any other period during the year. While the ice will continue to shrink until around mid-September, it is unlikely that this year’s summer low will break a new record. Still, this year’s melt rates are in line with the sustained decline of the Arctic ice cover observed by NASA and other satellites over the last several decades.

“Even if this year ends up being the sixth- or seventh-lowest extent, what matters is that the 10 lowest extents recorded have happened during the last 10 years,” said Walt Meier, a glaciologist with NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. “The long-term trend is strongly downward.”

The icy cover of the Arctic Ocean was measured at 2.25 million square miles (5.83 million square kilometers) on Aug. 21. For comparison, the smallest Arctic sea ice extent on record for this date, recorded in 2012, was 1.67 million square miles (4.34 million square kilometers), and the largest recorded for this date was in 1996, when ice covered 3.16 millions square miles (8.2 million square kilometers) of the Arctic Ocean."


Arctic Sea Ice Update: Unlikely To Break Records, But Continuing Downward Trend | NASA

 

[freedombecki]

Each year we see forest fire devastation growing, the melting of glaciers increasing at alarming rates, heat indexes rising, and the intensity of storms increasing.

I have absolutely no faith in the governments of this planet taking any action that might remedy the situation. Scientist have not been able to tell us that we can take action which would stop the climate change. What seems to make sense is that the nations should work together to prepare for the disasters that are forthcoming, yet nothing is being done. Some of us labor under the false assumption that the nations of this planet will wake up to the danger. That is simply not going to happen.

Well, up in Yellowstone Park a number of years ago, the environmentalist Park Service refused to allow a forest fire to be controlled. As a consequence, over one million acres of irreplaceable forests were burned down. The kill of small fauna was heart-wrenching, because their population was protected there where they prospered, and few remained. The towering forests were gone, and the spring melt took years of the best soil to eventually muddy the Columbia River/Pacific and tributaries to the Gulf of Mexico/Atlantic. It was not a pretty sight for years. The environmentalists could only agree on one thing--something would come back. But the solemn beauty of the forest before was gone. I saw it in summer and in winter before and after. I missed the majesty of the awesome home for millions of birds and tiny creatures. Their loss was legion, and it will take hundreds of years to get back what was, except some things will never come back. If they had just spared a hundred thousand acres, that would have helped.

Not one person I knew while living in the Equality State where most of the burn occurred was happy about it and were plum angry.

Mankind is part of nature and could have done quite a bit to prevent the massive loss of trees that one million acres wears, and it was a shame to see nature so naked afterward. There are no guarantees in a modern world that has so many people in it people see blank land as a place to put another landfill for human wastes that will not recover due to anaerobic failures. Garbage that is buried 50 feet below will still be garbage in a hundred years, because *snap* stuff is preserved where there is no air!

/soapbox

I don't understand the National Park Service reasoning on allowing fires to burn. Do they really know whether a fire was caused by man or a natural event at the time of the the fire. I doubt it.

Recollections aren't perfect, Mr. Flopper, but the fire I am referring to was known to occupy and burnt less than acre for several weeks. But as seasons change in the Equality State, winds quickly remove pockets of still air and evaporate humidity at the same time. Even though there is less oxygen at high altitudes, seasonal winds bring an unfortunate mix of atmospheric conditions which make little coals flicker and rage in the batting of an eye. So the danger was there, and when the winds rose up, it was all over but the tears shed by locals and those living on nearby reservations set aside for Western Indian Nations of Shoshone and Arapaho tribes who were shunted into badlands nearby that at least have clear streams running through them and a modicum of game, which is more than tribes further south received. The decision was made to let the fires strip mine Yellowstone. Somehow, small pockets of greenery were left where the fire raged through tree tops, but they were few and far between, and most of the conifers with green patches left on them died in a couple of years. Sad day for the state. Tourist areas were saved to protect some of the herds of elk, moose, and rocky mountain sheep. I can't remember when the buffalo herd was brought in. The first time I saw it was a few years later. I just didn't want to see the park denuded of its tall conifers, so avoided it in the summers. There are lovely stands of tall conifers on the road between Saratoga WY and Walden CO, which are 250 miles south of the park, more or less.

 

[Old Rocks]

Each year we see forest fire devastation growing, the melting of glaciers increasing at alarming rates, heat indexes rising, and the intensity of storms increasing.

I have absolutely no faith in the governments of this planet taking any action that might remedy the situation. Scientist have not been able to tell us that we can take action which would stop the climate change. What seems to make sense is that the nations should work together to prepare for the disasters that are forthcoming, yet nothing is being done. Some of us labor under the false assumption that the nations of this planet will wake up to the danger. That is simply not going to happen.

The forest fires are due to mismanagement. The Arctic sea ice is 1.5 MILLION sq. km GREATER than last year. Heat indexes rise thanks to the Urban Heat Island effect. Rural weather stations are showing a temperature decrease. Storm intensity is actually DECREASING. We have seen fewer and fewer tornado's and of lower intensity than were seen in the 1940's.

You need to read some real science and not the propaganda you are focusing on....

And, once again, you are totally full of shit. At present, the arctic ice is at either the sixth or seventh lowest in the satellite record. And the Northeast Passage is open.

Muller proved that the Urban Heat Island effect is just another lie you denialists delight in.

What the insurance companies are seeing;

https://www.genevaassociation.org/media/620506/08072013_insurancenews_ocean-warming.pdf

8 July 2013
A “paradigm shift” in risk assessment methods is needed in the face of increasingly extreme weather events, according to the Geneva Association.
New evidence shows the world’s oceans have warmed significantly, the think tank’s latest report says.
“Given that energy from the ocean is the key driver of extreme events, ocean warming has effectively caused a shift towards a ‘new normal’ for a number of insurance-relevant hazards.”
This shift is “quasi-irreversible”, the association says. Even if greenhouse gas emissions stop tomorrow, ocean temperatures will continue to rise.
“In the non-stationary environment caused by ocean warming, traditional approaches, which are solely based on analysing historical data, increasingly fail to estimate today’s hazard probabilities,” lead author Falk Niehorster said.
“A paradigm shift from historic to predictive risk assessment methods is necessary.

 

[PMZ]

Interesting to see science data quietly commissioned by the conservative government in New Zealand offering immense detail as to how climate change has impacted New Zealand's vital farming sector...I think this is interesting because it details how localised some climate impacts will be, something that often seems to confuse right-wingers here, who seem to think the entire world should experience the same impacts.

Note that the report does highlight some positives - and also notes that many of the impacts have already occured:

A new report has spelled out our future under climate change - but warns there is still much to learn over what it will mean for extreme events, diseases, pests and other impacts.

The report, published by the Office of the Chief Science Adviser yesterday, also says more work is needed to understand what 2C of change over the next century will mean for different regions.

There would be less rainfall in summer and autumn over the west of the North Island - but rates could increase by 5 per cent in winter and spring.

The picture was again different on the other side of the island; the Gisborne and Hawkes Bay regions stood to lose up to 10 per cent of its winter and spring rainfall.

Extreme weather on the horizon - National - NZ Herald News

Your article was punctuated with numerous and repetitive disclaimers, i.e.:

However, typical cold snaps, frost and snow conditions will continue.
Rainfall is forecast to be normal or above normal in the east and north of the North Island as well as the west of the South Island, while normal or below normal rainfall is likely for the west of the North Island and the north of the South Island.

Ergo, whatever comes, the author is correct!!!

Yep, they are worse than the charlatans when it comes to making vague predictions and statements!

Each year we see forest fire devastation growing, the melting of glaciers increasing at alarming rates, heat indexes rising, and the intensity of storms increasing.

I have absolutely no faith in the governments of this planet taking any action that might remedy the situation. Scientist have not been able to tell us that we can take action which would stop the climate change. What seems to make sense is that the nations should work together to prepare for the disasters that are forthcoming, yet nothing is being done. Some of us labor under the false assumption that the nations of this planet will wake up to the danger. That is simply not going to happen.

Well, up in Yellowstone Park a number of years ago, the environmentalist Park Service refused to allow a forest fire to be controlled. As a consequence, over one million acres of irreplaceable forests were burned down. The kill of small fauna was heart-wrenching, because their population was protected there where they prospered, and few remained. The towering forests were gone, and the spring melt took years of the best soil to eventually muddy the Columbia River/Pacific and tributaries to the Gulf of Mexico/Atlantic. It was not a pretty sight for years. The environmentalists could only agree on one thing--something would come back. But the solemn beauty of the forest before was gone. I saw it in summer and in winter before and after. I missed the majesty of the awesome home for millions of birds and tiny creatures. Their loss was legion, and it will take hundreds of years to get back what was, except some things will never come back. If they had just spared a hundred thousand acres, that would have helped.

Not one person I knew while living in the Equality State where most of the burn occurred was happy about it and were plum angry.

Mankind is part of nature and could have done quite a bit to prevent the massive loss of trees that one million acres wears, and it was a shame to see nature so naked afterward. There are no guarantees in a modern world that has so many people in it people see blank land as a place to put another landfill for human wastes that will not recover due to anaerobic failures. Garbage that is buried 50 feet below will still be garbage in a hundred years, because *snap* stuff is preserved where there is no air!

/soapbox

One of the things that environmentalists have learned over the years is that forest fires are an integral part of ecology. They've been going on since the beginning of time and forests depend on them to control overgrowth. In fact some trees cannot reproduce without the aid of fire.

Forest fires are however inconvenient to mankind who insists that mother nature be subservient to our needs. Mother nature sees it opposite to that.

So we dump our fossil fuel waste in the atmosphere and as weather patterns inexorably change, we say that it's merely mother nature being bitchy.

She is just going to have to adapt to us.

Right. We're learning an important lesson here. At least some of us are. Others are unable to.

You can't use the term "sustainable energy" and "serious energy technology discussion" in the same post.

Why?

Because you're an idiot.

You do an outstanding job representing the Dittohead Cult. Not the slightest sign of thinking on your part.

 

[PMZ]

Your article was punctuated with numerous and repetitive disclaimers, i.e.:



Ergo, whatever comes, the author is correct!!!

Yep, they are worse than the charlatans when it comes to making vague predictions and statements!

Why?

Because you're an idiot.

You do an outstanding job representing the Dittohead Cult. Not the slightest sign of thinking on your part.

A market-based approach, like a carbon tax, would be the best path to reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, but that is unachievable in the current political gridlock in Washington.

LOL! Obama should endorse a big fat carbon tax, it's the best path, these 4 Republicans agree.

If liberals were really scared about CO2, they'd jump on the nuke bandwagon.
But as bad as CO2 is, to them, nuclear power is worse.
Any solution that includes higher taxes and crappy "green" energy shows that they aren't serious.

The truth is that the last thing that the world needs is advice from you about sustainable energy. We're doing quite well, thank you very much, without you.

You have removed yourself from any serious energy technology discussion and that's best for all concerned.

So claims the idjit who sucks off goats

Another spot on representation of Dittohead intellect.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your article was punctuated with numerous and repetitive disclaimers, i.e.:



Ergo, whatever comes, the author is correct!!!

Yep, they are worse than the charlatans when it comes to making vague predictions and statements!

Why?

Because you're an idiot.

You do an outstanding job representing the Dittohead Cult. Not the slightest sign of thinking on your part.

Quick! Let's spend $80 trillion on "Green Energy", or else the climate will change!

 

[PMZ]

Yep, they are worse than the charlatans when it comes to making vague predictions and statements!

Because you're an idiot.

You do an outstanding job representing the Dittohead Cult. Not the slightest sign of thinking on your part.

Quick! Let's spend $80 trillion on "Green Energy", or else the climate will change!

Cheaper than the alternative of returning to the days of no energy.

There are sustainable sources of energy and there are temporary sources.

If you add the cost of adapting civilization to a new climate, there is no source more expensive than fossil fuels which are a very temporary source.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You do an outstanding job representing the Dittohead Cult. Not the slightest sign of thinking on your part.

Quick! Let's spend $80 trillion on "Green Energy", or else the climate will change!

Cheaper than the alternative of returning to the days of no energy.

There are sustainable sources of energy and there are temporary sources.

If you add the cost of adapting civilization to a new climate, there is no source more expensive than fossil fuels which are a very temporary source.

Cheaper than the alternative of returning to the days of no energy.

We have hundreds of years of coal, no chance of that happening.

 

[PMZ]

Quick! Let's spend $80 trillion on "Green Energy", or else the climate will change!

Cheaper than the alternative of returning to the days of no energy.

There are sustainable sources of energy and there are temporary sources.

If you add the cost of adapting civilization to a new climate, there is no source more expensive than fossil fuels which are a very temporary source.

Cheaper than the alternative of returning to the days of no energy.

We have hundreds of years of coal, no chance of that happening.

Boy, here's some good old conservative visionary thinking.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Cheaper than the alternative of returning to the days of no energy.

There are sustainable sources of energy and there are temporary sources.

If you add the cost of adapting civilization to a new climate, there is no source more expensive than fossil fuels which are a very temporary source.

Cheaper than the alternative of returning to the days of no energy.

We have hundreds of years of coal, no chance of that happening.

Boy, here's some good old conservative visionary thinking.

You're the one who fears no energy.
Great example of green idiocy.

Hundreds of years worth of nuclear fuel wasted in our used fuel rods.
Recycle it now. For clean energy that works. Instead of windmills that kill birds and waste $$.

 

[PMZ]

Cheaper than the alternative of returning to the days of no energy.

We have hundreds of years of coal, no chance of that happening.

Boy, here's some good old conservative visionary thinking.

You're the one who fears no energy.
Great example of green idiocy.

Hundreds of years worth of nuclear fuel wasted in our used fuel rods.
Recycle it now. For clean energy that works. Instead of windmills that kill birds and waste $$.

Anyone who doesn't fear the financial impact of insufficient energy knows nothing about the world economy. Anybody who hides from the financial impact of AGW knows nothing of science.

There is an upcoming nuclear technology that uses the U235 in spent fuel rods without creating weapons grade fissionable material. TWR. It is being, and should be, actively pursued.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Boy, here's some good old conservative visionary thinking.

You're the one who fears no energy.
Great example of green idiocy.

Hundreds of years worth of nuclear fuel wasted in our used fuel rods.
Recycle it now. For clean energy that works. Instead of windmills that kill birds and waste $$.

Anyone who doesn't fear the financial impact of insufficient energy knows nothing about the world economy. Anybody who hides from the financial impact of AGW knows nothing of science.

There is an upcoming nuclear technology that uses the U235 in spent fuel rods without creating weapons grade fissionable material. TWR. It is being, and should be, actively pursued.

Anyone who doesn't fear the financial impact of insufficient energy knows nothing about the world economy.

That's about 90% of greens.

Anybody who hides from the financial impact of AGW knows nothing of science.

When you can break out, precisely, the financial impact of AGW in 2012, let me know.

TWR. It is being, and should be, actively pursued.

Excellent! You finally got one right.

 

[S.J.]

Yep, they are worse than the charlatans when it comes to making vague predictions and statements!

You do an outstanding job representing the Dittohead Cult. Not the slightest sign of thinking on your part.

The truth is that the last thing that the world needs is advice from you about sustainable energy. We're doing quite well, thank you very much, without you.

You have removed yourself from any serious energy technology discussion and that's best for all concerned.

So claims the idjit who sucks off goats

Another spot on representation of Dittohead intellect.

Where would you be without Rush?

 

[Meister]

Each year we see forest fire devastation growing, the melting of glaciers increasing at alarming rates, heat indexes rising, and the intensity of storms increasing.

I have absolutely no faith in the governments of this planet taking any action that might remedy the situation. Scientist have not been able to tell us that we can take action which would stop the climate change. What seems to make sense is that the nations should work together to prepare for the disasters that are forthcoming, yet nothing is being done. Some of us labor under the false assumption that the nations of this planet will wake up to the danger. That is simply not going to happen.

Well, up in Yellowstone Park a number of years ago, the environmentalist Park Service refused to allow a forest fire to be controlled. As a consequence, over one million acres of irreplaceable forests were burned down. The kill of small fauna was heart-wrenching, because their population was protected there where they prospered, and few remained. The towering forests were gone, and the spring melt took years of the best soil to eventually muddy the Columbia River/Pacific and tributaries to the Gulf of Mexico/Atlantic. It was not a pretty sight for years. The environmentalists could only agree on one thing--something would come back. But the solemn beauty of the forest before was gone. I saw it in summer and in winter before and after. I missed the majesty of the awesome home for millions of birds and tiny creatures. Their loss was legion, and it will take hundreds of years to get back what was, except some things will never come back. If they had just spared a hundred thousand acres, that would have helped.

Not one person I knew while living in the Equality State where most of the burn occurred was happy about it and were plum angry.

Mankind is part of nature and could have done quite a bit to prevent the massive loss of trees that one million acres wears, and it was a shame to see nature so naked afterward. There are no guarantees in a modern world that has so many people in it people see blank land as a place to put another landfill for human wastes that will not recover due to anaerobic failures. Garbage that is buried 50 feet below will still be garbage in a hundred years, because *snap* stuff is preserved where there is no air!

/soapbox

I don't understand the National Park Service reasoning on allowing fires to burn. Do they really know whether a fire was caused by man or a natural event at the time of the the fire. I doubt it.

At the time when the Yellowstone fire first started there was a major thunderstorm rolling through that area, it WAS deemed a natural fire, and up to that time they let natural fires to burn....well after that fire they changed their ways.

 

[PMZ]

You do an outstanding job representing the Dittohead Cult. Not the slightest sign of thinking on your part.

So claims the idjit who sucks off goats

Another spot on representation of Dittohead intellect.

Where would you be without Rush?

The entire country would be infinitely better off, including you.

 

[S.J.]

Another spot on representation of Dittohead intellect.

Where would you be without Rush?

The entire country would be infinitely better off, including you.

But then you'd have nobody to default to when you can't win a debate.

 

[PMZ]

You're the one who fears no energy.
Great example of green idiocy.

Hundreds of years worth of nuclear fuel wasted in our used fuel rods.
Recycle it now. For clean energy that works. Instead of windmills that kill birds and waste $$.

Anyone who doesn't fear the financial impact of insufficient energy knows nothing about the world economy. Anybody who hides from the financial impact of AGW knows nothing of science.

There is an upcoming nuclear technology that uses the U235 in spent fuel rods without creating weapons grade fissionable material. TWR. It is being, and should be, actively pursued.

Anyone who doesn't fear the financial impact of insufficient energy knows nothing about the world economy.

That's about 90% of greens.

Anybody who hides from the financial impact of AGW knows nothing of science.

When you can break out, precisely, the financial impact of AGW in 2012, let me know.

TWR. It is being, and should be, actively pursued.

Excellent! You finally got one right.

Don't know any ''greens''. What I do know are people who understand the concept of sustainable energy, and those, like you, who don't.

If you make financial decisions based only on precision, two things can be said about you. You're conservative and poor.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Anyone who doesn't fear the financial impact of insufficient energy knows nothing about the world economy. Anybody who hides from the financial impact of AGW knows nothing of science.

There is an upcoming nuclear technology that uses the U235 in spent fuel rods without creating weapons grade fissionable material. TWR. It is being, and should be, actively pursued.

Anyone who doesn't fear the financial impact of insufficient energy knows nothing about the world economy.

That's about 90% of greens.

Anybody who hides from the financial impact of AGW knows nothing of science.

When you can break out, precisely, the financial impact of AGW in 2012, let me know.

TWR. It is being, and should be, actively pursued.

Excellent! You finally got one right.

Don't know any ''greens''. What I do know are people who understand the concept of sustainable energy, and those, like you, who don't.

If you make financial decisions based only on precision, two things can be said about you. You're conservative and poor.

So based on a cost that you can't quantify, you want us to waste 10s of trillions.
That makes you a green.