Globull Warming

[Old Rocks]

By the Milankovic Cycles, were we not putting GHGs into the atmosphere, we might be in another full blown ice age in twenty thousand years.

So what?

By the best models available, we will probably raise the average global temperature by 3.5 to 7 degrees C. by 2100. That is far more rapidly than any ecosystem or society can adjust to.

And this has been evaluated and shown that we have had a 1.8-3.5° increase over the last 50 years? No, of course it hasn't as we haven't had that much temperature increase in the last century. Therefore your predictions are just made up bullshit created by people who can tell what the weather will be like a week from now.

Wasn't my prediction. It was MIT's prediction. I assume that you know what the initials stand for?

 

[Old Rocks]

Did you really just say that? Shit. Well now that I know that precipitation is directly correlated to temperature and that for each degree temperature increases we can expect 15 inches less precipitation annually. I averaged Nevada out to 10 inches and Kansas(which ranges from 15 to 50) to 25 inches. So based on your model Antarctica should receive (based on my own average temperature of -30°) using Kansas as a model with average temperature of I don't know, 80°, that's 110° difference so, 110*15=1650 and then 1650+25=1675

Wow, Holy shit! Antarctica should receive 1,675 inches of precipitation annually or 4.6 inches per day! In snow that would be 1675 feet! That's about 1/3 of a mile! 4.6 feet per day of snowfall.

How do you reconcile your bullshit with the fact that Antarctica receives an average of 6.5 inches of precipitation annually? How do you reconcile your bullshit with the fact that the rainiest places on earth are also typically the warmest? How do you reconcile your bullshit with the fact that colder air carries much less water than warmer air and that you are saying dry air produces more precipitation than warm air? Do you realize that your stupid as all hell comment means that you are, quite literally, saying that water is not wet?

Damn, Screamy, you people actually work at being stupid.

Is that the sum total of all your arguments? You have told me 4 or 5 times now that I'm stupid, too stupid to understand your brilliance, and when asked to enlighten me you say I should google some shit, without bothering to expound on what, exactly, I should be googling. Forgive me if I fail to be persuaded by your eloquence, you magnanimous prick.

Yet to be answered:
How solar panels fit in gas tanks as an oil replacement.
How electricity is the same as oil.
How colder drier air produces more precipitation than warmer wetter air.
Why warmer than current temperatures in our past did not cause rapid population contractions but will now.
Why if colder places receive less precipitation than warmer places, warming would result in less precipitation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precipitation_(meteorology)
Why a warmer planet with more usable land surface would result in less food.

Since all the questions you state are easily researched on the net, I still have no reason to assume that you are not stupid, since you obviously have not done so.

 

[Contumacious]

The truth is that most of the ice cap and most of the glaciers in the world are melting.

Lies won't change that.

But the right will lie about anything if it suits them.

And you came to that conclusion how?

You Luddites are amazing. You want to stop industrial production . But you also want FREE Healthcare. Make up your feeble mind.

.

Strawmen.

We have consistently damned the Republican policy of shipping jobs overseas for the benefit of a few of the very wealthy.

Both parties are responsible for the outsourcing of jobs. They are both responsible for massive regulations and confiscatory taxation.

Nobody is saying that there should be free healthcare except for those that are unable to provide it for themselves.

Open you fucking eyes. All those countries including the US are running massive fiscal deficits.

And there is not a single scientific agency in the world that does not state that the ice caps and glaciers are melting. Not only that, we have photos from 150 years ago for many of the glaciers that show just how severe the melt has been.

Read the article. There is no unanimous scientific conclusion.

.

 

[Bern80]

So I ask again since you are telling us we need to help the earth cool and knowing we will have another ice age at some point that will kill millions if not billions, should we then try to heat the earth up to stave it off for the sake of the human race? You tree huggers are all about the earth, but I think you're just selfish. When that happens should we try to avert this catastrophic natural event for our own selfish desire to live?
By the Milankovic Cycles, were we not putting GHGs into the atmosphere, we might be in another full blown ice age in twenty thousand years.

Why is it you refuse to answer this question?

 

[Old Rocks]

So I ask again since you are telling us we need to help the earth cool and knowing we will have another ice age at some point that will kill millions if not billions, should we then try to heat the earth up to stave it off for the sake of the human race? You tree huggers are all about the earth, but I think you're just selfish. When that happens should we try to avert this catastrophic natural event for our own selfish desire to live?
By the Milankovic Cycles, were we not putting GHGs into the atmosphere, we might be in another full blown ice age in twenty thousand years.

Why is it you refuse to answer this question?

Why is it that you cannot recognize the differance between a change that takes 20,000 years, and one that will occur in 90?

 

[Old Rocks]

And you came to that conclusion how?

You Luddites are amazing. You want to stop industrial production . But you also want FREE Healthcare. Make up your feeble mind.

.

Strawmen.

We have consistently damned the Republican policy of shipping jobs overseas for the benefit of a few of the very wealthy.

Both parties are responsible for the outsourcing of jobs. They are both responsible for massive regulations and confiscatory taxation.

Nobody is saying that there should be free healthcare except for those that are unable to provide it for themselves.

Open you fucking eyes. All those countries including the US are running massive fiscal deficits.

And there is not a single scientific agency in the world that does not state that the ice caps and glaciers are melting. Not only that, we have photos from 150 years ago for many of the glaciers that show just how severe the melt has been.

Read the article. There is no unanimous scientific conclusion.

.

Hmmm...... Well yes, they, as well as we, are running massive deficits.

But that does not change the fact that they pay half of what we do for far better results.

No unanimous conclusion on the fact that most of the world's glaciers and icecaps are melting? What planet have you been on for the last fifty years?

 

[Bern80]

So I ask again since you are telling us we need to help the earth cool and knowing we will have another ice age at some point that will kill millions if not billions, should we then try to heat the earth up to stave it off for the sake of the human race? You tree huggers are all about the earth, but I think you're just selfish. When that happens should we try to avert this catastrophic natural event for our own selfish desire to live?
By the Milankovic Cycles, were we not putting GHGs into the atmosphere, we might be in another full blown ice age in twenty thousand years.

Why is it you refuse to answer this question?

Why is it that you cannot recognize the differance between a change that takes 20,000 years, and one that will occur in 90?

Because in terms of consequences to the human race there is no difference. Either will force us to drastically alter our life styles or lead to mass extinction. Now answer the question.

 

[Ringel05]

Globull Warming

Women do this to me often.

 

[Contumacious]

No unanimous conclusion on the fact that most of the world's glaciers and icecaps are melting? What planet have you been on for the last fifty years?

Globull Warming: The Real 'Inconvenient Truth'

.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ah, yes, the Junk Science site. As big a batch of lies as one could wish to find anywhere.

JunkScience.com - SourceWatch

JunkScience.com is a website maintained by Steven J. Milloy, an adjunct scholar the Cato Institute and the Competitive Enterprise Institute - right wing think tanks with long histories of denying environmental problems at the behest of the corporations which fund them. Milloy is also a columnist for FoxNews.com.

Milloy defines "junk science" as "bad science used by lawsuit-happy trial lawyers, the 'food police,' environmental Chicken Littles, power-drunk regulators, and unethical-to-dishonest scientists to fuel specious lawsuits, wacky social and political agendas, and the quest for personal fame and fortune." He regularly attacks environmentalists and scientists who support environmentalism, claiming that dioxin, pesticides in foods, environmental lead, asbestos, secondhand tobacco smoke and global warming are all "scares" and "scams."
Milloy's attacks are often notable for their vicious tone, which appears calculated to lower rather than elevate scientific discourse. That tone is noticeable, for example, in his extended attack on Our Stolen Future, the book about endocrine-disrupting chemicals by Theo Colborn, Dianne Dumanoski and Peter Myers. Milloy's on-line parody, titled "Our Swollen Future," includes a cartoon depiction of Colborn hauling a wheelbarrow of money to the bank [1] (her implied motive for writing the book), and refers to Dianne Dumanoski as "Dianne Dumb-as-an-oxski." [2]

[edit]Lobbyist
Prior to launching the JunkScience.com, Milloy worked for:

The EOP Group, run by Michael O'Bannon and his associates in the Reagan White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Multinational Business Services, run by Jim Tozzi (also ex-head of the OIRA), and Thorne Auchter (ex-head of the OSHA). This group was the Philip Morris tobacco company's primary lobbyist in Washington with respect to the issue of secondhand cigarette smoke.
National Environmental Policy Institute (NEPI) founded in September 1993 by Congressmen Don Ritter and Dennis M. Hertel, and funded by Occidental Petroleum which had problems with the government over a Superfund toxic spill cleanup. NEPI had links to The Center for Strategic and International Studies and to the Air Quality Standards Coalition fighting against pollution controls.
Regulatory Impact Analysis Project, Inc. a front group for the energy industry, that was fighting $400 million in Superfund clean ups. He was project manager in producing their "Choices in Risk Assessment" report
Competitive Enterprise Institute which funded him to write a 24 page booklet: "Regulatory Reform, Is it still a pipe-dream?"
He subsequently went to work for

APCO & Associates (later APCO Worldwide)
The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC), a Philip Morris front group created by the PR firm of APCO Worldwide. [1]
Environmental Policy Analysis Network, another anti-EPA front group, where he claimed to be president.

 

[Old Rocks]

Why is it you refuse to answer this question?

Why is it that you cannot recognize the differance between a change that takes 20,000 years, and one that will occur in 90?

Because in terms of consequences to the human race there is no difference. Either will force us to drastically alter our life styles or lead to mass extinction. Now answer the question.

Really stupid, Bern. The differance between 20,000 years to adjust, and 90 years.

 

[Bern80]

Why is it that you cannot recognize the differance between a change that takes 20,000 years, and one that will occur in 90?

Because in terms of consequences to the human race there is no difference. Either will force us to drastically alter our life styles or lead to mass extinction. Now answer the question.

Really stupid, Bern. The differance between 20,000 years to adjust, and 90 years.

You really can't answer a simple question can you because you're so afraid of what you might reveal. So you are saying we need to prevent this couple of degree increase, but 'adjust' to be under a couple miles of ice. I'm the stupid one?

 

[Chris]

Because in terms of consequences to the human race there is no difference. Either will force us to drastically alter our life styles or lead to mass extinction. Now answer the question.

Really stupid, Bern. The differance between 20,000 years to adjust, and 90 years.

You really can't answer a simple question can you because you're so afraid of what you might reveal. So you are saying we need to prevent this couple of degree increase, but 'adjust' to be under a couple miles of ice. I'm the stupid one?

Mass extinction.

What horseshit.

Conserving energy and deveolping alternatives is easy.

Getting the oil and coal lobbyists to give up control of Congress is hard.

 

[mdn2000]

Really stupid, Bern. The differance between 20,000 years to adjust, and 90 years.

You really can't answer a simple question can you because you're so afraid of what you might reveal. So you are saying we need to prevent this couple of degree increase, but 'adjust' to be under a couple miles of ice. I'm the stupid one?

Mass extinction.

What horseshit.

Conserving energy and deveolping alternatives is easy.

Getting the oil and coal lobbyists to give up control of Congress is hard.

right again, the oil and coal lobby pay off congress to mandate green energy sources which require massive amounts of oil and coal energy to build.

Me and Chris are on the same page.

 

[Chris]

Why is the arctic ice melting when the Sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years?

 

[Bern80]

Really stupid, Bern. The differance between 20,000 years to adjust, and 90 years.

You really can't answer a simple question can you because you're so afraid of what you might reveal. So you are saying we need to prevent this couple of degree increase, but 'adjust' to be under a couple miles of ice. I'm the stupid one?

Mass extinction.

What horseshit.

Conserving energy and deveolping alternatives is easy.

Getting the oil and coal lobbyists to give up control of Congress is hard.

You are aware that the nothern states used to be under about a mile of ice right? They will again at some point. So should we try to prevent it from getting cold or should we adapt to that somehow?

 

[Old Rocks]

You really can't answer a simple question can you because you're so afraid of what you might reveal. So you are saying we need to prevent this couple of degree increase, but 'adjust' to be under a couple miles of ice. I'm the stupid one?

Mass extinction.

What horseshit.

Conserving energy and deveolping alternatives is easy.

Getting the oil and coal lobbyists to give up control of Congress is hard.

You are aware that the nothern states used to be under about a mile of ice right? They will again at some point. So should we try to prevent it from getting cold or should we adapt to that somehow?

I see, it might get cold in a few years, so let's set the house on fire now.

 

[Bern80]

Mass extinction.

What horseshit.

Conserving energy and deveolping alternatives is easy.

Getting the oil and coal lobbyists to give up control of Congress is hard.

You are aware that the nothern states used to be under about a mile of ice right? They will again at some point. So should we try to prevent it from getting cold or should we adapt to that somehow?

I see, it might get cold in a few years, so let's set the house on fire now.

Not sure how you derived that out of what I said. Must be hard coming up with excuses to not answer a question. Why is this such a hard question for you to answer? Why are you so afraid to answer it honestly? Should we adapt to the earth changing or should we make it adapt to us? There is a perfectly acceptable answer here. I wonder why a smart guy like yourself hasn't figured it out.

 

[Toronado3800]

Did you really just say that? Shit. Well now that I know that precipitation is directly correlated to temperature and that for each degree temperature increases we can expect 15 inches less precipitation annually. I averaged Nevada out to 10 inches and Kansas(which ranges from 15 to 50) to 25 inches. So based on your model Antarctica should receive (based on my own average temperature of -30°) using Kansas as a model with average temperature of I don't know, 80°, that's 110° difference so, 110*15=1650 and then 1650+25=1675

Wow, Holy shit! Antarctica should receive 1,675 inches of precipitation annually or 4.6 inches per day! In snow that would be 1675 feet! That's about 1/3 of a mile! 4.6 feet per day of snowfall.

How do you reconcile your bullshit with the fact that Antarctica receives an average of 6.5 inches of precipitation annually? How do you reconcile your bullshit with the fact that the rainiest places on earth are also typically the warmest? How do you reconcile your bullshit with the fact that colder air carries much less water than warmer air and that you are saying dry air produces more precipitation than wet air? Do you realize that your stupid as all hell comment means that you are, quite literally, saying that water is not wet?

Um, I didn't mean to have you waste 45 minutes calculating where rain would fall differently. Maybe its Oklahoma that will turn into a desert or the loss of xxx miles of habitable coastal areas that will increase population density that will cause the first problems.

Sorry about that.

 

[mdn2000]

You are aware that the nothern states used to be under about a mile of ice right? They will again at some point. So should we try to prevent it from getting cold or should we adapt to that somehow?

I see, it might get cold in a few years, so let's set the house on fire now.

Not sure how you derived that out of what I said. Must be hard coming up with excuses to not answer a question. Why is this such a hard question for you to answer? Why are you so afraid to answer it honestly? Should we adapt to the earth changing or should we make it adapt to us? There is a perfectly acceptable answer here. I wonder why a smart guy like yourself hasn't figured it out.

You must be using sarcasm when you refer to either one of the Twins as a smart guy. I read that comment and had to laugh